Enigma13 Blog

The Grey Movie Review

2012-01-29T22:30:00Z

[The Grey
Written & Directed by Joe Carnahan
Starring: Liam Neeson, Frank Grillo, and Dallas Roberts
MPAA: R - For Violence/Disturbing Content Including Bloody Images, And Pervasive Language]

--

Every year, studios drop all the movies they have no faith in on the month of January. This usually means some of the worst and most forgettable films of the year are dropped into what the movie-geek community likes to call "The January Dead-Zone", a place where good cinema is scarce and the only source of refuge is watching last year's Oscar contenders being ushered into theaters so mainstream viewers who didn't catch up with them before Awards season could catch up.

But every once in a blue moon, the planets would align and a beautiful and unique snowflake of a movie would find itself dropped in this January dead-zone to save audiences from boredom, and this year, it's The Grey, which I am currently naming the best film of 2012. Not because there haven't been that many good movies, mind you. Actually, I'm awarding it that title because this film will be hard to beat, even by the time December rolls out. The Grey isn't just "good for a January movie", it's a great movie in general. A rich, gripping survival film populated with characters you care about, with a tension and atmosphere that sends chills down your spine, and a fantastic performance from Liam Neeson that--if the movie was released in December--would've been an easy Oscar contender for one of the best performances of that year. Yes, it's that good.

The Grey opens with an oil drilling team in Alaska getting ready to drop into their next site. Liam Neeson plays John Ottway; a man who, after having his wife leave him, exiles himself to Alaska to join the team. His job is to guard the oil drillers from intruding wolves and "take care of them" before they "take care of the crew". He enters the plane ready to go to the next site, but finds himself waking up from a horrific crash that finds he and seven other survivors stranded in the middle of the Alaskan wilderness. Having to seek shelter and ways to maintain warmth in the harsh coldness of the tundra, Ottway and the survivors find themselves the targets of a bigger problem: a ravenous pack of wolves who see the men as intruders.

The Grey has been marketed as an action thriller, boasting its lead action star Liam Neeson in all the promotional material, as well as a shot of him preparing to punch an alpha wolf using hand-crafted knuckles made out of broken bottles and tape. It was easy to make fun of the film as "LIAM NEESON: WOLF-PUNCHER" and see it as some sort of over-the-top, but still laughably super-serious version of a survival film.

But what really surprised me was just how deep The Grey got. Survival films are usually dark material, what with man having to be reduced to his animalistic nature in order to survive nature itself, but The Grey takes that and makes it even bleaker.

Part of this is thanks to Joe Carnahan's fantastic direction of the film. Carnahan was critically praised for his directorial debut, the crime thriller Narc, but followed that with middling but commercially successful action films such as Smoking Aces and The A-Team. Here, Carnahan is given wildly different material from his previous work, and pulls it off in spades. The way he constructs the wilderness in The Grey really makes the audiences feel the overwhelming cold, dread, and fear that the survivors are constantly surrounded by. Snow blankets the land as cold surrounds them; the survivors are enshrouded by fog in the morning and pitch-darkness at night, making sure that if a wolf comes in for a surprise attack, they won't be able to see it coming; even the sound design is able to send shivers down the spine as wind howls much in the same way that the wolves do; the viewer is completely enveloped in this fear as it slowly closes in on them, much like the survivors in the film.

The other thing that makes The Grey darker than your average survival thriller is that it has a surprisingly deep rooting in philosophical quandaries. As the survivors begin to bond, we are asked the question: Are these men really worth saving? Why would they even want to be saved, if their lives haven't even been worth living? When you live your life in a monotonous cycle--waking up, going to work, going back home, getting drunk, fulfilling nothing, bed, repeat--would you prefer to die surrendering yourself to an unstoppable force more powerful than yourself, such as Nature?

It is these questions that not only imbue the film with a bleakness uncommon in a mainstream release, but also elevates the material to more than just a gripping survival tale, but a thought-provoking meditation on faith and discovering meaning in your existence.

If all you want is a gripping survival tale, however, then The Grey definitely delivers on that front as well. Thanks to a fantastic cast of mostly no-name actors--with the exception of Liam Neeson, of course--each of the survivors feels fleshed out with his own strong characterizations. It's rare for a film featuring a fairly large cast of main characters that I'm actually able to distinguish which person is which, and you actually care about each of them.

Then there's Liam Neeson, who employs his talents both as a hardcore *** from roles such as Taken, plus a more vulnerable and raw side that we haven't seen from him in a while. If there's one man you can buy as a man who's an expert on how to fend off wolves who becomes the authoritative leader of a group of "men unfit for mankind", Liam Neeson is obviously the best choice anyone could possibly make.

If there's one thing that doesn't work in the film, and this is just a nit-pick, the scenes where we get flashbacks of Liam Neeson with his wife or as a child bonding with his father all felt rather hollow and artificial in what was otherwise a visceral and intimate experience. But even these scenes had touches that I loved, such as the way Carnahan melds the flashbacks with touches of reality that interrupt the flow; like when Liam Neeson is dreaming of resting beside his wife, only to be lifted up from the bed and wake up to find the plane he's in plummeting to the ground.

All in all, The Grey is the first must-see film of 2012, and you should all do yourself a favor and see it.

Final Verdict: Bleak, uncompromising, intense, and pitiless; but still raw, emotional, and surprisingly thought-provoking. The Grey is a survival film that leaves you gasping for air, but is elevated even further by raw performances, philosophical food for thought, and great direction from Joe Carnahan. It's the first legitimately great movie of 2012. See it.

--

That is all. You can read more reviews at my personal blog, as well as follow me on the Twitter-machine@Enigma6667 to make sure you don't miss a single review from me, as well as other random ramblings.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm never going outside again. Those wolves are scary ***...

(Please visit the site to view this media)

We Need To Talk About Kevin Movie Review

2012-01-28T22:30:00Z

[We Need To Talk About Kevin
Written & Directed by Lynne Ramsay
Starring: Tilda Swinton, John C. Reilly, and Ezra Miller
MPAA: R - For Disturbing Violence & Behavior, Some Sexuality, And Language]

--

I am not a member of the female sex, nor am I a parent; but if I was a mother, then Lynne Ramsay's We Need To Talk About Kevin would've been something like my worst nightmares being manifested in front of my eyes in minute detail.

There's been plenty of debate amongst fans of the horror genre, myself included, in which we wonder whether or not a horror film can transcend its genre. Not necessarily by being "great" horror films, but by being very "different" horror films, in a very specific way. William Peter Blatty famously kept telling critics that his classic, The Exorcist, was "not a horror film" but more of a "theological thriller"; a statement that has often been declared formally as "complete bullsh*t". But can a great horror film be more than just a great horror film?

When I posted my year-end list of 2011 a month or so back, I listed my favorite horror film of the year as Sean Durkin's Martha Marcy May Marlene; a film that isn't a horror film in the traditional sense, but was able to disturb me and terrify me more effectively than the more genre-heavy titles of the year. It was not only a disquieting look through the eyes of a disturbingly indoctrinated woman, but also a fantastic character study, an astounding showcase of talent for its female lead Elizabeth Olsen, and an artful depiction of a constantly deteriorating state of mind.

And now, one of 2011's left overs that hasn't been released in the US until recently, We Need To Talk About Kevin also makes that same argument. Kevin is not only a fantastic horror film featuring one of the most demonically evil children in film history, but also a fantastic character study, an astounding showcase of talent for its female lead Tilda Swinton, and an artful depiction of a constantly deteriorating state of mind. If I could change my top 10 list of 2011 right now just for this film, I would. We Need To Talk About Kevin is disturbing in every way, and is one of the best & most overlooked films of last year.

We Need To Talk About Kevin opens with Eva Khatchadourian (Tilda Swinton) waking up in a run-down, beaten-up house she has exiled herself into after becoming the most hated woman in her neighborhood. Without spoiling anything, we slowly learn as the film progresses that her son, Kevin (Ezra Miller) has committed a horrible atrocity too vile for words; and as expected of the media, the people of America shift their blame to "bad parenting", thus leaving Eva broken by the misery of simply setting foot outside and traumatized by the crimes Kevin committed. Through slightly non-chronological flashbacks, we catch various glimpses of Kevin's life from baby to toddler to child to teenager, while watching Eva slowly become a hollow shell of her former self.

The titular Kevin is portrayed more realistically than your usual demon-seed child of typical horror schlock likeThe Omen, The Good Son, or Orphan. But despite not being possessed by the devil, suffering from mental illness, nor actually being a midget adult that looks like a 12-year-old (Seriously, how exactly does that work,Orphan?), make no mistake about it--Kevin is one of the evilest, most downright hateful little sh*ts you'll see in a movie in recent memory.

When I said that the film is like a mother's nightmares come to life, imagine this: You're a parent, and the one single redeeming factor of your sad pathetic life--your child--has two notable attributes: 1.) He/she is an reflective embodiment of worst traits within you, and 2.) This child has made it his/her mission, practically since being a sperm cell, to make every waking moment of your life miserable by doing nothing but expanding on those hateful traits within you.

As a toddler, he'd soil his pants purposefully just to make his mother angry. As a child, he'd spray the rooms with paint out of sheer amusement, even as a baby he'd be extra sure to make the most shrill and loud wails and screams he can humanly create, and don't even get me started on the stuff he does as a teenager. I wouldn't say he's entirely realistic, since these kinds of movies obviously have to take some liberties with realism, but this is easily the most believable portrayal of an evil child I've seen in quite some time, possibly of all time.

One thing that helps with this is that the contrived moments of everyone not talking about Kevin are rare, if even there to begin with. Oh sure, there are some moments where Eva should've at the very least seen a psychiatrist, but the reasons for leaving those out are justified. For one thing, everything is seen through a surreal filter since it's all from Eva's perspective (A point I'm going to go back to later in the review), and on top of that, how would you be able to tell someone that your child is an evil little b*stard who is evil because he reflects the worst aspects of your own personality? Food for thought.

What really sells it are the performances. Kevin is played by three different actors at three different ages, and all of them really bring to life the dastardly nature within the character, specifically Ezra Miller as the teenaged version. Even John C. Reilly as the father, no matter how small his moments are, manages to shine in typical John C. Reilly fashion. But the real standout is Tilda Swinton as Eva. We've seen plenty of roles like this before; the mother who must live with the fact that her child could possibly be pure evil, such as Mia Farrow inRosemary's Baby or for a more recent example, Vera Farmiga in Orphan (And Joshua...apparently, Farmiga likes those demon-seed movies). But never have I sympathized with such a mother's plight like I did with poor Swinton in Kevin.

Her face is in a perpetual state of shock in this movie, her eyes are consistently tired due to not having felt any real sense of joy for more than 15 years because of her son. It's a draining performance to be sure, but Swinton really pulls it off. Despite being consistently depressed, she always feels like a real human being. The moments where she tries to hide her hostility towards her son with a phony, false sense of kindness are especially heart-breaking because you can just see the sadness in her eyes as she's feigning unconditional love.

Tilda Swinton gives one of the best performances I've seen all year...or at least of 2011, since us Americans got to see it late. Swinton has always been one of those actresses like Meryl Streep who seems to be consistently amazing with every role she's in, no matter the movie, so when I tell you that this is one of her best performance of her already dazzling career, this should be a big red flag that you should go see this if only for her wonderful performance.

But it also helps that this is not only a great acting show-case, but a marvelously directed horror/drama. Director Lynn Ramsay is effective at using haunting imagery to convey the psychological disruptions of her characters, and this is no exception. One such shot involving Eva's house being covered in blood-red paint from pranksters was haunting in its own strange way. When we see Eva attempting to clean the paint off her disheveled home, we are also seeing her trying to wipe away the trauma of her past away.

The atmosphere is also incredibly effective, utilizing this false sense of normalcy that despite looking very clean and proper, seems to be festering some sort of hidden evil from beneath the cracks.

I especially loved how subjective this movie was filmed. It's interesting to compare both this and Martha Marcy May Marlene back to back. Both films depict the deteriorating state of mind of their respective female roles. But while MMMM was very objective and non-judgemental, everything in We Need To Talk About Kevin is seen entirely through the filter of Tilda Swinton's perspective, which gives off a more intimate look at her psyche than MMMM did, despite being biased toward one side of the story rather than looking at it on all sides (We never really see anything from the father's perspective, who Kevin was actually nice towards), but it still manages to work in the film's favor in really trying to sell you on just how despicable Kevin is.

Now, I must head back to the question I began this review with: Do films like We Need To Talk About Kevinand Martha Marcy May Marlene show a significant evolution of the horror genre. I say absolutely. It's great to see more horror films more rooted in character development that truly look at the horrors within ourselves rather than supernatural horrors, which has definitely been explored before, but was without a doubt more prominent in recent years than in the past.

Final Verdict: Terrifying, haunting, chilling, traumatizing, and--most importantly of all--believable in its own way, We Need To Talk About Kevin is a masterful blend of horror, drama, and even tragedy that will stay under your skin thanks to its compelling direction from writer/director Lynne Ramsay and absolutely perfect performances from Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller.

--

That is all. You can find more of my reviews on my personal blog at cineffectpodcast.blogspot.com and you can follow me on the Twitter machine @Enigma6667 to make sure you don't miss a single review from me, as well as other random ramblings.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to talk about my sister Alyx. She's starting to...look at me funny...

(Please visit the site to view this media)

The 2012 Academy Awards Predictions - Round 2

2012-01-25T22:30:00Z

Last week, I discussed my predictions for the Academy Awards for what would be nominated, what would be snubbed, and what could possibly win. Now, however, the nominations are finally out, the movie-geek community is running rampant with equal parts applause, surprise, and backlash, & all the world is waiting to see which film will win the most prestigious award in the movie industry: A golden, naked man holding a bunch of leaves for some reason.

Probably shouldn't waste any more time on an introduction since I already did so in Round 1 of the predictions list, so let's just get this out of the way...

With the nominations finally out, it's time to hear my thoughts on what will probably win, what I think should win, the big surprises that no one saw coming, and more of the delicious, delicious snubs. Put on your monocles, grab your most expensive bottle of chardonnay, and raise your brows & pinkie fingers as high as humanly possible: This is round 2 of my 2012 Academy Awards Predictions extravaganza.

--

Best Picture

What Will Win: As mentioned last week, it was no surprise that The Artist would be the big awards front-runner of the year. With a long list of nominations under its belt, and the largest chances of winning the Best Picture award, Michael Hazanavicius's silent film has a 90% chance of taking home the gold.

Indeed, my powers of clairvoyance have done me well on this one, but for every Citizen Kane there's a How Green Is My Valley, and for every Avatar there's a Hurt Locker. And in grand old Oscar tradition, there is one film that's locked with an almost equally good enough chance of nabbing the Best Picture Oscar from the front-runner, thus surprising us all. I was expecting it to be something along the lines of Alexander Payne's The Descendants, but in fact it's actually Martin Scorsese's Hugo, which managed to nab even more nominations at the Oscars than The Artist (I believe Hugo has 11 nominaitons while The Artist has 10).

Granted, it's fitting for these two particular films to be head-in-head for the race. They're both nostalgic odes to the silent era, but like Professor X and Magento, they aspire to reach the same end using vastly different means. Whereas Hugo is a love-letter to not just the silent film era, but to the magic of filmmaking and art in general that looks forward as much as it looks back thanks to stunning 3D technology and visual effects, The Artist, on the other end of the spectrum, is more light and crowd-pleasing, an almost exact recreation of a silent film in every excruciating detail to the point that it feels like a movie that has time traveled from the 1920s and landed on our generation.

Which of these two will win, and which one do I think is more deserving? Well, I think it's a safe bet to say thatThe Artist will take home the gold. However, it would be a wonderful surprise to see Hugo nab it, because I honestly found it a much better movie, with more heart, more soul, and a third act that brings the tears on like no other. It doesn't really matter, however, because I think both films are great in their own way, and both just as deserving of the award.

However, there's one film that I think will be remembered as a classic far longer than either of the two. And yes, it's been nominated for Best Picture...

What Should Win: Last week, I mentioned that The Tree of Life was too polarizing and too unconventional for the Academy's tastes. I also said that I would love to be proven wrong on my assumption that Terrence Malick's magnum opus would get the snub. And boy was I proven wrong, and boy was I so happy to have been proven wrong. The Tree of Life is one of those rare films that I will literally describe as "emotionally transcendent" without a hint of irony in my voice. It moved me on so many levels, intellectually stimulated me like no other, and, yes, it felt like an out-of-body experience in which I was reunited with my own childhood.

Pretentious speech? Perhaps, but I truly do mean it when I say that The Tree of Life is one of the most important films of all time, and perhaps the most important film of this generation. Go ahead and kick me all you want, but no other film will be debated, scrutinized, or analyzed as thoroughly as this film in 20 years, and even if you hate it, there's no denying the sheer level of craftsmanship and artistry that is prevalent in the film.

Will it win? Chances are ridiculously slim, but I'm just glad that it was even nominated anyway, since I didn't expect it to at all. And maybe, just maybe, my dreams will come true on this one and it will get the award it rightfully deserves...and while we're on that note, I'd also like a PS3. Can't always get what you want.

Biggest Surprises: There were some small surprises in the Best Picture category, such as Steven Spielberg'sWar Horse getting a nomination despite having very little traction in previous awards ceremonies. But without a doubt, the biggest surprise of all is Stephen Daldry's 9/11 film Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close getting a nomination, despite mostly negative reviews and a 48% on Rotten Tomatoes--a staggeringly low review score for a film that was given one of the most prestigious awards nominations in the industry.

I haven't seen the film yet, and I'm sure it's not a terrible movie, but I really don't see how they could've supported such a film, when the main complaint that's being railed against it is that it uses very controversial subject matter (the 9/11 terrorist attacks) in a poorly done, manipulative way. But then again, this was directed by Stephen Daldry, who seems to like pissing film-buffs off (in 2008, his WWII-set drama The Reader nabbed a Best Pic nomination despite mixed reviews and millions of people begging for The Dark Knight to not be snubbed).

Biggest Snubs: The main course in the snub-menu was pretty obvious: Nicolas Winding Refn's crime thrillerDrive, one of the most well-received films by critics and just a generally amazing movie, was ignored entirely in every category except best Sound Mixing or Sound Editing--something along those lines. It was expected, but still sad considering it would've been, not only a ballsy choice in general, but also a subversion of expectations from the Academy, who usually only nominates high-brow dramas in the running, and Drive, despite being a crime action/thriller, was just artful enough to gain the attention of almost every critic.

Also snubbed was another one of my favorite films of the year, Sundance darling Martha Marcy May Marlene. Sean Durkin's directorial debut was haunting, terrifying, disturbing, and astoundingly made in both acting and directing fronts. Sure it was a small movie, but it was small in a way that was masterfully done, making for a truly great film. More people need to seek it out.

Best Actor In A Lead Role

Will Win: If this were a month ago, I'd have no problem telling you that George Clooney in The Descendants had the award in the bag already. Now, however, it seems as if The Artist is gaining so much awards traction that it is entirely possible that Jean Dujardin could nab it. Either way, it seems like a two man race on this one: The A-list Hollywood actor that everyone and their grandmother loves, or the new, up-and-coming Frenchman who will become a big hit in America. Regardless, it seems like after this awards season, Jean Dujardin's path could go one of two ways: He'll either become a big hit in America and get the recognition he deserves a la Christoph Waltz from Inglorious Basterds, or he'll make a flop next and be forgotten forever a la Roberto Benigni from Life Is Beautiful.

Should Win: If I had to pick which of the two I'd rather see get the award, it's still George Clooney for me. I know, I know, I'm an *** for not rooting for the underdog, etc. But George Clooney is simply marvelous inThe Descendants and it's honestly the best he's ever been. I know he's won an award before, but I believe it was for supporting actor (Correct me if I'm wrong), but I say that this is the year we give him the big one. He definitely deserves it.

Biggest Surprise: While Gary Oldman was a nice surprise for his work in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Seriously, am I the only one who noticed that that title has the exact same rhythm and syllable-count as Martha Marcy May Marlene?), the biggest surprise of all was Demian Bichir getting nominated for playing a Mexican immigrant living in Los Angeles in A Better Life. I haven't seen the film myself, but I get why his performance is kind of a big deal: His character is basically a representation of all the faceless Mexican workers we see tending to our gardens and cleaning our pools unnoticed. He has to show the humanity in them that people do not often see, and from what I heard, he does a remarkable job. Nice to see credit given where credit is due. I gotta check it out now...

Biggest Snub: There were plenty of snubs this year. Brad Pitt was nominated for his completely predictable performance in Moneyball instead of his more nuanced and powerful performance in The Tree of Life, Tom Hardy in Warrior was given no love, and the fantastic child actor from Tree of Life Hunter McCracken was ignored from just about every major awards circuit this year.

But the two biggest snubs for me were easily Ryan Gosling and Michael Fassbender; a snub which I predicted would happen last week, actually. It's easy to see why they were both snubbed: Their two best performances were too "out there" for the Academy's tastes. Ryan Gosling went completely psycho in Drive and Michael Fassbender was a sex-addict who shows his junk more than any other actor in years throughout Shame. But still, they could've been nominated...but for different, more accessible roles that were also very good. The Academy could've easily given Ryan Gosling a nod for The Ides of March, and though I haven't seen this film yet, I'm sure Michael Fassbender is great as Carl Jung in David Cronenberg's A Dangerous Method. But alas, it wasn't meant to be.

Best Actress In A Lead Role

Will Win: This one's a tough one. Literally four out of the five nominations in this category I can easily see walking home with the Oscar. Firstly, there's Viola Davis in The Help, who's become something of an overnight sensation thanks to her work in the film (Though I haven't seen it yet so I have nothing more to say on her). Then there's Rooney Mara for her electrifying work as the iconic Lisbeth Salander in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.

Then there's the two actresses that play well-known historical figures. I haven't seen either of their films, but I'm pretty positive they're both excellent as usual since they really are two of the best actresses working today. Michelle Williams is apparently so uncannily similar to Marilyn Monroe in My Week With Marilyn, that she could win by default for bringing back that certain Marilyn magic that no other actress has been able to recreate in so long. But then you bring in Meryl Streep in The Iron Lady, this being her 17th nomination in her long career--which is a freaking record that I doubt no other actor or actress could ever top. From what I hear, Meryl Streep is wonderful as usual, and also uncannily resembles her historical figure, Margaret Thatcher, very well. But unlike My Week With Marilyn, there haven't been too many favorable reviews for the film itself.

Should Win: If I had to pick a personal favorite, I'd definitely go with Rooney Mara. Not because she's the only one out of this list that I've actually seen...okay that may definitely be part of it, but she truly is wonderful in the film. It's hard to follow-up on Noomi Rapace's take on the same iconic character in the Swedish film, but Mara manages to actually improve on it, adding a level of humanism that was absent fron Rapace's more cold approach.

Biggest Surprise: While not a huge surprise, it was still pretty jarring to see Glenn Close nominated in Albert Nobbs, a film in which she plays a woman pretending to be a man while she saves the money for a sex-change operation. I've only seen the trailer from the film, so I'm not the best judge, but the performance really does look like more of a stunt than a real performance. Not to discredit the fact that Close is probably very, very, very good in the movie, but it seems like one of those things where she just said, "Yeah, I can play a man! That'll TOTALLY get me an Oscar nomination!" But I digress...

Biggest Snub: The most obvious snub is that what I thought was, in my opinion, not only the best female performance of the year but the best performance of the year period, got absolutely zero recognition. That performance was Elizabeth Olsen in Martha Marcy May Marlene who has stayed under my skin since I've seen the film, and hasn't left since. To call it haunting is a massive understatement to just how much she terrified me. It was a performance of a truly gifted movie star: A performance that relies so heavily on facial expressions to convey incredible amounts of information to the viewer and she makes it all look effortless. To say that this is one of the most disappointing snubs for me is yet another massive understatement.

But believe me, there are plenty more snubs in this list. Charlize Theron in Young Adult was ignored for pulling off a damn near impossible balancing act: Making an unlikable character incredibly watchable. Then there's Tilda Swinton for We Need To Talk About Kevin. I haven't seen the film yet, but I actually will very soon this coming weekend, and I can already tell that, from what I've seen, she does a bang-up job like she usually does. And don't even get me started on the Melancholia duo of Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg, who were both marvelous in Lars von Trier's beautiful vision of the apocalypse.

So yeah, Meryl Streep gets her ten bazillionth nomination, everyone else has to bite the dust. Circle of life in the female categories for the Academy Awards.

Best Actor In A Supporting Role

Will/Should Win: This is probably one of the few very obvious shoo-ins this year: There's no doubt in my mind that Christopher Plummer will win for his work in Beginners as an old man who comes out of the closet at the ripe(?) age of 70+. And rightfully so. He's wonderful in the film, so full of life and energy that is unusual for such an old man; he's like if your gay best friend and your cool grandpa were combined into one awesome package. Seek this rather overlooked movie out, because it is wonderful, and so is Christopher Plummer.

Biggest Surprise: Two pretty moderate surprises in this category were Jonah Hill in Moneyball and the legendary Max von Sydow for Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close. I thought Jonah Hill was fine in Moneyballbut honestly didn't find him terribly memorable. I haven't seen Extremely Loud as I mentioned earlier, but I can totally see why Max von Sydow would be a pick. He's a legendary actor who's worked with legendary directors playing an incredibly difficult role: A mute man who communicates only through vague hand gestures and written notes. I don't see him winning, but it's nice to see such a prominent figure getting some recognition, and I have a feeling more of the hip youngsters (kill me for saying that) will learn what an awesome guy Max von Sydow is.

Biggest Snub: Depending on your preference there were either two really big snubs or three really big snubs. For me, it was three really big snubs. Most obvious of which: Albert Brooks's very dark, very scary turn inDrive was ignored, along with the rest of the movie. A real shame because he was a fantastic villain that had a real sense of menace. But alas, he won't be acknowledged. I still do hope he continues to do more dark roles like that. He really is good at it.

Then there's Patton Oswalt in Young Adult, who is the human, relate-able center of all the dark comedy that proceeds in the film. Patton Oswalt, another gifted comedian who shows darker sides, is growing more and more of a gifted actor in each film I've seen him in. He was fantastic as the creepy, almost Travis Bickle-esque football fanatic in Big Fan, and he extends his dramatic range even further in Young Adult. One day, Oswalt will have his day. One day...

Finally, there's Andy Serkis. I predicted that this year would be the first that the Academy would recognize the talents of a motion capture performer. Perhaps I was a bit too optimistic on that one. Serkis was ignored yet again, for his fantastic work, this time with Rise of the Planet of the Apes. He brought to life one of the most memorable characters of the year with Caesar, and the way he immersed himself into those chimp-like movements and mannerisms was wonderful to view. Much like Oswalt, I would love to see Serkis have his big day some day.

Best Actress In A Supporting Role

Will Win: This one's a tough one. We could either go with yet another overnight sensation from The Help with Octavia Spencer (Who previously won a Golden Globe for the same category), or they could pull the Oscar favorite with Berenice Bejo in The Artist. A tough call, but in my personal opinion...

Should Win: Berenice Bejo should definitely get the Oscar out of everyone in this category. She exudes charm in every frame of the screen, and much like Jean Dujardin, I can see her becoming a big star in Hollywood. Also, I haven't seen The Help like I mentioned earlier, so there's that.

Biggest Surprise: At first, I was tempted to say that Janet McTeer in Albert Nobbs was the biggest surprise of this category since I had no idea who she was and had no idea that people even liked her to begin with...and then I realized that my eyes were not deceiving me and I had, in fact, seen Melissa McCarthy being nominated for Bridesmaids

Yes. You heard that right. Melissa McCarthy was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her work inBridesmaids. I.......don't know what to say to that. I'm glad, in one sense, since I love Melissa McCarthy and she was wonderful in Bridesmaids. At the same time, however, I wouldn't call her performance "Oscar-worthy" if you see what I mean. I'll still give it support since I'm glad that Melissa McCarthy is becoming more of a breakout star, but either way, she doesn't have that strong of a chance of winning.

Biggest Snubs: One nomination I forgot to mention was that Jessica Chastain, another overnight sensation from 2011, got a nomination for her work in The Help. But just like Brad Pitt, she's being nominated for the wrong movie because her best performance was in The Tree of Life, and it truly was my favorite supporting female role of the year. Chastain in The Tree of Life just has this amazingly angelic screen presence that is strangely hypnotic. She exudes a natural beauty and ethereal vibe that feels unique and awe-inspiring, yet she's so down-to-earth throughout most of the film. I'm glad she's nominated for something because she's a terrific actress, but it would've been nice to see her nominated for the right thing.

Otherwise, the only other snub I can think of is Shailene Woodley in The Descendants, an actress who I hated in the TV show Secret Life of the American Teenager, but manages to hold her own even against the legendary George Clooney in The Descendants. And it's rare to find teen actors who actually act like real teens--or real human beings, for that matter--so props should've been given to her.

Best Foreign Language Film

Will/Probably Should Win: I'll be honest, I haven't seen any of these films yet. Don't worry, I'm going to see A Separation this weekend and tell you all what I thought of it, but it should come as no surprise that this is the foreign film to beat this year. Not just being acclaimed for being the best foreign film of the year, the Iranian divorce drama has also received accolades in several top 10 lists, including getting a very prestigious number 1 spot in Roger Ebert's Best of 2011 list. I'm sure I'll like it, but again, I can't really say until I see it for myself...

Biggest Snub: The only reason why I'm even mentioning this category is because there are two other foreign films that I've seen this year that I think totally deserved a nomination that more people need to check out. Y'know how you make a top 5 list of 2011, but then you see a film from that year later than everyone else and you feel inclined to change your list? Well the film that did that to me was the Korean drama Poetry, which is easily the most depressing and achingly sad film of 2011. But it's so beautifully done, so marvelously acted, that the insane depression you feel comes with moments of such sheer beauty and poignancy that it helps heal the wounds you feel when the film ultimately breaks your heart into a million pieces. I dunno if it counts as a 2011 film since it released in Korea in 2010, but still, see it. It's on Netflix Instant and it's fantastic.

The other snub is Certified Copy another film that doesn't really count as a 2011 release, but was released here in the US in 2011, so it still does count in some way, if that makes any sense? But Certified Copy is one of the most intriguing mysteries I've seen in a film since Ingmar Bergman's Persona, and certainly something that will be debated for years to come, much like The Tree of Life. The film builds it's own mythology and fiction only to shatter it to bits and rebuild it from scratch in a way that's haunting, kind of ground-breaking, and simply fascinating. I don't wanna spoil how exactly it does it, but it too is on Netflix Instant and should be seen by more people. Again, seek it out.

Best Original Screenplay

Will Win: It seems like this one could either go to The Artist, the Academy favorite, or Midnight in Paris the film that isn't as much of an Academy favorite but was written by an Academy favorite who is returning to form after a long series of duds. Both scripts are very "playful". One plays with the silent film format in inventive ways, the other plays a lot with historical literary figures. If I had to pick a personal favorite however...

Should Win: ...It's easily Midnight In Paris. I know, I know, I placed The Artist above Midnight in Paris in my top 10 list, but I really do love Allen's script for Midnight in Paris that much. It's wickedly smart (English majors will adore this movie by default), very charming, and always leaves a wide smile on your face with Woody's signature dialogue.

Biggest Surprise: Bridesmaids again? I would've never expected that. I mean, I heavily enjoyed Bridesmaidsand I get why everyone loves it so much. That being said, Bridesmaids is not really a "script" movie. Most of the film's best movies were done with improvisation, what with it being a Judd Apatow-produced film with a bunch of female comedians sitting in one room, you know that they were letting it flow on the fly. So it's weird to see that script getting acclaim.

Other than that, the even bigger surprise was the inclusion of the previously mentioned Foreign film front-runner A Separation make the list. I dunno the last time a foreign film was nominated for Best Screenplay, but it's still highly interesting, to say the least. Man, all this praise for A Separation is making me wanna see it more and more. Gotta check that out...

Biggest Snubs: I'm tempted to let my Malick fanboyism wash over me and say The Tree of Life, but let's be honest: That movie probably didn't have a conventional script. Especially after hearing so many stories of how Malick would just write lines of lyrical poetry and give them to the actors to convey, it's safe to say it wasn't a screenplay in the traditional sense.

In other snub news, however, it seems like the Academy just can't give some love for Martha Marcy May Marlene. The way Sean Durkin's script flips between present and past is incredibly inventive and beautifully executed, that I'd venture forth to say that, coupled with the excellent editing that was also snubbed, it's revolutionary in its own little way.

One script that was more accessible, on the other hand, that I thought would get a nomination was Diablo Cody's script for Young Adult. Now, I liked Juno fine enough, but I wasn't a fan of a lot of the moments where Diablo Cody just forces a quirky line of dialogue just for the sake of making a quirky line of dialogue. In Young Adult, however, everything was more restrained and natural, and I really appreciated how Diablo Cody grew as a writer in it. It would've been nice to see the Academy acknowledge that growth, because I do think the script is the second best part of Young Adult next to the performances, but ah well...

Best Adapted Screenplay

Will Win: This could easily go to either Alexander Payne in The Descendants or John Logan in Hugo. One is an ultra-realistic meditation on life that features naturalistic dialogue and dramatic tricks that are about as natural and un-phony as humanly possible, the other is filled with whimsy and heart and a deep, unabashed love for cinema. It's kind of tough to pick which one will win, but my personal favorite...

Should Win: ...Is Hugo! Okay, I get that The Descendants is written much better than Hugo. It has more natural dialogue, the way every event flows is more believable, you get the drill. But god **BRAAAHHHH** do I love the amount of heart that fills every scene of Hugo. Everything is innocent without being cloying and it all comes from a place of passion and heart, that it's simply irresistible. It could have more to do with Martin Scorsese's direction than anything else, but I still must acknowledge how wonderfully done the script is.

Biggest Surprise: Nothing really too surprising in this category. It was interesting seeing The Ides of March in the list despite seeming like most people have forgotten that film, but other than that, this was a pretty safe list.

Biggest Snubs: Do autobiographical screenplays count? If so, I'd like to vouch for Beginners to get some recognition. I loved how personal the movie felt and how it was so clearly based on a real life experience, despite still having elements of quirk to mix things up. Also, if autobiographical scripts are indeed included, thenThe Tree of Life can count as well, even though it probably wasn't a traditional screenplay like previously mentioned.

In terms of real adapted screenplays, I was surprised to see The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo not getting any love. Perhaps it's because it is very similar to the original Swedish film, which in turn was very similar to the original Swedish book, but it seemed like they could've nominated this as a way of acknowledging that they didn't nominate the Swedish film for anything at all.

Best Original Score

Will/Should Win: The Artist is easily going to nab this award hands down. It being a silent film, there's definitely a much bigger emphasis on the music having to rope the audience up in the emotions along with the actors' facial expressions. The only thing holding it back is the whole controversy with how The Artist uses a very famous piece from the score from Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo. Now, if you know the Academy, you know they don't nominate musical scores if they take from another artist in any way possible. Black Swan couldn't be nominated because all the tracks were creepy reworkings of piece from Swan Lake, There Will Be Bloodcouldn't be nominated because it used samples from previous works from the composer or something like that that I've forgotten. So it's weird to see them so accepting of The Artist since the way they use that Vertigoscore is definitely very obvious, to the point that the still-alive Kim Novak ranted to the public about how the use of it was "rape" or something along those lines. But that's a whole 'nother story entirely.

Biggest Snubs: After scoring big with his score for last year's The Social Network, Trent Reznor was much hyped about for doing the score for David Fincher's remake of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. And it was a kick-ass score. Not really on the same height of his score for The Social Network, but it did fit the actual movie moreso than The Social Network and there were some really stunning tracks.

But an even bigger snub, in my opinion, was The Chemical Brothers' score for Hanna, another great film that was severely overlooked that had one of the best scores I've heard perhaps in the last five years. Intense, stylish, electric; it also strangely fit the surreal mood of the film as it presents the normal world as a new, alien experience for the film's titular character, who has lived in the wilderness throughout the majority of her life. It was strange, but incredibly evocative and even *** at many moments. I would love to see them do more scores for films.

Best Director

Will Win: If you didn't read Round 1 of my Oscar predictions list, I stated that there was a good chance that the Best Director/Best Picture wins would be split, so that the Academy could give both the two main front-runners the recognition each of them deserve rather than giving it to one over the other. The most likely choice is that Martin Scorsese will get Best Director while The Artist will get Best Picture as expected. On the other hand, it could be a total surprise and the directing honors could go to Michael Hazanavicius instead with top honors going to Hugo. The latter is still pretty unlikely, but you never know.

Should Win: Not a single film in recent memory has reached the staggering level of ambition that Terrence Malick put into The Tree of Life this year. Not just a film asking "What is the purpose of our existence?", not just a nostalgic ode to childhood, not just a look at the history of the universe, but also a deeply personal autobiography that manages to weave every one of those elements, both personal and philosophical, into one unifying whole that's unlike any other. He created a film that you don't watch; you experience. Malick is one of the greatest classic directors still working today, up there with, yes, Martin Scorsese and the other demigods of cinema. He's made many classic films, but has never won Best Director himself. If this were a perfect world, he'd get what he's deserved for so long this year, for the film that I personally think defines his entire career.

Biggest Surprises: None. This is about as safe a list as you can possibly make. I was a little surprised to see Woody Allen in the running since there wasn't really much "directing" going on in Midnight in Paris, but then I remembered that everybody loves Woody Allen and it clicked with me all of a sudden why he got nominated.

Biggest Snubs: Much like the Best Picture list, the most obvious snub was Nicolas Winding Refn, who brought an amazing sense of style in Drive that was unlike anything else I'd seen in recent memory. The action sequences were beautifully shot, the sound design was pitch perfect, the surreal atmosphere was engrossing, and it all culminates to a movie that just oozes what I could only describe as pure "cool" from start to finish.

Then there's Sean Durkin from Martha Marcy May Marlene, who despite being a first-time director, shows an amazing skill for restraint and control in each scene. Each shot is perfectly framed to keep you on your toes for what could be around the corner, thus provoking more unbearable tension, and the way he flips through present and past is a masterstroke. I simply can't wait to see what he does next.

--

phew.

Well that was long wasn't it. I hope I never have to write anything that long again, except I'm probably going to anyway next year, but at least I can take a break for a while.

The Oscars are gonna be televised sometime in February and we'll see what the real winners and losers are, but I also hope that this list turns your attention towards films that didn't get recognition that are worth checking out. If you have your own predictions and some personal snubs you'd like to mention, leave a comment of some sort. If you like what I write for some weird, indiscernible reason, you can follow me on the Twitter-machine @Enigma6667 so you'll never miss a thing I write, as well as hear some dumb ramblings I make every now and then.

--

That is all.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna place my bets against a bunch of other critics on Twitter. Note to other people willing to do this: Don't bet against Erik Childress. He will destroy you on this subject. Bye!

The 2012 Academy Awards Predictions - Round 1

2012-01-20T22:30:00Z

Make fun of awards shows all you want, but without them, challenging works of art in the cinema landscape wouldn't nearly get the amount of mainstream recognition they would've gotten without a powerhouse award circuit like the Academy Awards. Think about it, in a day and age where Hollywood seems to only favor shallow fluff, the awards shows like the Oscars are the only ones who encourage challenging films that showcase emotion and artistry over mediocrity...to a point, at the very least, but that's another topic entirely. I mean, say what you will about the Academy, but only an awards show can single-handedly get millions of movie-goers lined up to see a contemporary silent film with The Artist just for the Oscar-hype alone. There are plenty of things about the Oscars to pick on, but that is something to be appreciated.

Still though, there seems to be a certain formula to the Academy in their nominations, to the point that it's gotten easy to predict what they'd pick and what they'd whole-heartedly avoid. Sure there'd be some surprises here and there, like last year's inclusion of Dogtooth in the Foreign Language Film list. But for the most part, it seems like there is always some sort of definite pick for biggest piece of "Oscar-bait" of the year.

So what should you expect from this year's Oscars? Well, there are some obvious things to cover, as well as some personal predictions from myself. Rather than going category by category (which we'll save for round 2, when the nominations are finally released), I'm just going to pick whatever random ones I think are worth mentioning, including snubs. Okay? Alright, so where to begin...

--

Prediction #1: The Artist DESTROYS The Competition

It should come as no surprise that the big front-runner for Best Picture is easily Michel Hazanavicius's silent romantic comedy The Artist. For good reason, I must add. It's a definite crowd-pleaser, it makes you feel good and sunny when you walk out the theater, it's a homage to a classic style of film-making that we haven't seen recreated in such a long time, and it uses that in the most non-gimmicky way it possibly can.

I thought The Artist was a d*mn great movie. It was pure joy from start to finish, it is expertly crafted and directed, the performances are grade-A, and the way it transcends its gimmick of being a silent film made in the 21st century is handled with grace and elegance. Now, do I think it deserves to win the Best Picture award? Eh...kind of I guess. There were many other films that I thought deserved it more, but if it did win, I wouldn't complain. However, it must be said that plenty of vocal movie-geeks from the dark recesses of the Backlash Zone are all giving out one major knock against the film: That it's very light.

Well...of course it's light. Most silent films didn't have much depth since they had to convey emotions and ideas through broad storytelling devices, and incredibly expressive facial expressions. The only one I can think of that had the complexity of something like, say, Inception was Metropolis, and even that one was done with broad strokes. I think that when it comes to Oscar front-runners, people need to manage their expectations accordingly, regardless of whether it's most likely to win an award or not. The Artist is light in an incredibly well-crafted sort of way, which is more than enough to win the Academy.

One last thing: Anyone who tells you that The Artist is yet another example of "Oscar-bait" is probably a liar. If anything, using a silent film format wasn't really so much of a way to pander to the Academy, but rather it was a really big risk since one false move could've made the entire film a gimmick. I mean, it's not like The King's Speech where it just gathers every element from the Oscar-nominee handbook and rips off from it with reckless abandon (And I actually liked The King's Speech a lot).

Prediction #2: The Tree of Life Will Be Nominated For Best Cinematography...And Nothing Else

I believe I've expressed my love for this film enough already, but for those of you new to my opinions, The Tree of Life was by far my favorite film of the entire year, and the film that I think will have the most impact in 20 years, much in the same way that 2001: A Space Odyssey did.

That being said, it's way too unconventional and unsafe for the Academy to give it a Best Picture nod. It's a sad fact, but one that is hard to deny. Sure, 2001 was able to nab a Best Picture nod when it was released despite its lofty ambition and unconventionality, but that was 1968. In 2011, the Academy has gotten too used to a particular breed of film that anything that is too new and different to them will scare them away. There are exceptions, such as last year's Black Swan, a film that features psychological torment, a lesbian sex-scene, and disgusting self-mutilation, and was able to be nominated for Best Picture and win Best Actress for Natalie Portman, but for the most part, there are too many other safe choices for the Academy to make room for Terrence Malick's opus.

I could be wrong though, and boy do I like being proven wrong on these things, but at this point, the chances are very slim.

Otherwise, there's no doubt that The Tree of Life, being one of the best-shot films pretty much of all time, in my book, will get a Best Cinematography nomination for the brilliantly talented Emmanuel Lubezki (Who also shot the ridiculously amazing long-takes in Children of Men). Hell, there's even a good chance that the Academy will recognize its feats in Visual Effects, in how it portrays the birth of the universe and the dawn of the dinosaurs. But again, those chances are slim.

Brad Pitt and Jessica Chastain might also get nominations for their performances in the film, but both of them are in other, safer performance for the Academy to decide on (Moneyball for Pitt, The Help for Jessica Chastain). And Hunter McCracken, the amazingly talented child actor at the center, will walk away completely ignored.

Prediction #3: Drive Will Be Nominated For Best Supporting Actor...And Nothing Else

The same case I made for The Tree of Life can also be applied to Nicolas Winding Refn's Drive, another film that was one of my favorites of 2011 that is too unconventional for the Academy's tastes. But for different reasons. For one thing, Drive is an action thriller (Say what you will about the film's steady pace, but it is a thriller) and the Academy doesn't usually acknowledge the things that aren't incredibly high-brow or classically crafted.

Another thing: It's waaay too violent for the Academy's tastes. Sure, last year had violent surprises in the Best Picture list such as Black Swan and 127 Hours, but they are leagues behind the brutality that takes place inDrive. People are dispatched in ridiculously gruesome ways in that film, sometimes even cruelly so, such as a scene in which a man is stabbed in the eye with a dining fork. Academy voters only go for that kind of thing if there's an inspiring pay off at the end, like the aforementioned 127 Hours, but Drive's ending is, depending on how you interpret it, ambiguous at best, bleak at worst.

Ryan Gosling has a shot at getting Best Actor for his marvelous portrayal as the Driver, but the chances for that are rather slim. One chance that isn't slim, on the other hand, is Albert Brooks's turn as the lead villain inDrive. Not only because the Academy usually likes actors going out of their comfort zone (Brooks is a comedic actor who shows his dark side, in the film), but because he really is that good in it. Terrifyingly good, even.

Aside from that, the only other things I can see Drive getting away with this year are possibly nominations for Cliff Martinez's score and the sound design. But again, chances are slim.

Prediction #4: Martha Marcy May Marlene Will Be Ignored ENTIRELY

Another film in my top 5 list, Martha Marcy May Marlene is also probably going to get the boot. Not just on certain categories...on ALL categories. So far, there has been no awards buzz for this film at all. Which is a real shame, because Elizabeth Olsen gives what is probably the best performance of the entire year, female or otherwise, and the film in general is one of the most arresting and haunting experiences I've ever had in a theater.

Another thing that was overlooked by awards circuits, but thankfully other critics have been able to notice, is that Martha Marcy May Marlene is one of the few films that really shows the power of editing in a film. The editing is key to what makes the film's blurring of reality and imagination so eerily real and disturbing, that it would be an extra shame if the Academy didn't recognize the talent that was put into its transitions and edits.

The only thing I have hope for nominations wise is John Hawkes nabbing his second Supporting Actor Oscar nomination for this film. He was so delightfully spooky and terrifying in this film, and since there seem to be only two main frontrunners in the Male Supporting category (Christopher Plummer in Beginners and the aforementioned Albert Brooks from Drive), there's a good chance he can nab a spot. Otherwise, I hope this film gains more traction in time for it to earn some well-deserved nominations.

Prediction #5: The Help Will Be Nominated For A Sh*t-Load of Awards

Despite being one of the biggest surprise hits of the year, there's been a fair share of scorn for this "White Guilt" film. I can't join in on the consensus since I personally haven't seen it yet, but I can already tell that this will sweep the nominations the same way that another "White Guilt" movie, 2009's The Blind Side swept it.

If I had to guess what it will get nods for, it will most definitely be Viola Davis (Though I don't know whether she counts as Best Actress or Best Supporting Actress yet), Octavia Spencer, Best Picture, and quite possibly Bryce Dallas Howard and Emma Stone. Again, I haven't seen the film, so I can't add a say on whether it's overrated or not yet, but I'm pretty positive that there are other, previously mentioned films that are more deserving of the nomination.

Though if I did have to pick which of the Best Picture frontrunners deserved the big "Oscar-bait" stamp, it's this one. Just from what I've heard of the film, it sounds like The Blind Side all over again, which I'm not too fond of. But again, I'm not the best judge of this particular film, so we'll see...

Prediction #6: The Best Picture & Best Director Awards Will Be Divided

Sometimes, what the Academy will do is that when they're really divided on which film should win Best Picture and can't really decide, they'll give their own version of a fair trade. One film will earn Best Picture, the other will get Best Director. This was something that people were expecting for 2009's Avatar/The Hurt Lockershowdown, but both ended up going to The Hurt Locker anyway. But now, I have a feeling that it will really happen this year.

The two films that I think will share the honors will be The Artist getting Best Picture and Martin Scorsese getting Best Director for Hugo. Why Hugo, you say? I know, it doesn't seem like as big of a main front-runner as other dramas like, say, The Descendants, but there are a few qualifying reasons for it. For one thing, Scorsese really did direct the sh*t out of Hugo, prominently featuring what is quite literally the best use of 3D the cinema world has ever seen to this day. That alone could get the Academy to see the talent Scorsese put into the film, plus they just like awarding classic directors who are still making movies, even if Hugo was a radical departure for Scorsese.

Another reason why I think Hugo and The Artist will get the "stalemate" is because they are very similar thematically. Both of them are love-letters to silent cinema, and they both really embody the "magic of movies" in a gorgeously done way. One film expresses its love by looking back and walking forward at once by portraying the silent film era with new technology, a la 3D. The other is an exact recreation of the silent era in every minute, exquisite detail that ultimately transcends its gimmick and becomes the very thing it's trying to imitate in an Edgar Wright, Shaun of the Dead sort of way.

OR maybe the Academy will surprise us and give the top honors to Hugo while honoring Michel Hazanavicius's direction instead......naaaahhhhh....

Prediction #7: Cars 2 Will Be Nominated For Best Animated Feature Despite Countless Negative Reviews

I'm just going to personally say that Cars 2 isn't nearly as bad as what all the disappointed review scores have led you to believe. I do think, however, that it's very sub-par, mediocre, and mostly forgettable, which is an offense in its own way considering this is from Pixar, who's supposed to be the freaking *** every year. But I still think it will get a nomination for Best Animated Feature because...well, it's Pixar, and everyone loves Pixar regardless of the fact that they've made one disappointing movie. Do I think it will win? Not a chance. The two front-runners in this category are probably Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin and Gore Verbinski's Rango. I found both films to be overrated, Tintin less so than Rango, but I can totally see the appeal behind both of them. Still, it doesn't matter, because I honestly thought Kung Fu Panda 2 was the best animated film of the year. No, seriously, I really liked Kung Fu Panda 2...Shut up.

Prediction #8: Ryan Gosling and Michael Fassbender May Walk Away With Zero Nominations

Now I used the word "may" that time because this is probably the one where I can most likely be proven wrong, but I still have a feeling that both Ryan Gosling and Michael Fassbender, two amazing actors who both had a killer year in 2011, won't be nominated for any of their amazing roles. Ryan Gosling most certainly won't be nominated for Crazy Stupid Love (Yes, he was fantastic in that movie too), and has slim chances for getting honors for his roles in The Ides of March and Drive.

Then there's Michael Fassbender, who I'd say is probably my personal favorite actor working today at the moment. The man elevates everything he's in. Even X-Men: First Class, a film which I found to be extremely overrated, featured a performance from Fassbender that I wouldn't mind deeming Oscar-worthy. I haven't seen either of his other two films, A Dangerous Method or the one that everyone's been praising him for, Shame, though I really wanted to, but it seems like either of those could be shoo-ins.

But, I think that a lot of the roles I listed are a bit "out there" on the Academy's taste range. For one thing, Ryan Gosling in Crazy Stupid Love is more of a light comedic role than anything else, and the Academy usually only appreciates the really heavy, dramatic work. The Ides of March has already been forgotten a little bit, and I already explained how inaccessible to the Academy Drive was overall.

As for Fassbender, he has more of a chance for his work in Shame than anything else I mentioned. Even though it's a really difficult role that features a lot of nudity and sexual acts, what with him portraying a sex-addict and all, it's still difficult enough to the point that the Academy can appreciate its ballsy-ness (no pun intended). Otherwise, X-Men: First Class has him playing a comic book super-villain, and the Academy seems to only dig that kind of stuff when Heath Ledger is in clown-makeup, and his role as Carl Jung in A Dangerous Method has already been overlooked, for the most part (Along with the movie in general).

Again, this is the one that I can be proven wrong on the most, but it's still something to consider...

Prediction #9: Andy Serkis Will Be The First Motion Capture Performer To Get An Oscar Nomination

The Academy has stated time and time again that motion capture performances are not eligible for Awards under any circumstances. But Andy Serkis's turn as the chimp Caesar in Rise of the Planet of the Apes was so good, and such a big surprise, that everyone has been championing Serkis to the point that there's actually a very good chance that the Academy will finally give in this time. 20th Century Fox has already been pushing a "For Your Consideration" Campaign for his performance big time. And I actually think that this will be the first time a motion capture performer will get the recognition he truly deserves. And if he actually goes a step further and ends up winning, I wouldn't have a problem with that either. He was that good.

Prediction #10: The Chemical Brothers' Score For Hanna Goes Completely Ignored

Seriously, am I the only one who that this was the best score of the year? Because it totally was. Listen to it.

--

Well, there are plenty of other obvious things I can mention, such as Christopher Plummer being a shoo-in for Best Supporting Actor, or Take Shelter and Melancholia being almost entirely ignored alongside Martha Marcy May Marlene, and other such things, but we're out of time, and the nominations are getting closer.

Stay tuned for round 2, in which I actually analyze each of the big nominations lists and break down what I think will win, what I think deserves to win, and all the delicious snubs. Don't wanna miss it when it hits? Just follow me on the Twitter-machine @Enigma6667. See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to get into the motion capture business by playing a CG monkey...I just have to throw my *** around, right?

CinEffect Podcast Episode #14

2012-01-19T00:00:00Z

Episode #14: Top 10 Films of 2011. Click the link to listen.

Welcome to the CinEffect Podcast. In this podcast of constant douchebaggery, me (Chris), Alex, and Brady discuss film, video games, and everything in between. This week, Chris & Alex countdown their top 10 films of 2011.

Subscribe via iTunes

EPISODE TIMELINE

(0:00) George Valentin (The Artist OST)

(0:26) Introduction

VIDEO GAMES

(2:22) Alex - Dark Souls

TOP 10 FILMS OF 2011

(9:00) Number 10

(14:33) Number 9

(20:17) Number 8

(24:58) Number 7

(30:46) Number 6

(35:42) Number 5

(47:45) Number 4

(53:29) Number 3

(1:02:56) Number 2

(1:09:34) Number 1

(1:29:49) Top 10 Review/Honorable Mentions

CONCLUSION

(1:38:22) What We're Watching Next Week

(1:40:01) Links/Where To Find Us On Twitter

(1:41:24) A Real Hero by College feat. Electric Youth (Drive OST)

CinEffect Podcast Episode #13

2012-01-09T00:30:00Z

Episode #13: Super, War Horse, The Artist, Carnage, and Certified Copy. Click link to listen to episode: http://www.cineffectpodcast.blogspot.com/2012/01/cineffect-podcast-episode-13.html

Welcome to the CinEffect Podcast. In this podcast of constant douchebaggery, me (Chris), Alex, and Brady discuss film, games, and everything in between. This week, Chris & Alex go through a smorgasboard of films including War Horse, Carnage, Tabloid, Certified Copy, The Artist, and conclude with an in-depth spoiler review of Super.

Subscribe via iTunes.

EPISODE TIMELINE

(0:00) The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo OST by Trent Reznor

(0:27) Introduction

VIDEO GAMES

(6:11) Alex - Skyrim

(16:49) Chris - Outland

REVIEWS

(19:23) Alex & Chris - War Horse (Spoilers)

(34:48) Alex & Chris - Attack the Block (Minor Spoilers)

(40:37) Chris - The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

(46:13) Chris - The Artist

(56:29) Alex - Carnage

(1:00:20) Chris - Certified Copy/Before Sunset

(1:10:04) Alex - Tabloid

(1:21:28) Chris - The Devil Inside

(1:36:29) Alex & Chris - Super (Spoilers)

(2:09:46) Weird Antichrist Discussion

CONCLUSION

(2:11:18) What We're Watching Next Week

(2:14:06) Links & Where To Find Us On The Internet

(2:14:55) Calling All Destroyers by Tsar (Super OST)

My Top 10 Most Anticipated Films of 2012

2012-01-06T22:30:00Z

As is yearly tradition, January offers almost nothing of any significant note in the theatrical release landscape. And as such, all we movie-buffs are left to do is wait in masturbatory fury for the next big movies to pop out of the moist, quivery, studio-executive-sponsored womb. And that's exactly what I'm doing in this article; minus the moist, quivery wombs. Enjoy this little look at my 10 most anticipated films of 2012, and I swear if you tell me that a Roland Emmerich film should've been on here, I'll sue you simply for not being funny or clever at all.

--

#10: The Master (Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson)

What It Is: Paul Thomas Anderson's newest film centers around a man who forms his own religion, boasting a cast of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams, and a post-I'm Still Here Joaquin Phoenix.

Why You Should Be Excited: While little is known about what the film's plot is about, all we really need to know is that it's from the same mastermind behind Magnolia, Boogie Nights, Punch Drunk Love, and There Will Be Blood. P.T. Anderson has proven time and time again that he can bring amazing performances out of their actors and provide them with some of the most interesting tales in modern cinema. And even though little is known, it'll be nice to be surprised by what Anderson hits us with next.

[No Trailer Yet]

#9: Sound Of My Voice (Directed by Zal Batmanglij)

What It Is: A couple goes through great lengths to infiltrate a cult led by a woman who claims to be from the future with a mind-blowing plan

Why You Should Be Excited: Last year was the breakout of Brit Marling, an actress/screenwriter that brought us the cerebral sci-fi drama Another Earth, which managed to be both highly thought-provoking and beautifully emotional. After a strong debut such as that, it will be interesting to see how Marling will surprise us all this time, and considering this film already released during last year's Sundance to strong buzz, this has a good chance of being even better than Another Earth.

[No Trailer Yet]

#8: Brave (Directed by Mark Andrews & Brenda Chapman)

What It Is: It's a new Pixar movie. That's really all I need to hear. The fact that it's their first foray into fantasy is just the icing on the cake.

Why You Should Be Excited: See above.

(Please visit the site to view this media)

#7: Looper (Directed by Rian Johnson)

What It Is: Rian Johnson's latest is a time-travel action thriller involving Joseph Gordon-Levitt having to assassinate his older self, played by Bruce Willis.

Why You Should Be Excited: I'll admit to not having seen Rian Johnson's other critically acclaimed films, the high-school noir Brick and the con-man romance The Brothers Bloom (In fact, the only thing I'd seen of Rian Johnson's was that one episode of Breaking Bad that he directed), but I'm highly intrigued by the time-traveling premise of Looper, and I love me a good thinking-man's sci-fi movie. It also helps that there's a strong cast with Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

[No Trailer Yet]

#6: Only God Forgives (Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn)

Wait, is Ryan Gosling...kissing Nicolas Winding Refn?

What It Is: Ryan Gosling and director Nicolas Winding Refn, both of which collaborated on last year's Drive are teaming up again on another film which I know nothing about plot-wise.

Why You Should Be Excited: This is the only movie on the list that I literally know nothing about, plot-wise. All I know is that it's being directed by the mad genius behind one of my favorite films of last year, Drive, and it yet again stars Ryan Gosling in the lead role. That alone is enough to win my interest over, and I have faith that the duo will bring another memorable experience.

[No Trailer Yet]

#5: Gravity (Directed by Alfonso Cuaron)

What It Is: Sandra Bullock is an astronaut who is literally left to die in the middle of space, and needs to float her way back to safety. It's a claustrophobic thriller in what is literally the most vast expanse of nothingness that humanity knows: The cosmos.

Why You Should Be Excited: With a project that boasts the phrase "From the Director of Children of Men", a new Alfonso Cuaron film can do nothing but cause excitement. But the film also has an engaging premise that looks to give us a one-woman show from Sandra Bullock (Say what you will about her and The Blind Side but she is a *** good actress). And considering Cuaron's knack for amazing camerawork and one-shot takes, this definitely looks to be one of the most unique and interesting releases of the year.

[No Trailer Yet]

#4: Django Unchained (Directed by Quentin Tarantino)

What it Is: Quentin Tarantino's newest film is a Southern (Basically a Western that takes place in the South) centering around a slave named Django (Jamie Foxx) who must win his wife back from the captivity of an evil plantation owner played by Leonardo DiCaprio, and exact vengeance upon the evil white men of slavery-era America.

Why You Should Be Excited: A new Tarantino movie is enough to celebrate about. The fact that it's a Western makes it even more intriguing. But then you learn that it actually takes place in the Slavery-era South and it becomes even more enticing. And THEN you discover that it boasts a cast such as Jamie Foxx, Samuel L. Jackson, Christpoh Waltz, and a villain being played by LEONARD DI-***-CAPRIO and your mind might as well implode on its own by the sheer amount of talent and potential on display in this project.

[No Trailer Yet]

#3: The Dark Knight Rises (Directed by Christopher Nolan)

What It Is: The final installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. What else do you need to know?

Why You Should Be Excited: Unlike most of the internet complaining about Bane's voice, I still haven't seen the preview for The Dark Knight Rises. And I don't plan to. I'm actually planning on seeing as few promotional materials as possible because I know that if I do, I'm going to overhype the *** out of it. And while most people are going into their defensive backlash stages, thinking that there's a chance that the third time might be the death blow since almost every big franchise started to get horribly wrong by the third installment, I still think that Nolan could pull it off. If anything, Christopher Nolan has proven that no matter how big the hype is for his films, he continues to surprise with the most exciting and original films in the mainstream movie space, if not of all cinema history. And if there's one thing I know Nolan can do right, it's surprise us with a fitting resolution to his Batman trilogy.

[Yes there's a trailer but I don't wanna watch it and getting the link for it will only tempt me further, nngghhh]

#2: Prometheus (Directed by Ridley Scott)

What It Is: What started out as an Alien prequel turned into something new, daring, and original the second the script got a rewrite from LOST scribe Damon Lindelof. Centering on a group of astronauts who come across an interstellar artifact that could show them the origins of mankind, they soon realize they've unleashed a greater evil that has ties to the original Alien film.

Why You Should Be Excited: The original Alien set a benchmark for both the sci-fi and horror genres with iconic creature design and unbearable amounts of tension. It's one of my favorite horror films ever, and now the original director of the Alien universe, Ridley Scott, is going back to his sci-fi roots with this prequel of sorts to the original film, that also seems to be a stand-alone sci-fi thrill-ride.

The cast is excellent, with a smorgasboard of amazing actors along the likes of Noomi Rapace, Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, Guy Pearce, Patrick Wilson, and most importantly of all, Michael "The Fass" Fassbender. And if the trailer is any indication, Ridley Scott hasn't lost a hitch in his step when it comes to incredible tension and mind-blowing production values. No seriously, this is one helluva trailer...

(Please visit the site to view this media)

#1: Cloud Atlas (Directed by Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski, and Lana Wachowski)

I'm kind of biased towards this pick since the original book, written by David Mitchell, is actually one of my favorite books of all time. But setting aside that fact, Cloud Atlas looks like one of the most mind-blowingly ambitious films of all time. And I don't use that term lightly.

What It Is: Cloud Atlas follows six connected stories that continue off of one another from a completely different time period and genre altogether. To give you a sense of the variety in these stories, the first one is an 1800s sailor's tale and the final sixth story is a post-apocalyptic adventure. The structuring is also strange, as it is ordered with the stories nesting into one another with each story being abruptly cut off halfway through, only to recontinue later on. A more simple visual analogy: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

Why You Should Be Excited: That plot description alone should be enough to tide you over towards the film's high ambitions, but even more ambitious is the method the directors are choosing to finance and film it all. With a project as ambitious and huge as this, it's impossible for any self-respecting mega-studio to fund such a crazy risk, so the directors have decided to get funding from other countries (Asian countires, in partiuclar, supported the project since the theme of reincarnation features heavily into the intertwining narratives) reaching a $100 million budget, and having two seperate directing units film the 3 stories each. Tom Tykwer (Run Lola Run and Perfume) is handling three stories while the Wachowskis (The Matrix trilogy, as you're all probably familiar with) are handling the next three.

And that's not even including the stellar cast including Tom Hanks, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Hugh Grant, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Susan Sarandon, Ben Whishaw, Bae Doona...***. Just...***. Even more insane is that every single actor is going to be switching races and possibly even genders as they switch between the stories (Ben Whishaw confirmed he'd be playing a woman in one story).

This could either be an ambitiously flawed disaster, or the next modern masterpiece of epic proportions. I have more faith in the latter since the book is so strong and you have three talented filmmakers behind it, even in spite of its lofty ambitions. Plus the author, David Mitchell, was a big fan of the screenplay so there is hope.

But even if the movie is ultimately a failure, it's still going to be not just one of the most interestingly inventive films of the year, but also a benchmark in getting financing for ambitious projects that could very well lead to another masterpiece from a loftily ambitious director.

[No Trailer Yet]

--

And those are what I'm most looking forward to in 2012. But what I'm even more interested in is what you guys are looking forward too...well, not really, I've got a life, but feel free to massage my massive ego, my slaves!

If you agree or disagree with anything in this list or wanna add your own personal anticipated films, go leave a comment. If you wanna see more stuff from me, you can go to http://www.cineffectpodcast.blogspot.com and follow me on twitter @Enigma6667.

That is all.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go hide my secret homosexual desires for Michael Fassbender again. Oh, Fass...

2011: The Best & Worst Movies of the Year

2011-12-31T22:30:00Z

This year in film was a crazy one. Between sequels for just about every big franchise in the known world, we've gotten two Steven Spielberg movies release in the span of mere days, remakes no one asked for that actually turned out really good, two movies that rejoice the silent film era, a whole bunch of nostalgia trips, ballsy films that attempt no less than to show audiences the meaning of all of life, films about hot chicks escaping into their imaginations to avoid being raped, films about tires coming to life to explode people's heads, and the final installment of what is literally the most lucrative franchise in movie history. If that's not a crazy year, I don't know what is.

It certainly was a unique and incredibly interesting year of film, and I'm here to count it all down in what is probably my biggest blog post I've ever written. With 20 of my favorite films of the year, and also my favorite performances, my worst movie of the year, most overrated/underrated, and tons of other miscellaneous crap. Hold your breath, because this is gonna be a long one! The best & worst movies of 2011 begins now...

--

The Silver Soap Bar Awards For The 10 Best Runner-Up Films of the Year

#20: Bridesmaids (Directed by Paul Feig)

A funny, raunchy, female-driven comedy that also works as a surprisingly strong character study showcasing Kristen Wiig's talent. Bridesmaids is hilarious and heartfelt exactly when it needs to be.

#19: Source Code (Directed by Duncan Jones)

Duncan Jones' sophomore effort isn't as strong as his debut Moon, but Source Code moves at an incredibly brisk pace, managing to be both a thought-provoking sci-fi and an intense action thriller.

#18: Meek's Cutoff (Directed by Kelly Reichardt)

Incredibly slow-paced but always intense. This slow-burn of a western thriller is subtle and restrained, yet always keeps your nerves on your toes thanks to a strong atmosphere (unusual for a western) and a performance from the always-wonderful Michelle Williams.

#17: Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol (Directed by Brad Bird)

Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol is how all action movies should be made. The set-pieces are mind-blowing, the pace exciting, the performances entertaining, and it's all tightly directed by Brad Bird.

#16: 50/50 (Directed by Jonathan Levine)

A difficult balancing act of drama and comedy that's incredibly effective on both fronts. I was surprised to find myself laughing hysterically one minute, only to be swept up by emotion within the same beat.

#15: Another Earth (Directed by Mike Cahill)

A thought-provoking sci-fi drama with ideas and emotion to spare. Another Earth also features a strong performance from newcomer Brit Marling, who also co-wrote the film, and marks her as a talent to watch.

#14: The Descendants (Directed by Alexander Payne)

Another film that balances drama and comedy expertly, The Descendants feels real and genuine through every minute of its running time, and features George Clooney in one of his most fantastic performances.

#13: The Future (Directed by Miranda July)

Strange, dark, and whimsical. The Future, unlike most indie comedies, uses its quirks to reveal darker truths about human nature. A worthy follow-up to July's debut Me and You and Everyone We Know.

#12: Crazy, Stupid Love (Directed by Glenn Ficarra & John Requa)

One of the more surprising films of the year. Crazy Stupid Love is a fantastic romantic comedy that pretty much has it all: Wonderful performances, a lot of heart and charm, a hefty dose of romance, and hey, it's really funny! Who would've thunk...

#11: War Horse (Directed by Steven Spielberg)

A manipulative melodrama that, despite how much it desperately and obviously tugs the heartstrings manages to really work. Of all the people who can make a script like this work, it's the legend himself, Steven Spielberg.

--

The Golden Soap Bar Awards For The 10 Best Films of the Year

#10: Super 8 (Directed by JJ Abrams)

Many of Super 8's detractors have complained that the film loses itself in the final act due to having an unsatisfying resolution for the big monster at the heart of the movie. And I strongly disagree. If anything, I usually don't care about CG monsters in most movies anyway. What I want in a film is characters to care about and it is then that the action sequences have meaning. And Super 8 delivered on that front. Not just a thrilling sci-fi adventure, but a nostalgic ode to childhood and the Spielberg films of yesteryear that feels sincere and genuine in all the right places.

#9: Melancholia (Directed by Lars von Trier)

Melancholia is a punishing experience that tortures the viewer with unholy amounts of depression and despair that can become too much to handle at a certain point. At the same time however, it rewards the viewer as much as it drowns him/her in misery thanks to beautiful imagery, affecting emotion, and two of the best performance of the year in Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg. It's not for everyone, but those who are willing enough for a big spoonful of hard-hitting sadness will be rewarded for one of the most artfully captivating films of the year.

#8: Midnight in Paris (Directed by Woody Allen)

Midnight in Paris is in the exact opposite end of the spectrum of Melancholia. Of all the movies this entire year, none have left as wide a smile on my face quite as much as this one did. Thanks to the best Owen Wilson performance I've seen in years (Seriously, it regains your faith in Owen Wilson), Woody Allen's ode to the City of Lights lights up with ridiculous amounts of charm to the point that it becomes infectious. The screenplay is wickedly playful with sharp dialogue and clever usage of historical characters, and it just feels like Woody Allen had a marvelous time just making the film. Pretty much one of the most enjoyable experience of the year.

#7: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (Directed by David Fincher)

Yes, the detractors are all correct when they say that David Fincher's remake of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is very, very similar to the original Swedish film directed by Niels Arden Oplev. Despite that, however, this remake felt much more effective thanks to some small but strong improvements. The characters feel more like human beings for one thing; the bad guys are a bit more morally ambiguous, the character of Mikael Blomkvist is more interesting, but most important of all is that Rooney Mara plays the film's title character, Lisbeth Salander, with incredible gusto, making for one of the most memorable performances, and easily the most memorable character, of the entire year. It also helps that David Fincher supplies the film with more suspense and dread than the previous film. Despite the glaring similarities, this is without a doubt a superior remake.

#6: The Artist (Directed by Michel Hazanavicius)

Another film that made me smile and smile throughout all of its running time, The Artist is a lovingly made throwback to silent films of yore. As much as I love Super 8, it really felt like JJ Abrams was desperately hitting the marks to be like a classic Steven Spielberg film, but not quite getting there (despite being so close). The Artist, however, really feels like a silent film from the '20s that history has only uncovered until recently, and can now be shared with the world for anyone to enjoy. And *** is it enjoyable. Probably the best crowd-pleasing movie of the year, The Artist is just pure cinema magic that no matter how much you try to resist it, makes you wanna stand up and cheer.

#5: Hanna (Directed by Joe Wright)

Hanna is probably the most surprising film I've seen this year. I came into it with little expectations on what to expect, and came out blown away. Less of an action film (Though there's plenty of wonderful action) and more of a modern fairy-tale, Hanna brings us into the psychological mindset of its young assassin with such an incredible amount of depth and style. Joe Wright creates a surprisingly surreal atmosphere that makes the film stand-out, but he also choreographs and shoots action sequences with amazing flair and intensity. All while the thumping sounds of an irresistible Chemical Brothers score (more on that in a bit) echo in the background. Surreal but absorbing, Hanna is both *** and strange, and I wouldn't want it any other way.

#4: Hugo (Directed by Martin Scorsese)

Without a doubt the most uplifting film of the entire year. Martin Scorsese's love-letter to silent cinema, Hugo is beautiful, sincere, gorgeous, and heartfelt beyond all measure. One of those films about films that really captures the joy of the movies and what makes this medium so special to all of us, it's simply impossible for any self-respecting movie-buff to see this movie and not be swept up by its unabashed love of cinema. It also helps that Martin Scorsese uses this film to grace moviegoers with what is literally the best use of 3D you will ever see in your entire life. Wondrous and uplifting, Hugo is a movie-lovers dream come true. #blurb

#3: Martha Marcy May Marlene (Directed by Sean Durkin)

This may come off as over-exaggeration, but Martha Marcy May Marlene is honest to god one of the most intense experiences I've ever had in a theater. Strange considering how quiet, subtle, and restrained the entire picture is. But the film's psychological intensity really seeps into the viewer causing unbearable amounts of tension and unease. It got to the point that I was shaking throughout the entire second half second half of the film, and I would've left ill from it all if I wasn't so enthralled by the film's talent. First-time director Sean Durkin really nails the tension down, truly bringing you into the exact psychological mindset as its tortured, titular character so effectively that it becomes almost painful to watch. Making it even more effective is Elizabeth Olsen's performance, who is easily deserving of an Oscar after her work here. Coming from both a first-time director and an actress in her first major film role, it's strange to see that everything comes together so perfectly. Martha Marcy May Marlene simply must be seen. It's a terrifying psychological thriller that will stay with you months after first viewing it.

#2: Drive (Directed by Nicolas Winding Refn)

What exactly is Drive? Is it an action film? Why yes it has action scenes and car chases here and there, but they're few and far between and the film seems to move at a slow-pace. So, I guess it's a drama then. Well...no, because it also features brutal violence straight out of a horror picture...or a crime movie! That means it's a crime movie, right? Well...not really, since the main focus is actually on Ryan Gosling and Carrey Mulligan's relationship. So does that make it romance? Well not exactly, they mostly just exchange glances at each other with very little dialogue.

It wasn't until later that I finally came to the conclusion of what Drive is, and why everyone who expected a Fast and Furious-inspired car movie left disappointed: It's a character study on a man with no character. On paper, that sounds stupid, but it's one of the best films I've seen all year (Obviously, this being #2 in my top 20 list). Ryan Gosling takes the enigma of The Driver, the film's unnamed central character, and makes him incredibly compelling, even though he still remains a mystery by the end. What makes it work is that what he lacks in personality he makes up for in tension. You never know what the Driver is gonna do next, when he's going to do something nice, or when he's going to just snap and let all hell break loose. It also helps that Ryan Gosling gives out literally the best performance of his entire career (And considering a career involving Half Nelson and Blue Valentine, that says a lot). He's always intense, always unpredictable, impossible to read, but is able to showcase lots of visible emotional scars so effectively that he manages to gain your sympathy even while he's performing unspeakable acts of brutality.

Everything about Drive oozes tension. The action sequences play out less like action sequences and more like graceful games of chess in which the main character is in checkmate at all points throughout the film. The rest of the cast, including Carrey Mulligan, Oscar Isaac, Ron Pearlman, Bryan Cranston, and an incredibly unexpected turn as the villain by comedian Albert Brooks, is also fantastic, especially Brooks who brings ridiculous amounts of menace to his villain. Every single performance is simply, utterly pitch-perfect for this film.

Stylish, surreal, and intense--and like Hanna, a modern fairy tale--Drive is a unique, nerve-wracking experience that keeps you at the edge of the Driver's seat (See what I did there guys?!?!....okay I'll shut up now).

#1: The Tree of Life (Directed by Terrence Malick)

When I walked out of The Tree of Life, I didn't feel like I just walked out of a movie. I felt like I had just finished a profound, soul-searching journey through my own life. It all sounds incredibly cheesy, sure, but Terrence Malick's opus to all of life truly is one of those rare once-in-a-lifetime experience that deserves to be called "profound".

The main reason it is that effective is how sincere Terrence Malick is in his approach. Everything comes straight from the heart. It feels like a deeply personal film that may have more meaning to Malick than to the viewer. Yet it never feels that way in the traditional sense. What's amazing about The Tree of Life is how personal it feels from Malick, yet it still manages to feel like something out of the viewers' life, that is if the viewer allows the movie to wash over him/her. Everything is painted in a broad, easily identifiable stroke, yet the canvas is so huge as it attempts no less than to encapsulate all of existence, that everything still feels intensely intimate.

The childhood this film depicts feels so much like my own, even in spite of some notable differences. Mostly because it captures the emotion of childhood. While Super 8, The Artist, and Midnight In Paris were all well-done in their use of nostalgia, The Tree of Life not only makes you remember your past, it feels more like you're re-experiencing your childhood. And then there's the philosophical side of the film, which brings the film to much higher meaning through addressing all of existence and what could possibly be the afterlife. These moments feel like beautifully written, meditative poems that have been brought to life by imagery. To say that I could not contain myself throughout the final act of the film is a massive understatement. This movie broke me down. Hard.

It's certainly not for everyone, but for those with an open mind ready for a one-of-a-kind experience, The Tree of Life truly is unlike anything else you will ever seen.

--

Well that was fun. BUT WE'RE NOT FINISHED YET! Now it's onto some miscellaneous shenanigans!

The "Suck On This, Michael bay!" Award For Best Action Movie

Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol (Directed by Brad Bird)

There are set-pieces in Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol that I find impossible to not find completely thrilling exciting. Everything about the action scenes in this film is so well-done, so properly shot, edited, choreographed, structured, just everything about them is about as well-done as you can possibly do with an action scene. Sure there were action movies that I thought were better if not more slow like Hanna and Drive, but in terms of pure balls-to-the-wall, pants-wetting, non-stop action, this was the high-point...literally, because that Burj Khalifa tower is *** HUGE!

Honorable Mentions: Hanna, Drive, Fast Five, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (If only for the forest chase scene alone)

The Tickle Mah Balls Award For Best Comedy

Horrible Bosses (Directed by Seth Gordon)

As far as movies that just made me laugh, this one was the caper. It's not on my top 20 list because it definitely has script problems, but it's hard to complain when you have Jason Bateman and Jason Sudeikis doing what they do best, Charlie Day knocking it out of the park in what is the equivalent of The Hangover's breakout performance by Zach Galifinakis, and of course we have the horrible bosses played by Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston, and Colin Farrel at their most deliciously evil. It isn't as dark as it could've pushed like, say, World's Greatest Dad, but it's definitely the film that made me laugh the hardest in the theater.

Honorable Mentions: Bridesmaids, Midnight in Paris, Crazy Stupid Love

The Golden Shat-On Pants Award For Best Horror Movie

Martha Marcy May Marlene (Directed by Sean Durkin)

Okay, Martha Marcy May Marlene isn't technically a horror movie in the traditional sense, but I'd be lying if I wasn't admitting to it being the most terrifying experience I had in the theater. It's bone-chilling tension from start-to-finish, elevated by haunting performances from Elizabeth Olsen and John Hawkes.

Honorable Mentions: Fright Night, Paranormal Activity 3, Insidious

The James Cameron-Approved Award For Most Overrated Movie

Rango (Directed by Gore Verbinski)

There were plenty of films that I found overrated this year, yet I could still get why people would like them. I found just about every Marvel superhero film this year to be overrated (Thor, X-Men: First Class, Captain America) yet I could still get why people liked those films because they all had some good actors in their respective lead roles. I also found The Adventures of Tintin rather overrated, but it was still light, innocent, and inoffensive; and there were moments in it that I really enjoyed.

The one that took the cake for me, however, was Rango, but even this film had some qualities of merit. The animation is gorgeously detailed, able to find beauty in hideousness, there are some nice nods to westerns and noir films that I appreciated, and Johnny Depp did a pretty *** good job playing against type as a CG bumbling chameleon. That being said, nothing in this movie grabbed my enjoyment.

One of the main complaints people had over Super 8 was that it was basically just referencing a bunch of old movies that you loved yet left the plot elements very weak and unsatisfying. I didn't have that problem for Super 8 because I cared about each of the characters involved. I did, however, have that exact problem with Rango which just seemed to be referencing a bunch of old movies, but felt completely hollow in the story and character development.

And I honestly can't comprehend how people can say that the ending of Super 8 is unsatisfying, when the ending of Rango is so abrupt and ho-hum, that I honestly felt like even the people making the movie didn't care much about what was happening. While Super 8's story did have problems, I cared about the characters enough that I could overlook its problems. With Rango, there was nothing for me to latch onto, nothing to make me care, and thus the script problems were amplified. Thus, of all the overrated films this year, this one was the most frustratingly overrated for me.

Honorable Mentions: Thor, X-Men: First Class, Captain America, Moneyball

The Flaming Cowpat Award For Worst Movie of the Year

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Directed by Michael Bay)

When I initially discussed Transformers: Dark of the Moon with my friends after seeing it, I thought to myself, "That wasn't very good, but I didn't hate it either." As the film sunk with me, however, I began to realize just how much this film sucks. I mean, I knew it was bad from the beginning, but its badness really seeps into you much later. It's still not as horrendous as Revenge of the Fallen, but still just as intelligent, i.e. retarded.

Yes, there's some decent action in the final 45 minutes of the film, but in order to get to that, you have to slog through an hour and a half--that's the length of a god *** normal-sized movie--of some of the worst writing and acting you'll see this entire year. Firstly, Shia LaBeouf somehow got even more annoying than his character from Even Stevens, and constantly shouts for no apparent reason, while great actors like Frances McDormand, John Malkovich, and once again John Turturro, are all wasted by having almost literally nothing to do.

And speaking of nothing to do, there are characters that literally have no point. At least some pointless characters are there for one retarded, contrived reason like giving out information leading to the macguffin, etc. In this movie, however, the pointless characters literally have no point. John Malkovich accomplishes almost nothing other than get Shia LaBeouf to stop whining by giving him a job that has no point of being in the movie (the entire job-hunting sub-plot was useless altogether). Frances McDormand is even more pointless since all she does is talk through a radio signal when action is happening somewhere else to explain information the audience already knows.

And yes, while the final one-hour action-palooza is well-shot, it doesn't feel exciting like Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol does, because you simply don't care about anything that's going on. Simply having an entire hour of unbroken action does not a good movie make.

Keep in mind, reader, that I haven't seen too many of the really awful movies that other people seemed to have despised. I didn't see Jack & Jill, Alvin & The Chipmunks, The Smurfs, or Spy Kids 4D (Seriously, I have no idea how that one ended up being made), but of all the movies that I personally have seen, this was the one that stuck out the longer it lingered in the mind.

Honorable Mentions: Priest, Battle: Los Angeles, Breaking Dawn - Part 1, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, Straw Dogs

The Cyanide Ice-Cream Award For Most Disappointing Movie

The Green Hornet (Directed by Michel Gondry)

Would you like to know how much I love Michel Gondry's Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind? Oh, how about it being my favorite movie of all time tied only with David Fincher's Fight Club. Yeah, I love it.

So when I heard that Gondry would be teaming up with Seth Rogen, who's one of the funniest dudes working in Hollywood right now, to make a buddy-cop/superhero-without-super-powers movie that had lots of kung fu and Christoph Waltz from Inglorious Basterds playing as the villain, I got ***' stoked! I was ready to marry this project before it even came out! And...then I watched the movie.

What. A. ***. Letdown.

The movie itself is not terrible, but it is rather bad and really poorly scripted. What is terrible, however, is Seth Rogens character as The Green Hornet/Britt Reid, who is so ridiculously obnoxious and unlikeable that the film just does not work. I do admit to the action scenes do having a lot of flair thanks to Gondry's typically stylish direction (All of the "Kato-vision" moments are beyond cool) but Rogen's character was just so filled with douchebaggery that I wanted to punch myself throughout the film. Considering the talent involved, this should've been better.

The 16-Legged Guinea Pig Award For Most Interesting Failure

Bellflower (Directed by Evan Glodell)

I still don't know what Bellflower is about, or whether I liked it or not. I knew I was interested and mesmerized at all times throughout the movie, but I was also left scratching my head throughout the ambiguous ending and the jarring tonal shift from mumblecore-y romantic comedy to psychological drama/action/horror/David Lynch mindfuck. All I can say is that it's one of the most interesting and original films of the year, but a true success it unfortunately isn't.

The "YOU THREW A SHARK AT AN AIRPLANE AWARD" For Most Bat-Sh*t Insane Movie

Rubber (Directed by Quentin Dupieux)

A sentient tire goes on a killing rampage by blowing people's heads up with the power of its psychic mind....that's really all you need to know.

The Star-Gate Award For The 5 Best Scenes of the Year

There were so many amazing scenes this year that I decided, why the hell not, let's give this award to five awesome scenes...

#5: The Burj Khalifa from Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol

When it comes to action set-pieces, I don't think I've seen a recent one that's as jaw-droppingly thrilling as Tom Cruise climbing the tallest building in the world with only a pair of sticky gloves. The nauseatingly high elevation should be enough to do all sorts of nasty things to your vertigo, but even worse is when the sticky gloves start to malfunction. The scenes oozes suspense and excitement.

#4: The Subway from Hanna

I find it so awesome when directors decide to shoot something in one long continuous shot. Not only does it bring a sense of fluidity, but also lets the director really flex his directing muscles and show off what he/she can do. Joe Wright has always seemed to be a fan of the one-shot take (See the WWII sequence in Atonement) but he outdid himself with this one, as we see Eric Bana just walking into a subway station. It starts out normally as we see him exit a taxi and onto a street, but then we start to notice something. The camera hasn't cut at all, and strange men are following Bana around. What's going on?

It isn't long until he enters the empty subway station and 10 hitmen have surrounded him. All Eric Bana could use is his wits and special assassin skills to take all of them down, and Joe Wright choreographs the fight scene in one long steady take that circles around Bana as he simply annihilates everyone in the room.

#3: The Prologue from Melancholia

The 7 and a half minute prologue to Melancholia features some of the most stunning and haunting imagery of the entire year. Unlike most apocalyptic films, Lars von Trier begins his with the world ending then goes back from there. And if there's one man who can make the apocalypse look stunning and gorgeous, it's Lars von Trier. Featuring some effective CG effects for the colliding planets and what is honestly some of the most gorgeous uses of slo-mo you'll see in your entire life, Melancholia opens hauntingly, and gets more deranged from there.

#2: The Elevator from Drive

Unlike most of the scenes in this list, this one doesn't really have that much in the way of stylistic tricks or gimmicks. It is, however, one of the most powerfully done sequences I've seen all year. As the Driver finds that he's trapped in an elevator with a man who's ready to kill him and his only love in life, Irene, in just a few mere moments, he realizes what he has to do in an instant, and realizes the grave consequences of his actions, and he knows that he's going to lose Irene whether he succeeds or not. He decides to take advantage of his final moments with Irene by holding her back and kissing her in spectacular slo-mo and silence.

And this tender moment is immediately followed up by the Driver proceeding to smash the man's face in with the heels of his boots. Emotional and brutal all at once, I've seen the film twice in theaters and this sequence always sends chills down my spine.

#1: Creation from The Tree of Life

The one sequence that got thousands of moviegoers walking out of the theater in befuddlement is without a doubt polarizing. And it is also one of the most beautifully shot, meticulously crafted, gorgeously composed, and emotionally powerful sequences I've seen since the Star-Gate sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey. And it is all done with zero dialogue and nothing but the unbelievable images on the screen.

In just a mere 20 minutes, Terrence Malick tells what is quite possibly the greatest story of all: How all of the universe formed seemingly out of nothing, and how all of life was created. Beginning with the literal Big Bang; viewing the formation of planets, stars, and nebulae; the creation of molecules, which in turn form into matter; and finally the first living creatures of the earth: the dinosaurs. Wondrous, stunning, powerful, and visually awe-inspiring, it's a sequence that leaves you with your jaw on the floor.

--

And you thought this list was over? Oh, but you thought wrong. For I have lots of time on my hands, which says much more about my social life than you think. We still have to honor some of the people who helped make these movies possible, and we're counting all of these people down too. Don't worry, you're almost done, you'll be untied from that chair in no time...

The "HEEERE'S JOHNNY" Award For Best Actor

George Clooney from The Descendants

Who doesn't love George Clooney? Seriously, from his square jaw to his silvery gray hair to that chiseled face and his suave demeanor, I find it impossible for anyone to really hate George Clooney. It also helps that he's grown from his General Hospital origins into a legitimately great actor, and his work in The Descendants is some of his strongest stuff yet. Playing not a single note wrong whether it be confident, charming, emotional, or intense, he hits every emotional beat successfully, and considering how Alexander Payne writes his scripts and how authentic he makes every character feel, that's no small feat.

Honorable Mentions: Tom Hardy - Warrior, Ryan Gosling - Drive, Jean Dujardin - The Artist, Joseph Gordon-Levitt - 50/50, Owen Wilson - Midnight in Paris, Brad Pitt & Hunter McCracken - The Tree of Life

The "You Were Such A Superlady" Award For Best Actress

Elizabeth Olsen from Martha Marcy May Marlene

I loved Natalie Portman's psychotic turn in Black Swan as much as the next guy (She got this same award from me last year), but it was definitely a very external performance involving lots of crying, screaming, and self-mutilation. The thing that makes Elizabeth Olsen's psychological trauma so disturbingly real is actually how internal she makes all of her struggles. She rarely ever acts out or lashes out on anyone, but just the subtlest hints of paranoia can convey the most powerful emotion. Even just the blank stare you see on the image above is able to show how damaged she is emotionally as a human being, and that she'll never be able to go back to normal. It's a haunting performance that is going to stay in my nightmares for a long, long time.

Honorable Mentions: Charlize Theron - Young Adult, Saoirse Ronan - Hanna, Brit Marling - Another Earth, Kristen Wiig - Bridesmaids, Rooney Mara - The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, Kirsten Dunst & Charlotte Gainsbourg - Melancholia

The Disappearing Pencil Award For Best Supporting Actor of the Year

Patton Oswalt from Young Adult

Young Adult is a film that is centered around one of the most amazingly despicable and unlikeable characters to grace the silver screen with Charlize Theron's Mavis Gary. How do you ground a film with such a horrible human being as your protagonist? By having one of the nicest guys as a side character to balance things out. Yet Patton Oswalt doesn't overdo niceness as his character. He still remains grounded with his own flaws and bad habits. Yet he's probably one of the main reasons why Young Adult ultimately works. Even in spite of all of this, he's the most sympathetic character in the film and plays him with a surprising amount of depth coming from a former comedian. While he might not get Oscar recognition this year, he's still a winner in my book.

Honorable Mentions: Andy Serkis - Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Albert Brooks - Drive, Ryan Gosling - Crazy Stupid Love, Ben Kingsley - Hugo, Alan Rickman - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, Seth Rogen - 50/50, John Hawkes - Martha Marcy May Marlene

The Kathy Bates With A Sledgehammer Award For Best Supporting Actress

Jessica Chastain - The Tree of Life

About one year ago, we had no idea who in the hell this Jessica Chastain girl was. Then, out of nowhere, she makes her debut in Terrence Malick's masterwork and now she's seemingly in everything now, and she's heading on to even bigger roles such as playing Princess Diana in an upcoming biopic. To say that she's the big breakout star of the year is an understatement, but it also helps that she was fantastic in her first major film role with The Tree of Life. For playing a character that's supposed to embody all of the virtues of grace and compassion, she truly does exude that quality from her. She's like a paragon of all that is beautiful in the world: Graceful, eloquent, always forgiving, incredibly meek, naturally beautiful. Despite conveying what is essentially a quality rather than an actual human being, she does it with such beauty that you're enthralled the entire way through.

Honorable Mentions: Marion Cotillard - Midnight in Paris, Jennifer Aniston - Horrible Bosses, Julianne Moore - Crazy Stupid Love, Cate Blanchett - Hanna, Carrey Mulligan - Drive, Shailene Woodley - The Descendants

The Travis Bickle Award For Most Memorable Character

Lisbeth Salander as played by Rooney Mara in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

A goth, piercing-laden, tattoo-covered, high-functioning autistic, bisexual, supergenius hacker riding a motorbike. That is interesting by default, but there's more to Lisbeth Salander than just those unique traits. She actually bears heavy emotional scars from years and years from abuse from men. The entire point of the story in both the book and the films is that she literally takes revenge on misogyny (The original title of the Swedish book was literally "Men Who Hate Women"). And while she's definitely screwed up, she's honestly a much better female role-model than the likes of all the Mary Sues and Bella Swans that dominate our culture. She's actually strong, fierce, independent, and hey, she can kick your ass. And even in spite of her problems, she still displays strong hints of humanity, especially in the film's heartbreaking final moment. While not exactly perfect, she's one of the most fascinating human beings ever to grace the silver screen and she's played wonderfully by Rooney Mara.

Honorable Mentions: Martha in Martha Marcy May Marlene, Mavis Gary in Young Adult, The Driver in Drive, George Melies in Hugo

The Typist Award For Best Screenplay

Sean Durkin from Martha Marcy May Marlene

What makes this script stand out the most for me is how effortlessly it shifts from reality to flashback, and how it gives small hints that one may or may not be the other or that those flashbacks may be just part of the protagonist's imagination rather than real memories. It makes the film that much more disturbing and terrifying when you can't pinpoint exactly where you are in the movie and how each of the transitions are so fluid that you really can't tell reality and memory apart. It may not be Aaron Sorkin or William Shakespeare, but it's definitely one of the most effective screenplays of the year.

Honorable Mentions: Steven Zallian - The Girl WIth The Dragon Tattoo, Terrence Malick - The Tree of Life, Michael Hazanavicius - The Artist

The Kubrick-Approved Award For Best Director

Terrence Malick from The Tree of Life

Note: That's not actually Malick in the picture, but it's the best I could find of a behind the scenes pic considering how reclusive and secretive the director is

Few directors have accomplished the audacity and ambition that Terrence Malick has brought with The Tree of Life. It's deeply personal to him, yet it's able to connect with just about anyone who puts their mind to the film. He's honestly this generations Stanley Kubrick, as foolishly high praise as that might seem, yet he has something that Kubrick didn't: A warm, heartfelt sense of intimate emotion that contrasts nicely with Kubrick's cold cynicism (Which there's nothing wrong with, but it's nice to have a different perspective). He attempts no less than to capture all of life with The Tree of Life and that's enough to call him one of the most ambitious directors of all time. The fact that he succeeded in his vision so profoundly and so beautifully just makes him not just one of the most ambitious directors, but one of the best directors of all time period. Not that you needed more persuading considering he's been creating masterpieces since the '70s (Days of Heaven, Badlands, The Thin Red Line, The New World). But it isn't until now that he's basically reached a peak that will be tough for any other director to climb. Even if you weren't a fan of the film, there's no denying the artistry and talent that he employs with his camera. Give him a round of applause.

Honorable Mentions: Nicolas Winding Refn - Drive, Sean Durkin - Martha Marcy May Marlene, Martin Scorsese - Hugo

--

Phew. That was a long one. If you'd like to complain about how long this list was, agree/disagree with my opinions on the list, or ask how I was able to drug you and force you to read it all in the first place, you can leave a comment or something. You can also be notified of more of my *** by following me on twitter @Enigma6667.

That is all.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, it's time to get pumped for 2012. Happy New Year, everyone!

2011: The Best & Worst Games of the Year

2011-12-28T22:30:00Z

To say that the holiday season of gaming was overwhelming would be an understatement. With such a ridiculous amount of games coming out within the span of a mere couple of months, it was nigh impossible for the average gamer to keep up with all of the goodness that was coming out all around. And as such, I obviously couldn't play every game to release this year. While I did play some of the big heavy-hitters, I didn't have a chance to check out Uncharted 3 (due to not having a PS3), Modern Warfare 3 (Due to my general dislike for the Call of Duty franchise), and plenty more.

So please be aware reading this that I haven't played every game to be released this year, but you can bet your ass that there were some amazing games that I loved. And I'm going to count them down, and throw in some other fun sh*t along the way. So here's the year of 2011 in gaming, as determined by I, Enigma Bigglesworth VanNoLastNameInParticular.

--

The Golden Soap Bar Awards for the Best Games of the Year

#5: Dead Space 2

A lot of people (Or to be more specific, very few people since not that many people really follow my work here, let's be honest) seem to think that I "hate" the Dead Space games for not being scary. And that's only half-true. I hate how unscary the Dead Space games are. I hate their cheap jump-scare tactics, the way they half-heartedly rip off of concepts and scenarios from superior sci-fi horror such as Alien and Event Horizon, how it's setting a standard for modern survival horror games despite using the cheapest and easiest horror tactics imaginable, you get the gist.

So yeah, I still didn't think that Dead Space 2 worked as a fantastic horror experience. However, I did think Dead Space 2 was a fantastic game. With lots of fun shooting that made great use of strategic dismemberment; amazing set-piece moments that were some of the most thrilling and exciting since Uncharted 2; and a plot that, despite still lifting concepts from Event Horizon and Aliens (And a little bit of Bioshock, believe it or not), was more intriguing than it had any right to be.

Is it scary? No. But is it still a well-paced, incredibly fun, highly enjoyable sci-fi shooter?Absolutely.

#4: Gears of War 3

While most shooters offer up an amazing multiplayer experience hindered by a mediocre campaign and an almost non-existent co-op mode, Gears of War 3 is the full-blown deal. The frenetic and insane multiplayer is exactly what you'd expect, and remains as incredibly addictive as before, but every single other mode wasn't given the short shrift either. Co-op is ridiculously fun with a new and improved Horde mode that features more strategic tower-defense elements and chaotic boss waves, and a newly added Beast mode that lets you take control of the enemies with a vastly varied array of the different playstyles to choose from.

The most surprising aspect, however, was the campaign. Despite still having the usual Gears flaws, like the meathead dialogue and the overwhelmingly gray/brown color palette, the plot is much stronger this time around. For one thing, it actually makes sense and you can actually follow what's going on in some way or another. Another thing, Epic did a surprising job of making the characterizations stronger, thus leading to some emotional moments that I would've never expected out of a Gears game. It also helps that there are lots of varied set-pieces to keep the action interesting throughout.

So when it comes to getting the full circle, Gears 3 was by far the most satisfying title of the year.

#3: Batman: Arkham City

I liked Arkham Asylum a lot, but it didn't really click with me the same way it did everyone else. This sequel however, was an amazing single-player experience. With two playable characters that offer up variety, and a wonderful balance of intense stealth, ridiculously fluid brawling combat, and a ridiculously huge amount of content in a large open world, the entire experience just clicks even more. Probably the biggest improvement is the story, which, unlike the first game, doesn't involve a cliche plot to release a bunch of chemicals. There are a surprising amount of twists and turns that turn up, including a really ballsy move at the end involving the deaths of two really major characters in the Batman fiction. All in all, an unforgettable experience filled with really fun gameplay and an incredibly interesting plot.

#2: Portal 2

To give you all a little backstory here: I love the first Portal to death. How much do I love it? How about putting it at #2 of my favorite games of all time? To say that I was hyped about this game is a massive understatement. But there was still the looming possibility that it could've sucked. Sure it was still Valve making it, and those guys can do no wrong in my book, but part of what made the first Portal so wonderful was how self-contained and compact in length it was, and making a full-blown sequel at full price could've ruined it by stretching it out until reaching its tedium point.

So when I finally beat it and it actually ended up exceeding my expectations, I was pretty much ready to marry the game already. The puzzles are even more brilliant than ever, the dialogue funnier than ever thanks to fantastic vocal performances from Ellen McLain, Stephen Merchant, and J.K. Simmons ("I don't want your d*mn lemons!"), and the newly added co-op so incredibly rewarding. My one gripe is that while the dialogue is stronger than ever, the actual plot is a bit on the simplistic side, taking away the subtle Kubrick-ian horror elements of the first game, as well as the beautiful simplicity. But it's hard to complain when the dialogue is this well-written, and I'm laughing my ass off at every minute of the game. It's just as good if not better than the predecessor. And that's saying a lot.

#1: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

Oh. My. God.

Skyrim.

Motherf*cking Skyrim.

This game is so good I can live in it. In fact, that's what I've been doing the past month or so. Every chance I can get, I'll just play this game non-stop, 12+ hours straight and absorb myself into its world.

Fanboy gushing aside, I wasn't the biggest fan of Oblivion but Fallout 3 is another one of my favorite games of all time. Except while I think Portal 2 equaled its predecessor in quality, Skyrim completely blows every other game Bethesda has ever made out of the water with a fully upgraded FUS DO RAH (Slap me in the face for that joke, please). The world is so rich in detail and lore, the glitches aren't as obtrusive as previous Bethesda games, the gameplay is insanely balanced--truly allowing you to play your own way with stealth, bows, two-handed blades, magic, the like--, and the amount of content is staggering.

There are hundreds thousands of things to do in this game, and 90% of all of it is given the same amount of polish and quality control as what other developers would've only put into the main quest. It's one thing to give a game a vast quantity of quests. When there's both quantity and quality in just about everything you're doing, you might as well marry the game.

Skyrim is a god d*mn masterpiece of a game, and no amount of arrow in the knee jokes can ever ruin that for me.

Honorable Mentions: Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Catherine

The Flaming Cowpat Award For Most Piece of Sh*t Game of the Year

TIE: Duke Nukem Forever & Bodycount

"That's right. Just try to write something about why you're so great. Just try. Because you can't. You know why? Because you suck. You suck so much, Duke. Hail to the king, my ass."

I'm always careful with my gaming purchases, so there's not a single game that I've ever bought that I would ever say is bad (I'd always try a demo or borrow it for a friend before seeing if it's worth a purchase or not when I could). So this isn't so much a "Worst game of the year" award so much as a "worst demo of the year" award, and this year there were two f*cking awful demos.

First and foremost: Duke Nukem Forever. Now, I'm not going to beat the dead horse of "We waited 12 years for this?!", because I never really cared that much about Duke to begin with, but I do have to sympathize with the ones who truly felt that way. The targeting was so laughably sticky and awkward to control, and the fact that the textures were so horrendously ugly that you couldn't tell anything apart made shooting things that much worse. The humor is simply not funny. Plain and simple. Duke's poor attempts at modernizing his '90s sense of humor don't even count as attempts. We still get terrible pop culture references to old sh*t no one cares about (You're still making Olsen twins references? Really?), but added into the mix are terrible internet memes ("Uh...PROFIT!") because God knows we haven't had enough of those. And if the terribleness of the game doesn't sink in on you at first, don't worry because you'll have plenty of time to let it sink in while the ridiculously long loading screens break up the action like a bulldozer breaks up a retirement home.

Up next is Bodycount, and I remember some of the things that the developers said while the game was still in production. Things along the lines of "Oh, we're not doing cover-based bullsh*t, we're not doing space-armor bullsh*t, we're not doing any gimmicky bullsh*t at all. It's just you and your gun, and you can shoot pretty much god d*mn ANYTHING in the game and it will have an effect". I was skeptical of course, but hey, considering how horrendously Duke went out, it would've been nice to see a fun, arcade-y throwback in the vein of Serious Sam or Painkiller that wanted nothing more than to let yourself hang loose and have fun obliterating guys with massive guns. And indeed, it would've been fun if any of the controls were worth a d*mn.

Generic brown favela environments all wrapped around generic enemies that can be obliterated to bits, but only through generic weapons. Even worse is that it's claim that it "wasn't about cover" was a complete lie because instead of an ironsight system, in its place is an awkward zoomed-in "lean" mechanic that you hold while crouched behind cover, that allows you to pop out in any angle you want, but considering the destructibility of everything, is made completely useless. Plus you can't move while in lean mode so if you just want to really zoom in on an enemy, you'd have to do it while lying prone so either way you're a bullet sponge.

If I had to pick which one was worse, I'd have to go with Bodycount, but Duke Nukem's horrid humor allows it to share the spot with Bodycount's horrendous gameplay. Because sharing is caring, folks.

The Diamond Killstreak Award For Best Multiplayer Experience of the Year

Battlefield 3

Short version: Military shooters usually bore me to tears. Long version: In a medium that is oversaturated with military shooters, it's almost impossible to stand out in a septic tank of gray, brown color palettes and funny Russian and/or Middle Eastern accents. That being said, Battlefield 3 is one of the most fun shooters of the year. Not because it has some of the smoothest controls you can possibly want in an FPS, which it has. Not because the multiplayer is filled with a vast amount of unlocks that'll have you playing for ages, which it has. The other big FPS release this year, Modern Warfare 3, had all these things as well, but that ended up being yet another boring corridor twitch-shooter. What made Battlfield 3 so fun?

What makes Battlefield 3 stand out from the pack is the strategy. Whereas most shooters are strictly in the confines of small corridors, the battles in Battlefield 3 are huge, open, and massive. Combined with the inclusion of numerous vehicles, there's a level of strategy that is incredibly rewarding when playing with a good team that no other shooter does nearly as well. The only reason why it isn't ranked in my top 5 list is because the campaign is very mediocre and rather poorly done, but Battlefield 3 is still one of the best multiplayer experiences of the year.

The Silver Points-Card Award For Best Downloadable Game of the Year

Bastion

Granted, I haven't played any other downloadable games this year aside from Trenched/Iron Brigade, which I haven't played enough of to really have a full opinion on. But Bastion really is a quality game. Fun combat with a nice use of RPG elements and upgrades that are deep enough to offer strategy but not overwhelming enough to distract you from the real meat of the game, an interesting and fully-realized mythology with some great world-building that is slowly revealed through gameplay rather than cutscenes, and what is literally one of the sexiest-sounding narrators in the history of anything ever. Seriously, the man's voice is like a man's chocolate-dipped fingers massaging your earholes while the sounds of Scarlett Johannson's orgasms fill-up the background noise...sorry what was I talking about?

Oh yes, the plot wasn't as good as I had heard, but it has a killer of an ending that is strangely beautiful and heart-warming in a really strange way. It also helps that the game is incredibly vibrant both in visuals and sound design, with a wonderfully inventive art design and great music. While I do agree with some that it's kind of overrated, it's still a hell of an experience that really does feel unlike anything else I've played. And on that regard, it does deserve mad props.

The Stripper With A Heart of Gold Award For Most Underrated Game of the Year

El Shaddai: Ascension of the Metatron

Crikey, I haven't bought that many games this year. So as such, I wasn't able to put in a "Best Downloadable" or "Best DLC" award this time because I haven't played that many, but I would love to turn your attention to a demo that I played that I wholeheartedly fell in love with.

I am not over-exaggerating when I'm saying that El Shaddai: Ascension of the Metatron is one of the most gorgeous, soothing, zen experiences I'd ever had with a game, and all I played was a 20 minute demo. The art direction is flawlessly inventive with rich, abstract environments and a gorgeous, painterly style (And from what I've heard, it constantly switches numerous other styles along the way too). The sound design is moody and atmospheric, creating a surreal sense of calm that feels unlike anything else I'd ever experienced in a game. And the combat just has this strange rhythmic energy to it that feels as soothing as the back and forth of the waves in the background of a Hawaiian sunset.

All this culminates to a truly zen-like experience. The game grabs you in this trance and doesn't let go, and I would love more than anything to play the full game and give the developers who made this game the money they deserve.

The "YOU THREW A SHARK AT AN AIRPLANE!" Award For Most Bat-Sh*t Insane Game of the Year

Catherine

Calling Catherine crazy doesn't do the game justice. Between anthropomorphic sheep, nightmare monsters that try to eat you with their anuses, block pushing puzzles, and regular trivia about numerous alcoholic beverages, Catherine is another one of those games that's unlike anything else you'll ever experience. It should also be noted that, even though it isn't entirely as deep as it thinks it is, it's probably the first game to look at sexuality in a mostly mature way (anus monsters aside). Combined with a story that goes through tons of crazy twists and turns throughout, Catherine is sheer madness from beginning to end, and it's hard to put down.

The Nathan Drake-Approved Award For Coolest Moment Of The Year

Dead Space 2

Dead Space 2 has a ton of amazing and epic set-piece moments that really ratchet up the action, but the one that surprisingly stuck out the most was a small but incredibly tense moment involving Isaac having to use an eye-needle machine (for reasons that aren't incredibly clear, but hey, it's a cool moment, shut up). Having to guide the needle into the iris of Isaac's eye proves difficult as he starts twitching out, making it hard to center. As the needle gets closer and closer, you just hope to god that he doesn't f*ck it all up for himself. Even better is when you see what happens when you fail. It's a surprisingly, incredibly tense moment in what is usually not a scary game (Okay I'll shut up now!).

The "What Is This, I Don't Even" Award For Most Ridiculously Contrived Moment Of The Year

Modern Warfare 3

Imagine yourself in Infinity Ward's shoes. Your lead designers have left the company due to your publisher's douchebaggery, you're stuck making the sequel without them, your last game had a controversial scene in which the player could massacre an airport full of civilians, and despite a recent big win for "games are art" and free-speech at the Supreme Court, your medium is still under close scrutiny, especially after some d-bag in Oslo, Norway decided to go on a shooting rampage at a daycare center and call your game part of his (exact wording, here) "training simulation". Gah...

So what do you do? Make the controversial scene even more tasteless, manipulative, and contrived, of course! So you decide to, in a cutscene rather than an interactive segment like the airport scene, depict the death of a child in the most egregiously tasteless depiction of the death of a child you can possibly think up in a Modern Warfare game: Blowing her up. BECAUSE WE WANT OUR INDUSTRY TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AS AN ART FORM! THIS WILL TOTALLY HELP, RIGHT GUYS!!....Guys?!......guys?.....gais....

The Cyanide Ice-Cream Award For Most Disappointing Game of the Year

L.A. Norie

Okay, let's get one thing perfectly straight: I really liked L.A. Noire. But there were lots of crippling flaws that kept it from greatness. The facial animations: Awesome. The voice acting: Awesome. The attention to detail in its recreation of late 40s/early 50s Los Angeles: Awesome. The Story: Awesome until the ending makes you realize you didn't really have much of a connection with the characters at all. But that's okay. The Sandbox: Aweso--no, scratch that, there isn't really much to do in the open world, which is such a shame considering how much detail was put into it. The Shooting: Awe--no, wait, that's actually kinda crap. The Missions: Awesome...that is until they start repeating themselves over and over again. The Interrogations: Okay, I'm not even going to pretend that this one is awesome because the way they did it hear was really poorly handled (I HAVE THE EVIDENCE RIGHT HERE, WHY WON'T YOU LET ME USE IT!!).

All in all, L.A. Noire has the elements of a great game, but it's bogged down by some questionable design decisions and some not-incredibly-well-developed characters. The potential is there, but the execution leaves something to be desired.

--

Of course there are still so many more games that I have yet to play. I still need Saint's Row: The Third, Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, a PS3 so I can play Uncharted 3, and all those other games. But this was still a wonderful year for gaming. Of course, it's all for naught, because I won't have time to play any of those games for months because--OH MY GOD SKYRIM!! Why am I still writing this when I could be playing more Skyrim!?!

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to ride off with Shadowmere into the sunset to kill dragons and such. Bye!

Note To Developers: I didn't make ACTUAL, physical awards, per se, so I suggest just getting them yourself. Bethesda, go wash yourself with the best soap money could buy! Team Bondi, go eat a Cyanide Ice-Cream cone. Gearbox, scoop up a cowpat and set it on fire in your house. El Shaddai, fall in love with a prostitute. Infinity Ward, just...don't be near me.

CinEffect Podcast Episode #12

2011-12-26T22:30:00Z

Episode #12: Young Adult, Dogville, Hugo, Skyrim, and Spaced. Click the link to listen to the episode.

Welcome to the CinEffect Podcast. In this podcast of constant douchebaggery, me (Chris), Alex, and Brady talk about film, games, and everything in between. This week, we harken the return of Brady, *** over Skyrim and Spaced, discuss our favorite actors of the year in our reviews for The Descendants and Young Adult, Chris expresses his hatred for Lars von Trier's Dogville, and conclude with He-Man singing while we confess to being naked the entire show...wait, what?

Subscribe via iTunes

EPISODE TIMELINE

(0:00) Some Weird Blooper Thing...

(0:18) Skyrim Theme

(0:40) Introduction/The Return of Brady

GAMES

(4:27) Some Random Discussion

(5:48) Chris - Batman: Arkham City, Bastion

(10:40) Brady - Batman: Arkham City, Skyrim

REVIEWS

(21:11) Alex - Hugo

(35:42) Brady - The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

(43:54) Brady & Chris - Spaced

(49:58) Chris - Dogville

(1:01:57) Chris - Bellflower

(1:09:04) Chris - The Descendants

(1:15:36) Alex & Chris - Young Adult

CONCLUSION

(1:30:57) Links And Twitters

(1:32:50) What We're Seeing Next Week

(1:36:15) He-Man Singing "Hey, What's Going On"

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo Movie Review

2011-12-24T22:30:00Z

[The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Directed by David Fincher
Starring: Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, and Christopher Plummer
MPAA: R - For Brutal Violent Content Including Rape & Torture, Strong Sexuality, Graphic Nudity, and Language]

--

The word "remake" has become associated with so many feelings of vile contemptment in the movie-nerd world. With so many horrible and unnecessary remakes being churned out each year, from classics to more recent foreign films, it's hard to forget the remakes that are handled well. Last year we had the incredibly under-appreciated Let Me In (Remake of the Swedish Let The Right One In), Martin Scorsese turned a pulpy Chinese gangster film (Infernal Affairs) into a new crime classic with The Departed, and most people tend to forget that many classics like John Carpenter's The Thing and David Cronenberg's The Fly were remakes.

Sometimes, being first doesn't automatically make you the winner. Because when an assured director is able to own up the source material and make it his/her own, then it stops being a remake and becomes a full-fledged great movie. And while David Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo simply can not be discussed without mentioning the original Swedish film which was based on the original Swedish bestselling novel, it is still able to stand on its own. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is quite simply one of the best thrillers of the year, remake or not.

So, I guess I need to summarize my opinion of the originals first before beginning my review of this remake. I've actually read the first book and watched the first film, but I haven't seen or read the other two stories in the Girl series. The book was great, if not too long and overly-detailed for its own good, though I was willing to let that slide since having an insanely detailed narrative works well in a literary format. The film didn't lend itself to that nearly as well, but it was still a solid movie with a strong central performance from Noomi Rapace (Who you can find making her English-language debut in another big blockbuster coming out this month, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows). I didn't love it nearly as much as everyone else seemed to have, but as far as a faithful adaptation of the book goes, it was perfectly serviceable.

The stories of all three versions--book, original film, and remake--center around an investigative journalist named Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig, in this version) who is called forth to a private island to solve a 40-year-old mystery involving the disappearance of Harriet Vanger, who was part of the large, wealthy Vanger family. Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer), who was basically like a father to Harriet, has been being tormented by her killer for 40 years since her disappearance, for he has been annually receiving wildflowers, something that Harriet used to give him all the time, since the time after her death. Blomkvist, eager to solve the case after being offered a deal he can't refuse, enlists the help of the titular and iconic Lisbeth Salander, a goth cybergenius who can hack her way into the White House if she wasn't so emotionally fragile. Together they piece together something far greater than they could've ever suspected: a sadistic serial killer of women who may or may not be part of the Vanger family.

Now, it's weird to discuss why I find this film much superior to the original. On a basic plot and structural level, everything has mostly remained the same. There are a couple rather major alterations here and there, but 95% of the film is incredibly faithful to both original source materials which its basing itself on, plot-wise. Where it differs is the style, which may not seem like a big deal since style is all for naught without substance, but the Fincher's assured direction actually elevates the film's plot rather than detracts or distracts from it.

Being shot on a bigger budget and all, the film has a much better sense of atmosphere and dread. Bleak and cold in every sense of the word, Fincher creates a real sense of place in the Vanger Island that creates tension and unease throughout the entire picture. To me, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is David Fincher at his Finchiest...I promise I'll punch myself later for typing that. It has the sadistic violence of Se7en, the strong characterizations and dialogue of The Social Network, the sprawling and detailed narrative of Zodiac, and the nail-biting suspense of pretty much all of his movies wrapped up into one.

I've heard many of this version's detractors describe the film as "bland", and I couldn't disagree more. If this is what bland is, then bland should become a standard that every other mediocre thriller should aspire to. I can see why some people would say that though. This remake, despite its subtle differences, is still incredibly similar to the original film. So similar, in fact, that it's weird to find the same people who praised the original call this remake out as "bland". It could perhaps be that they've literally seen this story before, and I can understand that, but I think that that's a disservice to what Fincher brings to the table.

While I did like the Swedish film a lot, there was never a moment that really let me into the movie. It was a really solid thriller, but it ultimately never transcended "solid" due to a straight-forward approach in its directing. While some prefer that the straight-forward approach of the Swedish director, Niels Arden Oplev, created a sense of objective clarity and directness in the plot, I thought that Fincher's direction allowed for more complex characters and a more refined sense of dread that helps establish its themes of misogyny and the ugliness of human nature much better than the original.

Whereas Oplev was more direct, Fincher is more murky, but in a good sort of way. The characters all have a sense of moral ambiguity that gives each of them, even the side-characters, more depth than the original. Many of the characters in the Swedish film felt almost like archetypes rather than real people. Here, the characters are harder to read, but more captivatingly real, which creates a certain tension throughout every scene in the film.

And speaking of tension, it should go without saying that Fincher has always been a master of creating suspense and dread. While the Swedish film certainly was brutal, it never felt brutal. Here, everything is amplified. Some of my favorite scenes involved characters who clearly know of each others' ulterior motives simply just having a conversation with each other, trying not to give a hint at what they're really after. It reminded me a lot of the spectacularly intense moment in Zodiac, where Jake Gyllenhaal, after hearing that the man he's talking with wants to head down over to the basement, remembers that the killer he was looking for had a basement, and that not many people in California had basements to begin with.

And on the other end of the spectrum, the brutal scenes, such as the much-talked-about rape scene and another involving a metal ***, feel much more visceral and shocking than the previous iteration. Thanks to the atmosphere, and a spectacular score by Fincher's The Social Network collaborators Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, these sequences feel more raw and unflinching than before, though it's obviously not enjoyable to sit through by any means.

As bleak as the film is, I think that the film totally earns its darkness because it still manages to be so captivating. Not just because of Fincher's direction. I also forgot to bring up the excellent performances. Daniel Craig is the A-lister of the cast, playing the film's protagonist Mikael Blomkvist with his usually suave debonair, but it's Rooney Mara, who plays Lisbeth Salander, that steals the show. Salander is just one of those characters that catches your attention automatically. She's unique, interesting, hides deep emotional scars, and is always unpredictable. As played by Rooney Mara, who hasn't really had any other major film roles until this, she is more spellbinding than ever. Mara, like pretty much everything else that makes this version superior to the original, creates a much better sense of unease and discomfort without over-playing it or making her character too detached from reality to sympathize with.

There are still a few flaws to be had, but they've been inherited from the original film. Like the original, it takes a long while for Salander and Blomkvist to actually team up (They don't officially work together until the one hour mark), and it goes on a bit too long, reaching many points where you think it's supposed to end but instead just keeps going and going. But I was willing to forgive that flaw this time around because unlike the Swedish film, they decided to go with the book's beautifully bitter ending rather than just end it on a completely abrupt note.

Final Verdict: While it doesn't really differentiate itself too much from the original film, Fincher's version of the The Girl WIth The Dragon Tattoo is a perfect example of how small, subtle changes can make a huge difference, and ultimately make the film stand on its own despite its similarities. It's a smart, captivating thriller that has strong performances--including a star-making turn for Rooney Mara--, and assured direction from David Fincher that ratchets up the suspense. It's a rare remake that, despite being so similar to the original, ends up being so much better than it at the same time.

--

That is all.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to find a good tattoo remover. I have no idea how I got these in the first place...

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Bellflower Movie Review

2011-12-17T22:30:00Z

[Bellflower
Written and Directed by Evan Glodell
Starring: Evan Glodell, Jessie Wiseman, and Tyler Dawson
MPAA: R - For Disturbing Violence, Some Strong Sexuality, Nudity, Pervasive Language, and Some Drug Use]

--

One of the best things about how movies have evolved over the years is that basically anyone can make a movie now. If you can handle your budget accordingly, and you know some people who can act or do technical asides, you're set to go. The DIY-era of film-making is on a gigantic rise and it's led to some incredibly interesting products ranging from mega-hit mockumentaries like Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity, to experimental projects such as the mumblecore movement started by the Duplass brothers and the enigmatic Lynch debut Eraserhead.

There's just something so inherently cool about learning that just a bunch of average schmoes like us funded their own movie, got their friends to do all the acting and camerawork and such for them, and sent it out to the world via YouTube, film-festivals like Sundance, and the like. Even if the movie winds up not being a total masterpiece, you can admire the craftsmanship and energy that went into making it.

Such is the case of one of 2011's Sundance darlings: Evan Glodell's Bellflower. Bellflower is probably the epitome of the DIY movie. The film was written, produced, directed, and has a protagonist played by one man, Evan Glodell; he got most of his friends to play the other major roles; he filmed on location at his hometown on the titular Bellflower Street; he designed all of the explosives, flamethrowers, and muscle cars heavily inspired by Mad Max that are prominently featured in the movie; he even built his own camera rig from scratch. If that isn't commitment to get your vision across, I don't know what is.

The film's low-budget charm is incredibly admirable and the film is definitely one of the most unique and interesting experiences I've ever had with a movie all year. I just wish that it worked as a legitimately good movie.

Bellflower has been marketed as an "apocalyptic romance", which can be seen as false advertising since it has almost nothing to do with the apocalypse. The main characters are Woodrow (Evan Glodell) and his friend Aiden (Tyler Dawson), who are master tinkerers (Both in the movie, and in real life) that spend their days preparing for the apocalypse after becoming obsessed with the Mel Gibson film Mad Max. They create everything from flamethrowers to biker gang emblems, all surrounding their own Mona Lisa: The Medusa, a *** muscle car that belches flames at top speeds and is perfect for traversing the wasteland around.

Along the way, Woodrow sparks up a romance with a blonde, vulgar maiden named Milly (Jessie Wiseman) who beats him at a cricket eating contest at a local bar. They drive all the way to Texas, eat at a crummy restaurant, buy a motorcycle, and do all sorts of other shenanigans together. But it becomes clear from the start that this relationship won't end well. After a dramatic break-up, the film takes turn upon turn, twist upon twist, and genre upon genre, layering itself into a messy but mesmerizing sandwich that tastes unlike anything you'd ever eaten, but still probably gave you some bad indigestion.

Now, when I say that it's unlike any other film I'd ever seen, I meant it. As mentioned earlier, Glodell literally made his own camera rig out of dozens of other camera parts and Russian lenses, creating a look and feel that's fitting for it's apocalyptic themes. Everything is grimy, grungy, and overly saturated in color. It's a look that feels wholly unique and original without even really trying; an impressive feat coming from a first-time director.

However, it should be made clear that this is very much a style-over-substance film, and while Glodell clearly has an eye for visual candy, his first time out writing and directing shows clear signs of a first-time student trying to make it to the big leagues in his first swing, like Richard Kelly and Miranda July before him.

To say that the film's tone dramatically shifts during the second half is an understatement. Bellflower incorporates so many genres than you'd think from an "apocalyptic romance". There are elements of comedy, mumblecore, action, horror, psychological drama, Lynchian indistinguishability between dream/memory/reality, etc. It is never boring. The way the film infuses all these different elements together is wildly inventive at all times. Unfortunately, it doesn't feel natural like, say, The Evil Dead II careening effortlessly between slapstick comedy and straight-faced horror.

First and foremost, with a movie that features so many elements, certain ones aren't as strongly developed as others. Namely, the romance between Woodrow and Milly doesn't feel terribly strong. It's nice and there's some charming dialogue here and there--and it also helps that the actors do a fine job--but it never really becomes a relationship that you truly care about. This makes the film's dramatic crutch, the break-up, feel loose and wobbly, thus making it hard to hold up the more serious shifts in tone.

Even stranger are the moments in which it takes a Lynchian turn of mind-bending confusion. Yet the film feels more like it's trying a bit hard to be like David Lynch or David Cronenberg rather than really being as successful. Whereas Lynch was able to turn the nonsensical into poetry by creating an intense mood and a clearly abstract visual language that allows for numerous interpretations.

Glodell gets as far as the intense mood, but still has a long ways to go to match the genius of Lynch to make a language using his imagery. Instead, it feels more like a haphazardly assembled collage of cool images that don't really seem to thematically connect. I'm sure that there's a clear meaning in the ending that I'm probably not getting, but Lynch's endings are also like that too, only far more successful. But what made it that way was because the entire movie was nonsensical and abstract. Bellflower shifts its tone so much that the Lynch ending is treated more as an enigmatic aside rather than making the entire film a riddle that ropes you in so you're dying to untangle it yourself.

And yet, despite all of the shifts in tone, Bellflower remarkably has its own identity. It feels unlike almost any other movie I'd ever seen, and for that I won't forget it. I just wish that the script was more fine-tuned, the direction was more clear, the tonal shifts more fluid, and the striking imagery more of a complement to its thematic material rather than a separate entity to stare at. Otherwise, it could've been the next Donnie Darko cult classic.

Final Verdict: I wouldn't say that Bellflower is a good movie, and it's tough for me to recommend it. But if you have an hour and forty five minutes to sink in on a maddeningly absorbing but destructive experiment of a film, then it's worth a watch. The film has a clear style that feels unique and cool, and there are some interesting ideas lying somewhere, hidden beneath the dusty cracks of the movie. But the tonal shifts are too awkward, the romance isn't developed enough, and the direction still amateurish and unable to make it all thread together nicely. An insanely interesting failure of a movie.

--

That is all.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna whip out my copy of Fallout 3 again. Cuz I don't want to set the woooorld on fiiiiire...

(Please visit the site to view this media)

CinEffect Podcast Episode #11

2011-12-12T23:00:00Z

Episode #11: Melancholia, VGAs, The Descendants, Hugo, Skyrim, The Muppets, Breaking Dawn. Click link to listen.

Welcome to the CinEffect Podcast. In this podcast of constant douchebaggery, me (Chris), Alex, and Brady talk about film, games, and everything in between. This week, Chris & Alex discuss the trailer hype in the VGAs, Chris's addiction to Skyrim, how batsh*t insane Ichi the Killer and Breaking Dawn are, Alex's hatred for The Boy In The Striped Pajamas, and conclude with an in-depth review of Lars von Trier's Melancholia.

Subscribe via iTunes

INTRODUCTION
(0:00) The Thief by Howard Shore (Hugo OST)

(0:46) Introduction & Sundance Line-Up

VIDEO GAMES

(9:56) Chris - Skyrim

(13:00) Alex - The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, Super Mario 3D Land, Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3, King of Fighters XIII, Dungeon Defenders

(23:13) VGAs Round-Up

DVD

(45:30) Alex - Elf, Wayne's World, John Adams

(52:07) Chris - Beautiful Boy, Ichi The Killer

REVIEWS

(1:04:39) Alex - The Muppets

(1:07:26) Alex - Like Crazy

(1:15:04) Chris & Alex - Sideways & The Descendants

(1:24:39) Chris & Alex descend into a rant about The Boy In The Striped Pajamas

(1:30:55) Chris - Hugo

(1:39:12) Chris - The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn

(1:46:49) Chris - Melancholia

CONCLUSION

(2:03:32) Links/Where To Find Us On The Internet

(2:04:17) What We're Watching Next Week

(2:09:38) Tristan Und Isolde Prelude by Wagner (Melancholia OST)

Melancholia Movie Review

2011-12-11T22:30:00Z

[Melancholia
Written and Directed by: Lars von Trier
Starring: Kirstin Dunst, Charlotte Gainsbourg, and Kiefer Sutherland
MPAA: R - For Some Graphic Nudity, Sexual Content, and Language]

--

The end of the world is a concept that has been completely overused by Holywood for years now. We've seen landmarks of all shapes and sizes demolished by Roland Emmerich, we've seen giant monsters, aliens, zombies, and preachy Al Gore messages end the lives of a good portion of the human race, we've seen idiotic ways of preventing the end of the world such as nuking the asteroid before it hits earth or having the President pilot a fighter jet to kill aliens...

Simply put, we've seen the end of the world so many times, but when you think about it, has there ever been a movie that truly looks at an intimate portrayal of what would really happen when the impending apocalypse loomed ever closer? Has there ever been an apocalyptic film that didn't star a cutthroat hero like Will Smith or Bruce Willis, but instead depicted everyday people reacting to such a situation? Have we ever seen an accurate portrayal of what a regular person would do when faced with the inevitability that everything that they know and love will be wiped out in an instant and there's nothing they can do about it?

In reality, the end of the world would be a bleak, depressing affair with zero hope to be found. There would probably be nothing an average joe could do to stop it, or even survive it. The end of the world would mean the end of all of humanity as we all know it. And the big question is: Will anyone miss it when it's gone? Will anyone miss us when we're gone?

Lars von Trier's latest film, Melancholia, is perhaps the closest a film has ever gotten to succeeding on such an apocalyptic vision. It begins with Justine (Kirsten Dunst) having an expensive wedding with her new hubby (Alexander Skarsgard) in a lavish mansion in the middle of the woods. Her sister (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and brother-in-law (Kiefer Sutherland) have planned the expensive wedding for her and wish her the best, but it becomes increasingly clear to the audience that nothing about this marriage is going to work out.

After a marriage that, believe it or not, lasts shorter than Kim Kardashian's betrothment with Kris Humphries (I'm getting topical, guys!), Justine battles through severe amounts of depression and decides to temporarily move in with her sister in the mansion. What should be a therapeutic vacation becomes an unsettling descent into despair when a giant planet five times the size of earth named Melancholia is seen heading for a collision course for earth. It's the perfect apocalypse: There's absolutely nothing anybody can do to stop the planet, and all our characters can do is sit and watch as the planet grows bigger and bigger in the sky.

The genius behind Melancholia's bleakness is in how the film opens. The first seven and a half minutes are an almost disconnected prelude featuring a collage of images of destruction and despair in the most grandiose slo-mo you've ever seen. It's probably one of the most gorgeous openings I have ever experienced in a film. A perfect marriage of stunning imagery, meticulous detail, excellent shot composition, and beautifully fitting classical music. But it also works on a narrative level as well. By showing the end of the world first, there's no suspense on whether everyone will live or die. Instead, we have a fantastic sense of impending doom. It's a brilliant use of dramatic irony: The audience knows much more than the characters, and we know that nothing is going to end well for any of them. The opening seven and a half minutes alone are worth the price of admission.

Directly after that, the film shifts gears to what is titled "Part 1: Justine", which documents Justine's wedding night. And this is where the film's flaws drop in. If you saw Part 1 of the film without seeing the opening prologue, and you weren't told what the concept of the film was, you'd honestly think it had nothing to do with the sci-fi aspects at all. I get what von Trier is trying to do here: Ground the film in reality, show us the calm before the storm, and draw parallels between the end of Justine's happiness and relationship with the end of the world as we know it. But what makes this prolonged wedding scene not work is that it drags on for too long.

At first, we can kind of sympathize with Justine. She clearly didn't want to marry this man but did so anyway to make a better person out of herself, and she's now faced with the prospect of a life of unhappiness with a man she never really loved to begin with. However, this sequence goes on 25-30 minutes too long. At that point, Justine becomes an unlikable shrew of a woman who isn't given enough reasons to be depressed at such a lavish party with a man who clearly cares about her other than "because she's kind of crazy". There are hints of her being bipolar, but it's never extensively explained, and still doesn't excuse how she acts within Part 1. It would've been much better executed if Lars von Trier decided to cut this sequence down by 10-15 minutes or so. As it stands, it's something to press the fast-forward button on when you get the DVD.

Thankfully, things pick back up in Part 2 of the film which is titled "Claire", and focuses more on Charlotte Gainsbourg. Now, I'm probably in the minority when I say this, but it's well worth mentioning: Everyone has been praising Kirsten Dunst's performance in the film, but in my personal opinion, Charlotte Gainsbourg brings a much stronger presence, character, and overall performance than Dunst. Not to discredit Ms. Dunst, who gives us a very raw and brave performance, but Charlotte Gainsbourg is given a more nuanced character to work with.

In general, Charlotte Gainsbourg is one of the most underrated actresses of our generation. I've only seen her in three films (The Science of Sleep, Antichrist, and this) but in all three, she was absolutely phenomenal. She has a natural beauty to her that feels genuine, can evoke strength and independence alongside fragility and fear. Her work here is phenomenally well done and I hope she also gets the same recognition that Dunst has also been getting .

The fact that Part 2 focuses more on Claire isn't the only reason that the last two acts work so well. It's also because it's the moment when Lars von Trier introduces the sci-fi aspects and the threat of Melancholia. Seeing ordinary people deal with an apocalyptic event in this fashion is something very refreshing in the movie landscape. They react naturally, like real human beings would act in the threat of such a situation. The five stages of grief apply: Denial that it's actually happening, anger when they realize the inevitable, bargaining for a way out, depression when they realize that there is no way, and finally, the acceptance that this is the end of all things.

Whenever I see films like Independence Day, inoffensively fun as they are, there is never a true sense of loss when you realize that everything that you know and love is coming to an end. Melancholia is the first film to truly make you feel sadness for the death of the world. Like you are watching the end of something beautiful, and you realize that you'll never see it again. It is this sadness that elevates Melancholia from other films that are just depressing for the sake of being depressing.

Lars von Trier, a man who is normally known for shocking his audience, has created his most tasteful, beautiful, and--in it's own weird way--uplifting film of his entire career. Despite the true sadness on display, what makes it even sadder is that there are moments of sheer beauty and real emotion throughout the picture. It's a hefty balancing act of beauty and sadness that makes the film work, even when it is punishingly depressing to view. I'm glad that Lars von Trier didn't indulge himself in pretentious symbolism and shock-value this time like he did in Antichrist. If anything, I'd like to see him make more films like this.

--

Final Verdict: It can be a punishing experience to view. It's unpleasant in every sense of the world, but at the same time it's also one of the most mesmerizing films of the year. While I have my gripes with the first act of the film, seeing the gorgeous prologue and the emotionally heavy final two acts more than make up for it. Combined with fantastic performances from Kirsten Dunst, Charlotte Gainsbourg, and Kiefer Sutherland, plus the best and most assured direction that Lars von Trier has ever brought with him, and Melancholia is an unforgettable experience. Even in spite of its overwhelming sadness, there's no denying that it's a hard film to shake off after viewing it.

See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to nuke Melancholia before it hits us. If I can't save us, and Bruce Willis can't save us, then no one can. Bye!

(Please visit the site to view this media)

[Want more of Enigma? Visit his blog at cineffectpodcast.blogspot.com and follow him on twitter @Enigma6667.]

Hugo Movie Review

2011-12-06T22:00:00Z

The Following Review Contains Major Spoilers

[Hugo
Directed by Martin Scorsese
Starring: Ben Kingsley, Asa Butterfield, & Chloe Grace Moretz
MPAA: PG - For Mild Thematic Material, Some Action/Peril And Smoking]

--

There's a funny story behind the origin of film. The Lumiere Brothers of France created not only some of the first film cameras in the 1890s, but they were the first successful inventors of "moving pictures" in all of history. One of the first movies ever, L'arrivée d'un train en gare de La Ciotat (or The Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat Station) was literally just a train arriving at a train station, but it struck a massive chord with its first viewers. When the train moved towards the camera, the audience panicked, believing that the train was going to jump out the screen at any moment, because it was unlike anything they'd ever seen in their entire lives. Leave it to Martin Scorsese, one of the greatest film-makers alive today, to recreate that classic scene, and use brand new technology such as 3D to rejuvenate that feeling that we are watching something extraordinary. With Hugo, Scorsese brings the magic of cinema to life, in what is one of the best movies of the entire year.

If you've seen the trailers and marketing for Hugo, you wouldn't be blamed if you simply just weren't appealed by it. I certainly wasn't. It looked like a whimsical children's fantasy, but in the sickening way like, say, the film adaptation of A Series of Unfortunate Events, or the recent and forgettable Narnia films. However, like how Quentin Tarantino tricked Grindhouse fanboys hoping for a bloody shoot-em-up into seeing one of the most dialogue-driven movies ever with Inglorious Basterds, Martin Scorsese's Hugo is actually a love-letter to silent cinema of the '20s and '30s.

Hugo is the story of an orphan boy named Hugo Cabret (natch), who lives within the walls of a Parisian train station operating the many clocks surrounding it and making sure they never desynchronize from time. His only source of food is snatching croissants from unsuspecting bakery owners, and his only means of entertainment are sneaking into the movie theater and gathering spare parts to fix up an "automaton" (i.e. robot) that his father was working on before leaving it unfinished when he passed away. Hugo's one wish in life is to finish what his father started years ago, hoping that it would lead him to a clue that could save him from his perpetual loneliness without a family.

That's all I'm going to describe of the plot. It's best to keep the rest of it unspoiled for the audience, but believe me, I will spoil it. But before I do so, let me go over some of the more base, non-spoilery aspects of what makes Hugo one of the year's best films.

The art direction is beyond stellar. Martin Scorsese's recreates 1930's Paris in a way that feels fantastical and beautiful all at once. The sets adhere less towards historical accuracy, and lean more towards a bright color palette that gives the film a whimsical atmosphere while still grounded enough in reality to keep the picture from going over-the-top.

The cinematography is simply stunning, and enhanced further by the 3D (which we'll describe more of in the spoiler section). The opening shots of the film begin with a high-angle establishing shot of Paris that looks glorious and epic in scope, then zooms directly into the train station passing by a myriad of passengers in a single take, and then finally twists and winds its way through hidden tunnels and passageways in such a fluid manner that sets your jaw on the floor.

All of the actors are wonderful. The child actors are charming without being cloying and irritating, while the adult actors hold their own playing the more secondary characters with all the personality and charm they can churn out. Sacha Baron Cohen, for example, brings out a surprising amount of depth to what could've been a one-note character. Ben Kingsley, in particular, brings up some of his best work as George the mysterious toy-store clerk. It's the best performance the knighted actor has ever brought out since The Wackness.

Now, after reading the plot synopsis above, it may not sound like much of a love-letter to silent films judging from that plot description, but that development is best left unspoiled for the viewer. And it's hard to describe what makes everything in this film tick into place without giving away major plot developments. So consider this a spoiler warning: I advise that those of you who haven't seen the film yet to not read the rest of this review until later. Go ahead and watch the movie. Right now. It's in my top 5 in the year. Seriously, I'll wait.

...

Okay, you're back? Good, let's get on with this...

It's hard to see what exactly it was about this particular story that intrigued Martin Scorsese enough to direct it, but it soon becomes clear that Hugo plays almost like a fictionalized autobiography of Martin Scorsese's life and how his passion for the movies grew. I was actually surprised to learn that the film was based on a novel called The Invention of Hugo Cabret, because it felt almost like so much of Scorsese's own life was put into the story.

For example, part of what made Scorsese so invested in film was how his asthma kept him from playing with kids outside, and had him spending most of his days absorbing as much film and television as he possibly could from the theaters and the television in his Little Italy apartment. When I see the film's title character Hugo waiting in that clocktower, observing the world through the windows, his only form of enjoyment in tinkering with the clocks in the station and sneaking into the theater to watch movies, I see Scorsese back at his apartment in Little Italy.

This is where the REALLY BIG SPOILERS come in: The film takes its silent movie tribute turn when we learn that the automaton is able to write a message that leads Hugo to George Melies, a man who hides behind the guise of a toy store clerk, but in reality is one of the cinema's first magicians ever. He literally invented special effects in the movies. And I don't just mean that within the movie's universe. George Melies was a real French filmmaker who invented the first special effects and created fantastical worlds that no other filmmaker dreamed of putting on celluloid at the time. Without him, there would be no Avatar, no Lord of the Rings, no Harry Potter, and, yes, no Star Wars. How appropriate then, for Martin Scorsese to make his first 3D film about the man who pretty much invented the use of visual trickery in the movies.

Now here's where I SPOIL THE ENDING for you all (Seriously, I can see you there, people who didn't actually see the movie but are reading my review anyway! I know you're there!) The film ends with Hugo literally reviving George Melies career by saving and restoring several of Melies's prints that were thought to be lost for centuries. When we see Hugo reintroducing the magic of Melies's films to the world, we also see Scorsese doing the same with Michael Powell when he brought forth a restored print of one of his favorite films of all time, The Red Shoes, as well as a misunderstood gem Peeping Tom.

The way the film parallels with real life is clever without trying to hard because it comes from a genuine and intimate place in Scorsese's heart. Scorsese seems like one of those people who just lives and breathes off of movies, much like Roger Ebert and Quentin Tarantino, and his unabashed love shows in spades. Some of my favorite moments in Hugo involved characters simply just watching a short movie together, with the camera lingering onto each of the characters' reactions on their faces to what was being shown on screen. Everything from the excitement, the wonder, and the joy we feel from the movies is displayed in a beautiful and heartfelt way. It reminds us why we go to the movies, and what it is that we love so much about them.

One more thing before I leave: This is literally the best use of 3D I have ever seen in a film. No seriously, it trumps Avatar. At the time of this writing, there are only three films that I'd ever consider as good representations of how 3D can improve on a film. The first was, of course, James Cameron's Avatar, which used the technology to further immerse viewers into Cameron's fantastical and imaginative universe. Then with Dreamworks Animations' How To Train Your Dragon, which used it to create some impressively thrilling action sequences that enhanced the danger of its conflicts. And now we have Hugo which is the first film that uses 3D to enhance a film thematically as well as visually.

Like I said, it was appropriate that a film about George Melies, a master at tricking the eyes with his revolutionary films, would be made in 3D, which is literally made with a visual eye-trick that goes on directly behind the headache-inducing glasses. It enhances the film's theme of the magic of cinema, and how it brings us closer to our dreams. It also helps that it makes an exceptional use of depth. There was a spectacular shot in which the camera stares down a long stairway in the clocktower, the abyss seeming more threatening and huge thanks to the depth provided from 3D.

It also works with the film's message on the importance of revitalizing classic films (a cause that Scorsese himself is always hard at work on since creating The Film Foundation). With many classic moments from other silent films being faithfully recreated or paid homage to, but with a fresh new look to them. Hell, even the poster depicting Hugo dangling from the long hand of a giant clock is lifted from the silent comedy Safety Last!. Look and see for yourself.

Simply put, if you've ever loved movies, you simply must go see Hugo. Scorsese wishes to share that love with you, and remind you of why you go to see them in the first place.

Final Verdict: Hugo is equal parts a deeply personal life-story of Scorsese, celebration of the movies, and a whimsical fable that children and parents alike will enjoy. Breathtaking camerawork and 3D usage, stellar performances from all of its actors, and emotionally satisfying and heartfelt in every way. Hugo embodies the magic of the cinema.

--

That is all. See ya next time. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to fly myself into the eye of the moon. OBSCURE SILENT FILM REFERENCES ARE FUN, GUYS!!.........GUYS?!?!.....Guys?....guys....gais......

(Please visit the site to view this media)

[Want more of Enigma in the most non-homosexual way possible? Visit his blog at cineffectpodcast.blogspot.com and follow him on twitter @Enigma6667.]