The Road

This is a difficult experience. It's a disturbing disaster film because you don't actually see the disaster. This brilliantly focuses the story into a character-driven experience. What haunts you is the unknown, but what consumes you is the hope and love the two main characters share. All this is attributable to Cormac McCarthy, but to have it actually translated onto the screen requires some skill, particularly from the cast.

The performances are what sell it. Viggo Mortensen as "Man" and Kodi Smit-McPhee as "Boy" avoid all of the cliches that could have cheapened the experience. Mortensen gives off a hint of determination while drowning in desparation that is at its peak in flashback scenes with his wife, "Woman" (played by Charlize Theron). Smit-McPhee plays a boy that is unlike any child in any other film. While he is open and optimistic to everything unfamiliar, he is also skeptical and fearful, because this man is all he has ever known. He is of another world because he knows nothing of our world.

What ruins the experience is the pacing. Anything based on work from McCarthy must be given time to be absorbed. McCarthy writes in prose and avoids certain punctuation for the purpose of being more direct and using "simple declarative sentences." He believes in not "blocking the page up with weird little marks." So why block this film up with more cuts than what it needs? To be simple is to be real and to be real requires as few edits as possible.

Director John Hillcoat and editor John Gregory should have learned a lesson from the Coen brothers (a.k.a. Roderick Jaynes) and slowed the tempo for this movie down. It might not be fair of me to hold the same standards for "The Road" as "No Country for Old Men," but the attitude and rhythm of the books (or at least the pieces I have read of them) are very much similar. The Coen brothers were successful because they submitted completely to McCarthy's narrative tone. Hillcoat and Gregory, on the other hand, are a bit more traditional in their approach and it clashes with their story.

Nevertheless, the visuals, the writing, and the acting all come together and manage to bring this collaborative struggle between a father and son to the screen and truly give a sense of each being "the other's world entire." I have not read the book, but after seeing this film I am now inspired to and know that I must. Given that, I render the film a success.

Avatar

It did not take long for a general opinion to form stating that the script to Avatar (for lack of a more common term) "sucks." It became a cliche for most cinephiles when discussing the film. Phrases resembling "if only he had paid more attention to the story" were heard throughout America during discussions amongst students in the classroom, employees at the water cooler, and fanboys on blogs. It was held against Cameron that he "stole" his story from Pocahantas (a rather lame accusation). I'm going to venture to say that Avatar, while lacking in total originality, is nevertheless an authentic experience that does not sell itself short.

Technically, the film is astounding. It's solid in every aspect of production and post-production. There is little one can say to refute that. Most importantly, everything comes together to create the needed emotion to make it all work. From the destruction of the massive "hometree" to the moments when Jake is gasping desperately for oxygen, I cared about these characters and what happened to them. No matter how stock they might be, they were well portrayed by the actors and the film did everything to earn the amount of care I had. Zoe Saldana in particular beautifully portrays her character through her grace and athleticism.

This is an outstanding film and there is no such thing as an outstanding film with a bad story. Everything about it is its story, from the way its shot and edited to the way its acted and scored. For every piece of dialogue that might be considered a bit stale I can point out a narrative-driven, lush visual that nullifies it. The use of avatars by the characters underlines a very human desire to reside within a body greater than that in which we do. It is an allegory for the idea that we are not at home as humans and that there is something beyond these physcical bodies we reside in. The world of Pandora is untainted and in wonderful harmony. A beautiful note is that it is a place without religion in the sense that we think of it. All of its creations are unified in recognizing a single omniscient deity.

It truly speaks volumes for Cameron's directorial abilities when complaints about the script run are as wild as they are. I must state that I believe the story to be good, even if it is older and used. I can point out several films from 2009 whose scripts truly left me shaking my head. Some of which I saw and others I did not even need to (unfair, but generally true). But Avatar is a film with a story that works well enough to support a fascinatingly original world with very spiritual themes.

I usually avoid dating my reviews and prefer to express opinions that could apply to any point in time relative to a release, but given how exceptional this film is and how exceptional it's been deemed by the worldwide Box Office intake, I thought for the sake of discussion it was worth noting the the opinions that have developed.

A Single Man

To describe the main character as "single" perhaps brings about the same connotation associated with a facebook relationship status. But to describe George (Colin Firth) in such a way, while true, would be trivial. He is a man apart from this world entirely, seeming to feel as if he has no place.

The main course of action takes place over the span of a single day. George's last day. With the death of his partner, he is consumed by melancholy and dreads mornings (although apparently this was the case even before his lover died). He puts up a facade at work and amongst friends but it seems that there is an internal cause beyond his widowed state that is never quite fully brought to the surface. As a homosexual he considers himself a minority, but in 1962 he is not a minority that is feared. He is one that is, as he describes in one of his classes, invisible.

Throughout the movie, George throughly buys into this idea. People all around him are reaching out, inviting him to do this or that or simply to be with him, but he stays away from any of that. A visual used throughout has George drowning as he tosses and turns in a large body of water, unable to break free. What finally pulls him out and allows him to find a breath of air is one of his students. They spend an evening together after running into each other (although in fairness the student was looking for him) at a bar and George finds friendship and bliss in this outing. He experiences a rare "moment of clarity."

The screenplay is insightful and poignant and Colin Firth will likely land a nod for Best Actor from the Academy. He convinces us that he has a great sorrow but that it almost seems bottled, for his character faces internal struggles. The problem is that we never get a chance to dive fully and completely into these sorrows. The narrative arch feels restrained by the 101 min running time.

Many of the visuals are desaturated but obtain their color when George interacts with another person and notices little bits of beauty. There is much to admire about human interaction and George knows it, but yet he avoids camaraderie in much of the film. George is a smart person and I'm convinced that something else that is not hinted at troubled this character.

This film won't ever get a sliver of the amount of mainstream attention as Brokeback Mountain ever got, but it's characters are more convincing. The love they share for another is indeed the love for another human that anyone can share, and not merely lust-based as I'm convinced Ennis and Jack's was. The pain George goes through is universal. I felt it, but not as much as I would have had it been on the screen longer.

Fantastic Mr. Fox

When I see movies, I simply shoot for story's that seem worth telling and one's that seem to be told well. I don't give much thought to the genre or target audience of the film. Thus, I was initially surprised to see several children in the theatre for this movie until I remembered the source material. By the time the end credits were rolling, I wanted to ask the kids in the theatre whether they enjoyed the movie or not. I couldn't help but wonder how I would have felt had I seen it when I was 7, 8, or 9. It would have had an odd effect on me, indeed.

This is not a traditional animated film, even if it does use one of the more traditional forms of animation. It is not always straightforward and direct nor does it even try to keep the senses fully satisfied during every second. In fact, the soundtrack can be very quiet at times with only simple, low dB foley effects added in to what would otherwise be silent stretches with no music to dictate the emotions with. I can imagine that I probably would not have enjoyed it as a child, because my taste was limited to what fulfilled my superficial expectations.

But kids should be taken to see this just so they can experience something different, yet in a familiar format. There is a lot that's expressed with these characters. Much of the narrative deals with finding one's identity. Mr. Fox asks:

"Why a fox? Why not a horse, a beetle, or a bald eagle?"

But nevertheless he is a fox, and in his attempt to live up to his desire of being "fantastic," he does what he does best and hatches up a master plan to steal from some rather mean farmers who in turn seek vengeance. This gets not only Mr. Fox, but the surrounding community running for their lives. Meanwhile, his son deals with insecurity after the arrival of his perfect cousin.

The script is witty, at times hilarious, and layered and Anderson makes nice use of the photography. His quirky direction is fitting to the main idea presented: we are all different, but "there is something fantastic about that." We have our abilities and inabilities and I suppose we can change how we feel about them. In the end, we just are who we are and do what we do and sometimes it might mean that no matter what we do to redeem ourselves, we are just another dead rat behind a Chinese restaurant.

Up in the Air

Ryan Bingham is not Juno MacGuff. Don't see this movie just because the guy who did Juno did this too. If you have that mindset, it will disappoint. Juno is a character who starts out aimless and finds a more defined path for her life. Ryan starts out with a defined path for his life but winds up aimless by the end. The effect is unsettling and even unsatisfying if you're looking for a more traditional comedy.

What is great about Jason Reitman is that he shoots for the edit in this film. Every shot is carefully planned for both comedic and dramatic purposes. One scene in particular could be used to study directing and editing. It simply has Bingham going through a security check at an airport, but every little step involved with that procedure is shot and cut in rapid, harmonious succession with sound effects that make those blunt gray containers seem like weapons. Bingham is a warrior.

Several scenes include large American Airline posters in the background that read: "We Value your Loyalty." This underlines the defining concept of the film. Loyalty is a limited resource. Everyone has it invested in something, but what's going to provide the most return? There is much to be said about relationships, with characters that are loyal, disloyal and even indifferent, and the need "to make a connection" (as the tagline so cleverly tells us). This is a timeless story centered around the American Dream but yet is a snapshot of our time and the result of the current economy. People need to see this. It will reach out to them.

It is clear now that Juno was what it was because of Reitman. He brings a certain level of humanity to everything he does. Up in the Air deserves the title of Best Picture. It's the most all-around complete film of the year.

Oscar nominations for Picture, Director, Actor (Clooney), Supporting Actress (Kendrick and Farmiga), Adapted Screenplay and Film Editing. Reitman will pick up the first Oscar of his career for the screenplay. Kendrick will finish as the runner-up for Best Supporting Actress. The lone barrier between her and the statuette: Mo'Nique.

The Princess and the Frog

Not until the final month do we get this decade's first truly satisfying feature length animated musical from Disney (although there's only been a handful of attempts). This is a rebirth of Disney filmmaking in the traditional sense. To watch this movie is to watch something magical that hasn't happened in nearly a dozen years.

There are a variety of opinions concerning which Disney films of the Disney Renaissance era are better than others, but I'm going to take it upon myself to say that the last great traditional animated film was The Lion King in 1994. Good films still came out and Alan Menken continued to put together some wonderful soundtracks for the remainder of the decade, but the new millennium has not shown much promise.

What really sells The Princess and the Frog is that it tells a story worth telling (take note Dreamworks) and tells it well. As the second American protagonist (after Pocahantas), Tiana stands apart from many of the other Disney princesses as being the first to seek the American Dream. She aspires to own her own restaurant and works two jobs to save up enough money for the down payment. Unlike Ariel, Belle and Jasmine, she does not dream of an escape from her current lifestyle. She is satisfied until she hits a roadblock with her plans which then cues our inciting incident.

Along the way she learns to place family and relationships above her personal dreams. A very modern message to say the least. There is a particularly powerful moment when the villain tempts her with a virtual tour of the restaurant she desires to have and a flashback with her father.

Two years ago, Enchanted reminded us of what we were missing out on. For those of us whose childhood took place during the Renaissance era, it was a refreshing and extremely nostalgic experience to see Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz at work again. The filmmakers for that movie knew it too. The way in which the sequence for the catchy number "That's How You Know" plays out was... well, enchanting. My only disappointment with "The Princess and the Frog" is that it lacks a really moving score from Randy Newman and while the musical numbers are fun and energetic, what's missing is the one song that encompasses the emotions of the film the way "Beauty and the Beast" did for Beauty and the Beast or "A Whole New World" did for Aladdin. There is a song called "Almost There" that comes close, but for the life of me I couldn't seem to recall the tune after the film.

Alan Menken will fortunately be back with 2010's Repunzel. However, that movie will involve CGI with the "intention to look and feel like traditional hand-drawn animation" (a curious description indeed). Time will tell if Disney can get any momentum going off the wake of The Princess and the Frog, a film that deserves to take its place amongst the studio's numerous animated greats.

An Education

When you see this film (and you should) don't expect it to impress you on a superficial level. It won't satisfy the senses, the story-line won't necessarily leave you in awe, and the characters don't seem to go through the motions of intense dramatic moments that you would maybe expect to propel a character-driven piece (for example, I would say Rachel Getting Married undoubtedly had moments with intense drama). This is an internal story of a girl who wants to discover the world and when given the opportunity, lunges at it. Now, when put bluntly like that, you can probably guess that consequences resulting from her naivety will result. But this is life and it happens to us all.

Carey Mulligan will win a Golden Globe and (God bless her) ultimately go head-to-head against Meryl Streep for the Lead Actress Oscar. Her performance as Jenny doesn't make this character memorable for being a rarity, but rather she embodies all of us during our teenage years in the sense that her character is ready to commence adulthood and will do anything to get the process going. She is warm and charming, giddy and anxious, but yet she exerts as much caution as she knows how. What is most memorable is her laugh. You'll be happy and excited for her when she's happy and excited and you'll feel deeply for her when her world comes crashing down.

Gradually, Jenny begins to compromise herself and even though you know disaster lurks around the corner, it all seems rather acceptable while you're along for the ride. Her parents seem to fall into this same trap. As Jenny's father, Alfred Molina gives a superb take as a man who comes off as having plenty of confidence but finds himself torn down when his daughter is discovered to have been taken advantage of.

My lone complaint is that very little running time (in fact, probably only a handful of minutes) is devoted to Jenny's eventual redemption at the end of the film to really give the sense that something significant was accomplished. Nevertheless, when you see this movie you will see yourself in some way or another. You will watch something that you have either experienced or will experience and it will make you ponder what your "education" in life has consisted of.

Oscar nominations for Best Picture, Best Actress (Carey Mulligan), Supporting Actor (Alfred Molina), and Adapted Screenplay. Although Molina is a wild card. If he doesn't land a nomination, he'll be in the non-existent 6th or 7th slot.