So Here We Are (Final Oscar Wrap-Up)

21 thoughts on last night's Oscar ceremony...

• Hey Fister - if you're looking for your specs, they're perched on your forehead.
• Was Franco tweeting as he walked on stage?
• Please stop trying to impress me by dicking around with the set.
• Guess I gotta keep my eye out for a showing of IN A BETTER WORLD now, eh?
• Trying to decide if Kirk Douglas amused me or made me feel uncomfortable.
• I suddenly feel the urge to download "He Doesn't Own a Shirt"
• Think Randy Newman feels a bit like the 2007 Red Sox this morning?
• Actually Justin, I'm Banksy.
• Can't speak for y'all but I found Franco & Hathaway pretty charming - Anne especially seemed excited as hell to be there.
• The woman who won for designing the costumes for Alice musta been proud as punch to be collecting her award standing in front of a still from LORD OF THE RINGS, donchathink?
• "Congratulations nerds!" You rock James.
• To get a glimpse at Tom Hooper's future look up "Levinson, Barry"
• There was outrage in my living room at Corey Haim's omission from the 'In Memorium' montage (Not that it bothered me).
• Clearly, documentaries bore The Coen Brothers.
• "I shoulda got a haircut" My new hero = that guy.
• Continuing the overall theme of "meh", If I Rise might be the dullest song nominated yet.
• Was it my imagination, or did this year give us nothing but the most boring speeches?
• Cripes was that Best Picture montage ever spoiler-ific!
• For what it's worth I got 13 winners right - how'd y'all do?
• Got a grin when Spielberg reminded us all that GRAPES OF WRATH, RAGING BULL and CITIZEN KANE make up a noble fraternity of Best Picture also-rans.
• Would it have killed Oscar voters to come up with just one surprising win?

Hail Hail (83rd Academy Award Winners)

Complete list of winners for the 83rd Annual Oscars...

Best Picture: THE KING'S SPEECH
Best Director: Tom Hooper
Best Actor: Colin Firth
Best Actress: Natalie Portman
Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale
Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo
Best Original Screenplay: David Seidler, THE KING'S SPEECH
Best Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin, THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Animated Feature: TOY STORY 3
Best Foreign Feature: IN A BETTER WORLD
Best Documentary Feature: INSIDE JOB
Best Cinematography: INCEPTION
Best Editing: THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Art Direction: ALICE IN WONDERLAND
Best Costume Design: ALICE IN WONDERLAND
Best Make-Up: THE WOLFMAN
Best Original Score: THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Original Song: "We Belong Together" by Randy Newman, TOY STORY 3
Best Sound Mixing: INCEPTION
Best Sound Effects Editing: INCEPTION
Best Visual Effects: INCEPTION
Best Documentary Short: STRANGERS NO MORE
Best Animnated Short: THE LOST THING
Best Live Action Short: GOD OF LOVE

Play the Game (Hatter's 83rd Oscar Predictions)

Time to put up or shut up...

Best Picture: THE KING'S SPEECH
Best Director: David Fincher
Best Actor: Colin Firth
Best Actress: Natalie Portman
Best Supporting Actor: John Hawkes
Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo
Best Original Screenplay: Christopher Nolan, INCEPTION
Best Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin, THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Animated Feature: TOY STORY 3
Best Foreign Feature: INCENDIES
Best Documentary Feature: RESTREPO
Best Cinematography: TRUE GRIT
Best Editing: THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Art Direction: ALICE IN WONDERLAND
Best Costume Design: ALICE IN WONDERLAND
Best Make-Up: THE WOLFMAN
Best Original Score: THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Original Song: "We Belong Together" by Randy Newman, TOY STORY 3
Best Sound Mixing: THE SOCIAL NETWORK
Best Sound Effects Editing: INCEPTION
Best Visual Effects: INCEPTION
Best Documentary Short: KILLING IN THE NAME*
Best Animnated Short: DAY AND NIGHT*
Best Live Action Short: NA WEWE*

* I haven't seen many of the short nominees - these three are primarily blind guesses.

Champion (Oscar Predictions - Best Picture)

There can only be one. For all the hemming and hawing we've done over the last four weeks, it's time to put the money where the mouth is. While I'm really cool with any of these ten taking the top spot (there really isn't a weak link in the bunch...no SEABISCUIT if you will), I got a feeling I know how this will all play out. My thoughts on the Best Picture race after the jump

So first a little clarity on the voting process: Lets assume for a moment that we are in a particularly stellar year, and every film lands with around 10% of the vote except for one that eeks out an eleventh percent. Oscar will not give that film the prize. How it works is this: The number to hit is 2,889. Assuming every Academy member turns in their ballot, that would make 5,777 votes up for grabs. Once 50 percent of the electorate is on board with one title, we have a winner.

Voters are asked to rank the films from favorite to least. Let's say my own ballot went like this:

WINTER'S BONE
INCEPTION
TRUE GRIT
THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT
THE SOCIAL NETWORK
TOY STORY 3
THE KING'S SPEECH
THE FIGHTER
BLACK SWAN
127 HOURS

Supposing all the votes get counted, and no one film has reached 2889. At this point, the film with the least amount of support is out of contention, and its votes are then redistributed to the number two film listed on each (or discarded entirely if they don't note a number 2!).

So if WINTER'S BONE was the first film scratched - which it very well could be - my vote would then be counted in with INCEPTION'S lot. Still no 2889, repeat the last step with what is now the lowest film on the board. If INCEPTION was the next one out, my vote now gets given to TRUE GRIT.

In the long run, this means two things...

For starters, no love it/hate it film can take Best Picture under this system. If a film is one that wouldn't make most people's top five, it's done for. Call it the AVATAR effect.

Furthermore, this system indirectly encourages strategic voting. Let's say that you're a voter that really has a vendetta against Aronofsky, and you want to make sure that your vote in no way gets counted for him. Even though you might not completely believe it to be true, you could put BLACK SWAN in the tenth spot, leaving you safe in the knowledge that there's no way your vote can possibly get added to his tally. Sounds sorta cold, but I'll bet you it happens.

With that in mind, here's how I think it plays out.

Three films that should be honoured just to have been nominated are 127 HOURS, WINTER'S BONE and THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT. All three got some healthy exposure thanks to their nominations, and in a time when many are questioning the ten nomination system, I point to these three quality films as a reason to keep the system intact. They never would have landed one of the five spots, and yet have all benefitted from the audience uptick.

Another film that will be off the board early is INCEPTION - the lack of a directing nomination for Christopher Nolan pretty much assures that. This is a film that is truly important in the grand scheme of things, since it proves to the studios that a big budgeted original blockbuster is possible in the right hands, and that not every tentpole release needs to be based on a comic book, TV show, or franchise. It maight make some noise in the technical categories, but it's out of the running here.

After coming on strong around Christmas, THE FIGHTER has waned late in the season. While it is a passable film, it's a movie that relies heavily on its cast and if it stood any chance here, it would have needed to pick up the SAG award for best ensemble...like INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS last year, or LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE a few years before. It's fall isn't the worst thing, since it's easily the slightest of all nominees in this category.

Remember when I mentioned that for a film to be in contention, it has to be within a voter's top five? This actually works in favour of TOY STORY 3. Really, who's going to dislike it that much that they would have it at the bottom of the list? One could even argue that its chances are increased if some voters use it as a way to honour the whole trilogy! When the dust settles, Pixar will be too overmatched...but I'd wager that this film has more of an influence in the final vote than many of us give it credit for.

I really would like to say that BLACK SWAN is in a position to play spoiler, but unfortunately there will be voters just too put off by it's dark and odd melodrama. Thus while many will like it enough to give it a boost, there will be just as many who despise it and peg it down at 9 or 10, if they even include it on their ballot at all. In a perfect world, the film would have enough momentum to make this race interesting...but I fear that too many voters didn't fall for it like so many of us did.

Indeed the spoiler this year is TRUE GRIT. It's an audience favorite, made by Oscar darlings, with enough broad support to distract from the heavyweight fight. Remakes fare surprisingly well in Oscar's historyand this particular remake seems to have captured people's imagination. It would need a little bit of help to get there, but in reality it is indeed one of the three titles that could be called out at the end of the night.

Grumpy as it might make some (myself included), THE SOCIAL NETWORK's chances aren't good. None of the directing, producing, or acting guilds rallied around it...and many of the people who vote on those awards will be voting in this popularity contest. The reasons behind their apathy are varied:

It's too emotionally cold.
It has an unlikeable protagonist.
It's too young.
It feels very of-the-moment.
It's not a prestige picture.

Add 'em all up, and you make the film ripe to be passed over. Not saying I agree with it, just tellin' ya how it is.

Which brings us to THE KING'S SPEECH which is the opposite of everything I just said. Nobody will argue that THE KING'S SPEECH is a bad film, even if they like something else better - thus it has that 'no-less-than-fifth' angle going for it.

What's most important is the fact that THE KING'S SPEECH had Harvey Weinstein pushing it through the PR machine that leads up to the awards, and there are few people in Hollywood who know how to play the game better than Harvey. More than anything else, this vote is political...and when when a film's PR can make it speak loud & clear to the broadest base of voters, then it will be politically successful. THE KING'S SPEECH is the favourite in this category by a healthy magian, and anything less than a touchdown must be seen as a major upset.

The Hatter's Pick... Did I bloody-well stammer? THE KING'S SPEECH takes the prize

Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Director race.

The Headmaster Ritual (Oscar Predictions - Best Director)

Oscar can be counted on for certain trends.

An affinity to docs that aren't commercially successful.
Honouring an actor for a lesser role to make up for a great role they overlooked.
Period films usually take awards for costume and art direction.

Oh, and the film that wins Best Picture almost always goes hand in hand with the award for Best Director.

But every once in a while, things take a turn and there's a split...which is what I believe we're headed towards this year. I'll get into the Best Picture side of the split tomorrow, but today take a look after the jump where I get into the nitty-gritty of this year's award for Best Director.

Right off the opening tip, David O. Russell is done. He does deserve a lot of credit for coming into THE FIGHTER as a hired gun and working a bit of alchemy to elevate it above its pedestrian trappings...but that's all the credit he'll be getting this year. This nomination should do a lot for a guy who was quickly getting a reputation in Hollywood of being wickedly difficult to work with. Maybe this will help him get his stalled auteur project (nailed) out of hock.

Any other year, I'd wager that The Coen Brothers could play spoiler, especially after tapping into the audience at large in a way they haven't done in a long time. But as anxious as Oscar is to award visionary directors, it actually takes a lot of doing to turn the trick twice. That's not to say that they won't nab another directing award eventually, but this won't be the year.

If there's a spoiler in the bunch, I believe it could be Darren Aronofsky. Should the two front runners in the category split the voting body, the support for BLACK SWAN could translate into an unexpected victory. Odd things have happened in the category before...think Polanski in 2002, or Soderbergh just two years before that. At the very least, the nomination affirms this vanguard director's place in Hollywood's elite and promises more support for his vision going forward.

Tom Hooper has to be the favorite at this point thanks to his DGA win and the wicked amount of support for THE KING'S SPEECH. (I wonder how many times I've typed the words "support for KING'S SPEECH" this week?) To be crystal clear, in the last 25 years the DGA Award winner has gone on to take the Oscar all but four times. If there's a statistical knock against Hooper, it's that he's a relative newcomer. KING'S SPEECH is only his third feature, and historically this tends to be a category that likes to reward a filmmaker for a body of work...or entire legacy if your name is Martin Scorsese.

The subtlety of Hooper's directing, combined with his new arrival on the scene could pave the way for a split. Whether or not Oscar "gets" THE SOCIAL NETWORK, it seems as though everybody is impressed by David Fincher's vision for the story. Like Aaron Sorkin's contribution to the film, Fincher's direction undeniably elevates the film to being so much more than "The Facebook Movie". The project seems to bring together all of the very best tricks Fincher has learned over his career, and patched them together in an unforgettable way. What it adds up to might be just enough to give Fincher the award in what would be a minor upset. Hooper might already have a DGA Award in hand, but now the voting will be up to more than just directors...and you gotta believe that there are quite a few of the younger Academy members wanting to give "The Director of SE7EN" the gold.

The Hatter's Pick... Fincher makes for a minor upset.

Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Director race.

Stars and Sons (Oscar Predictions - Best Actress & Actor)

On to the big dogs; The achievements that will forever be mentioned above actors' names in trailers for whatever films they do in the future. The exclusive club that includes such Hollywood royalty as Nicolas Cage, Roberto Begnini, Helen Hunt, and Cher. (Yeah, I know: I'm a twerp).

Predictions for Best Actor and Best Actress after the jump.

One of these two categories is a lock, so we'll begin there.

Javier Bardem owes Julia Roberts a car. She was the one who really championed his nomination in the run-up to Oscar season. Lo & behold it came to be. Bardem is good in this film, as he always is in every one of his films, but he doesn't do anything with BIUTIFUL that he didn't already do in THE SEA INSIDE, NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, or VICKY CRISTINA BARCELONA.

Jesse Eisenberg should be awful proud of himself for being nominated so young. Other men nominated before the age of 28 include John Travolta, James Dean, and Orson Welles. That's some amazing company! Where he goes with it now is what will matter most.

James Franco's inclusion in the category is hopefully a sign that he has finally turned a corner. He's always shown a lot of promise, but sadly that promise was being wasted in films like ANNAPOLIS and FLYBOYS. Nowadays, with work like HOWL, MILK, and certainly what he was able to achieve in 127 HOURS (where he carries the entire film)...he is showing us what he is really capable of. If the hosting job doesn't cushion the blow of losing the award, I'm sure his University studies will...or his poetry writing...or his directing...or his soap opera work..or...

Jeff Bridges' work in TRUE GRIT frustrates me to no end. It frustrates me because it is miles ahead of what he did last year in CRAZY HEART. But everybody in Oscarland felt the urge to reward him last year: because he's so well-liked, because it was his time, because, because, because... Proud of yourself now voters? Bridges came right back and gave us something even meatier to gnaw on, but you already rewarded him for a lesser part. And since his name isn't Tom Hanks, we know he's not winning.

If there's a solace to be had, it's the fact that the guy who should have won last year, is who will win this year. Colin Firth was heartbreaking in A SINGLE MAN, and is about to rightfully get his due in THE KING'S SPEECH. At least in this case, there is less of a disconnect than there was between Bridges two roles. His performance was the stuff of determination, charm, and fortitude and he will rightfully be honoured on Sunday night.

The Hatter's Pick... Bet the farm on Firth

Best Actress is a tad more unclear, but is only a two-horse race.

Two women are well out of the running, and in each case its a shame. Michelle Williams and Jennifer Lawrence were both illuminating in their respective films, and both had to go to some very bleak places emotionally to achieve what they did. For Williams, it's another gold star on what is quietly becoming a very impressive resume, and for Lawrence it was a coming out party. Hopefully it's not the last time we hear either name in this category.

Nicole Kidman is likewise an also-ran in this category, but for her the victory is a return-to-form. After a long string of puzzling role choices in the last decade, she found a role that really gave her a chance to show what she does best. It's not an easy part, and certainly one that lends itself to melodrama - but Kidman turns it into something deeply moving, and for that lands herself on the shortlist. Don't get too used to this kind of quality from her yet - her next flick is a Nicolas Cage vehicle.

That leaves the big duke-a-roo, with Annette Bening in one corner and Natalie Portman in the other corner. This is Bening's third nomination in the category. This time she doesn't have to worry about getting passed over for Hilary Swank, however she is in a dogfight with an ingenue again. Take Helene Mirren out of the equation, and this certainly has been an ingenue's category over the last ten years or so...thus, one must give an edge to Portman.

However, it's a slight edge and one can't help but feel a slight groundswell of support for Bening. Is that groundswell, and her impressive track record enough to pull a rabbit out of the hat when it matters? Maybe not...but you gotta admit, it's been a fun race to try and predict!

The Hatter's Pick... Portman by a nose

Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Actor & Actress races.

Perfect Symmetry (Oscar Predictions - Best Supporting Actress & Actor)

Today the Oscar predictions continue as we look at the bit players (or mostly bit players if we're ignoring TRUE GRIT). Those boozers, bawlers and brawlers that made the movies they were in that much more compelling. Come along beyond the jump for a breakdown of who might win for Best Supporting Actress and Best Supporting Actor.

It pains me deeply to say that Jacki Weaver will have the night off. While her part in ANIMAL KINGDOM is a big piece of what makes the movie work, and a truly fascinating bit of acting, the flick is just far too underexposed to build any sort of true contention. Pity.

Amy Adams can likewise forget about fretting over who she has to thank, since her contribution in THE FIGHTER was not only overshadowed...but overshadowed within this very category. Adams continues to come back to good roles in good projects, so here's hoping that this recognition keeps her looking to continue making good decisions.

Helena Bonham-Carter was once an also-ran in this category, but the momentum built for THE KING'S SPEECH just cannot be discounted. She is heavily outmatched by the boys she shares the screen with, but in the past, certain films have just grabbed Oscar's attention with both hands and refuses to let go until every last award has been shaken loose. This award is usually handed out early, so if Bonham-Carter takes it, you'll know fast where the night is headed.

Melissa Leo seemingly has this award, and rightfully so. Her acting in THE FIGHTER walks brazenly right up to the line of charicature, but never crosses over. The way she rocks that accent, that look of disapproval, that command over the greek chorus of daughters...and yes, the hair...is the stuff of legend. But - in recent weeks she has been a little less than forthcoming on the campaign circuit. Oscar has been known to get fickle and her refusal to play the game could cost her (though it didn't hurt Mo'Nique last year).

Such pettiness, and vote-splitting could open the door for Hailee Steinfeld. Oscar voters obviously liked TRUE GRIT a lot, and this might just be one of the few chances to reward it and spread the love around. Likewise, a juvenile actor winning in this category isn't unheard of (Patty Duke, Tatum O'Neil, and Anna Paquin all took this trophy before their seventeenth birthdays). Should it happen, chalk it up to campaign brilliance. The TRUE GRIT pr folk knew she didn't stand a chance in the Portman/Benning dogfight. By pushing her in this category, Steinfeld is suddnely very much a contender.

The Hatter's Pick... Melissa Leo weathers the storm to come out golden.

Like Supporting Actress, the Supporting Actor category also has a pair of guarenteed also-rans.

Mark Ruffalo and Jeremy Renner have little else to do on Sunday but wave to the red carpet onlookers, laugh at Hathaway/Franco's jokes, and look gracious in defeat. In the case of Renner, back-to-back nominations looks pretty good on him - especially after coming out of relative obscurity.

If you'd asked me in December, I'd have offered that Christian Bale had this category locked, but that's why they don't hand out Oscars in December. Since THE FIGHTER's opening, Bale's star has come back down to earth a bit. Could it be due to malaise for what many are calling a very pedestrian film? Could it be that the hype piqued too early? Could it be that people are remembering that Mr. Bale can sometimes be difficult to work with?? Whatever the reason, a win for the once-and-future-Batman isn't the slam dunk it was just eight weeks ago.

Bale's biggest fight will be holding off Geoffrey Rush in THE KING'S SPEECH. The film has run a tremendous campaign, and at every turn Rush has gained an increasing amount of support. Not that I really believe Rush has done anything extraordinary, in fact he's really just playing "Geoffrey Rush", but the man has a lot of momentum on his side. He could ride that momentum all the way to the podium...

...but then there's John Hawkes.

WINTER'S BONE achieved quite a lot by nabbing its four nominations, as multiple nods for a film this small are still wickedly rare. The film definitely has the exposure, and that exposure could benefit John Hawkes. From all accounts, this is a guy who is well liked, and his part in the film has a stoic violence that sticks with viewers well after the credits have rolled. I'd like to believe that there is a surprise or two in our future, and this is where I think it'll happen.

The Hatter's Pick... Hawkes pulls a Marica Gay-Harden and makes for the shock of the night.

Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Supporting Actor & Supporting Actress races.

Story To Be Told (Oscar Predictions - Best Adapted & Original Screenplay)

We're less than one week away from Hollywood's big night. As you might have noticed, I've spent much of the last few weeks watching films nominated in the top eight categories. So now that I've soaked up all of these nominated screenplays, performances, direction and pictures...it's time to put my money where my mouth is.

Let's start today with the writing. My thoughts on adapted and original screenplay after the jump.

Adapted Screenplay is an interesting category, as it is such a strong group of contenders but such an open-and-shut slot.

WINTERS BONE has achieved so much since its debut back at Sundance, and Debra Granik's nomination in this category can mean nothing but good things for her future as a filmmaker and screenwriter. But WINTER'S BONE is not THE SOCIAL NETWORK.

127 HOURS is a case of mining a source material to sculpt the very best film possible. I actually read Aron Ralston's memoir this winter. While it's a decent read, I can tell you that it isn't nearly as captivating as the treatment that Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy conjured from this life-or-death tale. Their achievement is admirable, but 127 HOURS is not THE SOCIAL NETWORK.

TOY STORY 3 is being honoured here not only as a nod to the whole trilogy (note: Part 1 was also nominated for Best Screenplay), but also for how it wonderfully closes off the whole series. Closing it off well wasn't a certainty - Google Disney's original concept for the film. The Pixar Dream Team really achieved something special in this conclusion to the TOY STORY trilogy, but TOY STORY 3 is not THE SOCIAL NETWORK.

TRUE GRIT's nomination could be seen on the surface as Oscar's love-in with The Coen Brothers continuing full tilt. But before we chalk it up to lazy nominating, we should consider the dark humour that the western is infused with, and likewise the tonal deviation from the original classic. But TRUE GRIT is not...well, you get the idea.

Yes, Aaron Sorkin's script for THE SOCIAL NETWORK is that much of a lock. Oddly, it's the only lock for this film that started the awards season as the front-runner to best. Credit has to be given not only for the rat-a-tat rhythm of the dialogue, but likewise for how it took "The Facebook Story" and infused it with so much human drama. How this film ages remains to be seen, but as of now there's no denying that it wouldn't have achieved everything is has without that stellar screenplay.

The Hatter's Pick... Bet the farm on THE SOCIAL NETWORK, bitch.

For starters in the original screenplay category, there's THE FIGHTER - which actually perplexes me with its inclusion in this category. There were a lot of things about THE FIGHTER I liked, but its simplistic script wasn't one of them and likely won't win over any voters either. Thanks for showing up!

Two years ago I noted that Mike Leigh is the sort of talent Oscar tends to nominate every time out, and ANOTHER YEAR did nothing to dissuade me from that stance. That's not to say that the nomination is undeserving (it's a fabulous script actually), but Leigh is a darkhorse in this crowd.

A script that is definitely in play is Lisa Cholodenko's script for THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, which she co-wrote with Stuart Blumberg. In the past, Oscar has used this category to reward the smaller stories (JUNO, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE) and the timely stories (MILK, THELMA & LOUISE). Giving the gold to KIDS could kill two birds with one stone and reward this indie gem. It's a screenplay that is certainly in the mix.

THE KING'S SPEECH is definitely riding a wave of support heading into Oscar night, and the wave could easily send it right into a win in this category. While its script isn't nearly as witty or original as some of its co-nominees, it's still a very good story...one that provides the framework for this front-running film. Should SPEECH get on to a bit of a roll Sunday night, this award could be its for the taking.

But then there's Christopher Nolan. Despite being elbowed out of the running for Best Director, Nolan is up for two awards and this very well could be the place that Oscar recognizes his achievement. Lest we forget that one of the best things that INCEPTION had going for it, was the fact that many were hailing it as an intelligent blockbuster...one that proved people would come out in droves to see an action film with brains. Might Oscar remember that little stunt? Or is the nomination all the film gets to savour before the kick??

The Hatter's Pick... Barring a KING'S SPEECH freight train, INCEPTION gets its totem.

Whaddaya think folks? Leave comments with your own thoughts on possibilities and predictions of the Best Screenplay races.

Doubleback: WAKING SLEEPING BEAUTY

At least once or twice this winter, the conversation of whether animated features should qualify for best picture has come up around the blogosphere. To those who still count themselves amongst the naysayers, have I got a movie for you...a doc about Disney's renaissance from 1984 to 1994 called WAKING SLEEPING BEAUTY.

The doc is a fascinating look at what went on behind the scenes at the House of Mouse, and how people like Frank Wells, Roy Disney, Michael Eisner, and Jeffrey Katzenberg helped restore it to glory. Seems like an odd thought, doesn't it? Restoring Disney to glory?? Perhaps that's because for most of the readers of this blog - and certainly for the dude writing it - Disney has always seemed to have a glorious place on the motion picture landscape. Well, it wasn't always so gang.

Later on in his life, Walt took a disinterest in the animated films his studio was producing, excited more by the theme parks, live action films and television programs. That disinterest, and the legacy it left can be seen in the quality of the animated features the studio was cranking out from 1968 onward. What this doc illustrates (no pun intended) is the manner in which the old guard were passing on that malaise to a new generation of animators.

Faced with potentially shutting down the entire animated division, Disney did something radical. Spearheaded by Roy's suggestion, they brought in outside talent to run the show for the first time ever. Hiring Katzenberg, Wells, and Eisner led to a change in how business was done, a rekindling of the imagination for the artists involved, and a return to glory for this once proud studio.

Of course, when you throw imaginations and egos like these into a room, there's bound to be bloodshed. To that end the doc does a great job of showing you all of the forensic evidence.

But back to my opening point. WAKING SLEEPING BEAUTY (surprisingly) was made with Disney's co-operation...which means its bursting with bits and bytes of animated classics like WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, THE LITTLE MERMAID, BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, ALADDIN, and THE LION KING. These are the classics of a generation, and while every single one of them are Oscar winners, only one of them was able to score a nomination as Best Picture (BEAUTY AND THE BEAST in 1991).

Face it gang, these are the films that many of us grew up on, and that many of us will raise (or are already raising) our own kids on. Seeing the story of how they turned a whole studio around was rather amazing, and seeing those clips instantly made me want to go on a dvd-watching bender for the titles at hand.

That's what a 'best picture' should do...animated or not.

Review: ANOTHER YEAR * * * 1/2

Many of the films I've seen over the last few months have been real-life stories of families trying to weather great stresses. The very fabric of their bonds feels worn down to its last thread, and time after time they struggle just to make it through another day.

Then there's ANOTHER YEAR...

The story of a couple that care about each other so much that they have plenty of warmth left over for their friends who truly need it. After seeing so many stories of struggling relationships, it's safe to say that this movie could not have come at a better time.

ANOTHER YEAR is the story of Gerri and Tom Hepple (Ruth Sheen and Jim Broadbent). It gives us a year in the life of this loving couple, who may be getting on in years but still obviously love each other very much. Not only do they love each other, but they have a great deal of love for their friends and family whom they regularly welcome into their home.

There's Ken, an old friend of Tom's who comes by in the summer months to catch up with his old friends. Ken and Tom obviously go back a ways, and it seems like Tom is still holding on to who Ken was rather than truly engaging who he is. In no uncertain terms, Ken is a mess. He's a slob, he's directionless, and he almost seems to have given up on the world. Nevertheless, Gerri and Tom care for him "warts and all". They aren't the sort to push someone away just because they're wasting potential.

There's also Ronnie, Tom's brother. Ronnie's meagre life gets turned upside down, and it would appear as though he doesn't have anyone else to turn to. What's worse, is that Ronnie's relationship with his son Carl has turned volatile. Not ones to leave family out in the cold, Gerri and Tom invite Ronnie to come and live with them. They are the sort to reach out to family at such times, and not leave them to fend for themselves.

But most of all there's Mary (Leslie Manville). More than any of their friends, Mary is the one whom Tom & Gerri give the most of themselves to. There's no special reason for her to have a place of honour - she's no worse off than someone like Ken or Ronnie. She just seems to be around rather often, usually drifting over the line of friendship and wandering into the land of imposition. Mary is rather mixed-up, and with that mixed-up feelings come a certain level of neediness.

This sad neediness that Mary exudes might push some people to lash out in frustration...but Tom & Gerri aren't exactly "some people"

The charm of ANOTHER YEAR is the way it structures itself around the passing and changing of the seasons. That passage of time is echoed warmly with the gardening habits of Tom & Gerri. They give each other constant care and attention, and as such are able to harvest the joys of life year after year.

Conversely, Mary feels like a patch of garden that has gone untended for many many season, and as such is unable to harvest any sort of fruits of happiness. What's sad is that Mary doesn't seem all that interested in sorting herself out. We've all met someone like her: Those who only want to whine about their lot in life. They don't want tea and sympathy so much as they want wine and complacency.

Mannville plays this role amazingly. She finds a charm that would in fact have you agreeing to go for a drink after work, and as she's allowed to talk (and talk, and talk) she makes you want to make up a lie about suddenly being needed quite urgently.

Writer and director Mike Leigh has created something rather special with ANOTHER YEAR. He has created a very plausible story, and infused it with a lot of reaffirming truth. With Gerri & Tom he's given us a how-to on how to make a loving relationship endure, and likewise taught us that a home is meant to be shared with the special people in our lives that we inevitably don't spend enough time with.

The movie isn't sexy, and as such can easily get glossed over at a multiplex (If one can even find a multiplex playing it). However, the fact that it's constructed around plausible characters carries quite a bit of currency. Characters like these feel familiar...they could be our neighbours, our co-workers, even relatives we should be spending more time with.

Not only are they plausible, but in many ways they are a rarity. This is a world where what was once a seven-year-itch is now down to three years, and people are letting go of what they gave so much of themselves to with greater and greater ease.

As it happens, I probably know more people who act like Mary than I do like Gerri & Tom - and that's what makes this story so bittersweet. Its central characters come across as the sort of people who live such a simple life, when in reality what they have - and how it endured through year after another year -likely took a lot of time, work, and patience.

What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions to ANOTHER YEAR.

Days of The Week (Films Watched 2/12 - 2/18)

Got back up to my usual habit this week, and might have even made it another ten-spot had the subway not broken down last night forcing me to make a long walk home.

Funny thing about the week's watches; In the last week I went to as many screenings as I did the entire month of January!

The last two weeks have largely been about watching new stuff than re-watching ones I own. I'm sure this sort of trend won't continue...hell spring training began this week, so baseball will soon take over my TV, on nights when I'm not down at the ballyard myself.

But to the week at hand...


Screenings
TIME BANDITS - Many thanks to Danger Girl for suggesting this film so many moons ago. I truly did enjoy the hell out of it.
ANATOMY OF A MURDER - A fun night out with Lady Hatter and my parents. Remember when you were younger and seeing a movie with your parents was so uncool?
BIUTIFUL - Still boggled by how much I didn't care for this.
ANOTHER YEAR - Beautiful in its subtlety.

Blu-Rays/DVD's I've Never Seen
ARTHUR - I can totally see Russel Brand doing well in this remake.
PRIDE OF THE YANKEES - You'll never guess how it ends.
YANKEE DOODLE DANDY - I waited two whole hours for a scene about baseball, talk about disappointing!
SENSE & SENSIBILITY - Jane Austin seemed apropos for Valentine's Day
BLOODY SUNDAY - Very poignant.

Blu-Rays/DVD's I've Watched Before
RESTREPO - Wouldn't be very surprised if this took Best Documentary next weekend.


Boxscore for The Year
30 First-Timers, 29 Re-Watched
59 Movies in Total

How's about you - seen anything good?

Twist My Arm

Today, I Feel Like This...

(That'd be me on the right)

Everybody's Talkin' 2 - 18 (Chatter From Other Bloggers)

Take the subject of that photo. Add it to the fact that I'm off work today. Top it off with some unseasonably warm weather here in the city, and what you get is one happy Hatter.

Before I get to this week's link, I feel like telling y'all something for the sake of posterity. Tomorrow I'll be going to a theatre to see an old movie that I have long resisted watching. Why am I finally seeing it now? Because I'm told "It's awesome" and that I'll love it. I am going into this with an open mind and hoping to be entertained.

Just felt like jotting that down. Just in case.

But enough of that noise, a long weekend awaits!!


For your listening and reading enjoyment, I give you...

With the Oscars just over a week away, Simon & Jo waste no time in covering three Oscar nominated films on their latest show. Give a listen to their discussion about ANIMAL KINGDOM, INSIDE JOB, and TRUE GRIT.

Rachel isn't satisfied and wants to do it again (You're welcome).

Came across a new blog this week. Take a gander at The Smoking Pen who celebrated Valentines Day by rhyming off some of the most badass couples in movie history.

The Kid in the Front Row might have just created the most eloquent blog post I've ever read.

Marya the Awards Fanatic has been keeping herself busy looking at the Oscar track record of film noir.

Looks like Nick's 60/60 series gave him a new dose of awesome. Check out his thoughts on ANNIE HALL.

Enjoy!

Review: BIUTIFUL * 1/2

This world seems to be filled with equal parts beauty and tragedy. It's easy to get so caught up in one, and forget about the other...thus what often happens is fate shoves something at us to balance the scales back out. The trick is to take it all, and be able to make enough sense of it.

But there's the rub, sometimes we can't make sense of it...not even in the movies.

BIUTIFUL is the story of Uxbal (Javier Bardem). There are three truths about this man that will be the thrust of the film...

Uxbal can commune with the recently dead. He is able to give surviving family members a sense of peace. Prayers are conveyed, secrets are unlocked, everybody goes home happy. Oh, and Uxbal gets paid.

Uxbal is facilitating black market entrepreneurs in Barcelona. He is working with a pair of exploitive Chinese men who have a dungeon of mistreated workers cranking out pirated goods. Uxbal then hands them over to street merchants who sell them to tourists. Uxbal wants to be cautious about this venture so as to keep things running. Unfortunately, dealers selling where they aren't supposed to, a basement full of immigrants in shoddy conditions, and local cops less willing to turn a blind eye are aligning against his hard work.

Finally, Uxbal is suffering from an aggressive type of cancer. It has made things complicated with his ex-wife (which of course were plenty complicated already), and forced him to cherish what time he still has with his two young children.
BIUTIFUL is a cinematic paradox. It is a sprawling film in every way possible. Its pace, its visuals, its structure, its score...even its runtime. That's not to say that sprawl is a bad thing to aim for: some of the best films are stories that sprawl and unfurl with much detail to be pondered through repeat viewings. The paradox is the fact that all of this sprawl is dedicated to one rather ordinary man.

The ballad of Uxbal should be just that - a ballad. It should be a character piece about a man trying to deal with his mortality, and what it will mean to those he loves. It works best when it's intricate and subtle. It should leave us wanting to spend more time with this man to understand him better, and wanting to watch a scene again to pick up on his every facial tick. It should not go and go and go until I feel like I could give you a complete profile on the man right down to his shoe size and social security number.

Instead of a ballad, BIUTIFUL seems like a tome - one that isn't out to tell you a story so much as it is prepared that you will eventually just give up and stop listening. At the core of BIUTIFUL are three disjointed narrative threads - Uxbal's health, his relation to the exploited workers, and his ability to commune with the recently deceased. Beyond the fact that this seemingly adds up to one thread too many, they play at a complete disconnect.

I can't say I blame Iñárritu for trying: if anything he tried too hard. He has dotted this film with more throwaway elements of elegance than most movies manage at full-throttle. The problem is, that he's never able to bring them back to what's happening in the story. They become disruptions more than accents. What's worse, they take what could be an achingly beautiful tale and make it feel painfully long.

It pains me to say that, because in doses there are a lot of things to like about this movie. Javier Bardem plays tortured so very well, and carries himself in a manner that offsets his sorrow and pain with a healthy dose of determination. He plays Uxbal as a man who looks like he could start weeping at any moment, but is far too proud to let anybody see him in such a state.

Likewise, the story does have moments of true heartbreak and genuine shock. There is true tragedy afoot within BIUTIFUL, with scenarios as upsetting as anything I've seen this year - and I've seen some upsetting shit this year! Then it's all framed so artistically. I desperately wanted to hail avant garde images of birds flocking, but there's only so much avant garde I can handle.

Eventually you have to stop teasing me with avant garde, and finally just get to the "garde".

You know how sometimes you'll get different types of friends together and they don't really mesh? The work friends are on one end of the table, the family friends at the other end, and the neighbourhood friends at a whole other table...and none of 'em are intermingling? That's BIUTIFUL.

What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions to BIUTIFUL.

Freaks (X-MEN FIRST CLASS Trailer)

It seems as though over the past ten days we've been bombarded with trailers for the popcorn movies that next summer will offer us. Some look better than expected, others look to disappoint. If there's one that looks right on the money though, it's this one for me.

Fair warning everyone: There's gonna be a lot of comic book action next summer...with four superhero stories on tap. Then in summer 2012 we do it all again with SUPERMAN, DARK KNIGHT RISES, AMAZING SPIDER-MAN and THE AVENGERS. We have brought this on ourselves gang - I will hear no bitching!

For me, this looks like the most interesting one to come this year, perhaps because that cast just goes and goes...

Falling for The First Time (Talkin' GHOSTBUSTERS with Tom Clift)

You may recall that late last year, I started this series where I get my fellow movie-lovers to check out some 80's and 90's pop culture touchstones that they might have missed to see how they hold up to a fresh pair of eyes.

So far, the entries in this series - THE BREAKFAST CLUB, BACK TO THE FUTURE, and FERRIS BEULLER'S DAY OFF - were films I thought would hold up beautifully. "Not so much" would be a more apt description as my fellow bloggers all seemed to come back with an "It was OK" reaction.

This brings us to a film I dug very much as a kid, but one that I didn't think would stand up all that well: GHOSTBUSTERS. Take a look beyond the jump to see what Tom, our friend down under thought of the 80's staple.

MH: Any particular expectations going in?

TC: I think Ghostbusters is generally considered as one of the all time classic comedies. On top of that, I’m a big Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd fan based on their other work. So I’d say my expectations were fairly high.

MH: I've grown to learn that high expectations are never a good thing, especially where older films are concerned. So with stakes like those, how well did it fare for you?

TC: I definitely liked it, but it won’t make a list of best comedies in my book. Bill Murray was really entertaining as always, and there were acouple of brilliant lines (“It’s true. This man has no dick”), but overall there weren’t as many laugh out loud moments as I was expecting.

MH: Interesting. I remember laughing out loud at it quite a bit, but that's more likely because it wasn't hard to make me laugh at the age of seven. (Come to think of it, it's still not very hard to make me laugh).

TC: Also, as ridiculous as this may sound, I had trouble a lot of trouble with the films believability. It seemed awfully convenient that all these ghosts were arriving just as the heroes had set up a ghost extermination business.

MH: I didn't get the impression that these ghosts were just "showing up"...more that there was now someone who could actually do something about it. Like an especially good rat catcher showing up in Manhattan.

TC: That’s definitely true…it’s not that I had trouble believing in the existence of ghosts, because obviously within the world of the movie, they exist. I just guess I wasn’t entirely satisfied with how they built that world. Ghosts were just sort of suddenly there.

MH: Or were they always there and people in this movie just didn't want to admit it?

TC: There’s that scene early on where Peter Venkman is chastised by the university for carrying out experiments in the field of parapsychology, so it’s established that the supernatural phenomenon aren’t commonplace or widely observed. And yet fifteen minutes later we get a montage showing the Ghostbusters extermination paranormal beings all over the place. It just felt awfully inconsistent and a bit convenient.

MH: You're trying to apply logic to a film where I have to buy Dan Akroyd and Bill Murray as scientific geniuses. You realize that, right? What about the film'e "eightiesness", how dated does it seem now?

TC: It’s definitely dated. It’s sort of hard to put your finger on it, but comedies from this time period tend to have a certain feel to them.I’m not sure if I’m used to a more raunchy or more rapid fire style of humour, but eighties comedies often feel a little like they’re trying to be funny...like the characters are delivering jokes rather than just speaking dialogue that feels naturally funny. Aside from that (and the effects, which are obviously dated, but not in a way that really detracts from the film), the other thing that seemed really out of date was the music choices. Decidedly eighties!

MH: I will strike you down for blasphemy if you try to speak ill of that legendary theme song!

TC: The song is still awesome. Obviously even though I only just saw the film, I’d heard the song long before. It’s pretty rare, especially these days, for a film to have such an iconic song, and it was just really cool to finally see it/hear it in the context of the movie

MH: Alright, you dodge an ass-kicking for now. Back to the comedic timing...have you seen films like MEATBALLS or STRIPES that used many of the same people and is likewise seen as a comedic classic? I'm wondering how GHOSTBUSTERS compares to those as the rhythms are very much the same.

TC: Honestly, I have a pretty serious gap in my film knowledge around that era. I do have a few favourites though, including BILL & TED'S EXCELLENT ADVENTURE, BACK TO THE FUTURE, BLUES BROTHERS and FERRIS BEULLER, all of which I find far funnier than Ghostbusters. All of those films are ones I first saw between about the ages of about eight and twelve (on DVD or on television), so I wouldn’t be surprised if I’m being affected by nostalgia.

I recently rewatched BILL & TED, and I knew in my heart of hears that a lot of the humour was pretty weak and enormously dated. I’d say that might be the same for fans of GHOSTBUSTERS. I think we all have movies from our youth we view through rose coloured glasses.

MH: I agree - which is why I started this series. I actually wanted to assail some of these films I mistakenly believe are bad-ass.

Was there anything in particular that stood out for you as a highpoint? (I remember particularly enjoying the final showdown as a kid.)

TC: I definitely enjoyed the Stay-Puff Marshmallow Man. Like the song, I think it was because I knew it was coming, and it was cool to finally see the famous sequence that I’ve seen and heard referenced so many times.

The other moment that immediately springs to mind is the scene where Venkman is rigging the ESP test so he can seduce a girl. I thought that was a really good way of introducing his character.

MH: So there we go, not a complete waste of time, right? On a scale of 1 to 5, we give GHOSTBUSTERS...?

TC: I think it’s a solid 3.5 - Generally funny, but without the nostalgia I don't think it’s anything particularly special.

Midnight Radio: The Matineecast Episode 28

First and foremost, some national pride to take care of: Congrats to Arcade Fire on their Grammy for Album of The Year!

So this is the episode where the tweaks begin, and again I must thank everybody for their fantastic notes on The Matineecast (Though Mister Columb - I'd still like you to resend yours). There's one or two implemented here, with more to come in future episodes.

While I don't believe it was specifically mentioned in the feedback y'all sent me, this is also the episode that begins the trend of return guests, and what better way to start than to go almost all the way back to the beginning, and bring back the first guest who wasn't either married to me or an old high school friend. And the best part about talking to this cat again: It felt just like old times.

Here's the Al Leiter episode...



(Go here or to iTunes if the embedded player doesn't start)

Here's what's in store in episode twenty-eight...

Runtime
63 minutes, 36 seconds

Up for Discussion

1. Introduction
2. KNOW YOUR ENEMY - Q & A with return guest Ryan "Univarn" Helms from A Life in Equinox. (3:03)
3. COME TALK TO ME - We recount moments of joy (mostly) from listeners' experiences of seeing a film cold. (10:18)
4. THE NEW SLANG - Review and reaction of ANIMAL KINGDOM (16:17)
5. THE BEST OF YOU - Univarn and I talk about our own memorable moments seeing various movies stone cold. (29:06)


Comments and feedback are welcome, and thank-you very much for listening.

Enjoy!

I Get Around: TIME BANDITS @ The Lightbox

I've mentioned on more than one occasion that I really dig how Rich at Wide Screen World doesn't just review films, but talks about the entire experience of going out to the theatre. I got to thinking about this on Thursday night over beers with Bob and James.

We began talking about how a lot of theatres in Toronto have a tough go of things, because even though they are bringing in quality programming, people tend not to come out...not even many of us in the community of heavy movie-goin' crowd. For us, it just comes down to just so many hours in the week, and I'd wager just so many dollars in the bank.

Put it all together, and it leads to me deciding to chronicle my movie-going experiences whenever something interesting happens...for better or for worse. In short, infuse just a bit more personal experience into this space while I have the luxury.

Take yesterday for example...

The order of the day on Saturday was Terry Gilliam's 1981 cult classic TIME BANDITS. I had never seen the film, much to chagrin of Danger Girl who'd loaned it to me, only for me to leave it unwatched on my coffee table for six weeks. Thus, when we learned that The Lightbox would be showing it as part of their 80's programme, it was a chance to right a great wrong in my film literacy.

As the days went on, the posse grew and grew. Lady Hatter of course was in. Ditto little brother and his gal Rachel. Then I found out that Kurt from Row Three was coming too, along with his lovely wife and two kids. By the time all was said and done, we had almost an entire row taken up!

So after a few cool give-a-ways, a boisterous crowd settled in for some fantastical goodness. The film played pretty well, getting lots of laughs which helped everyone overlook the fact that the print we were watching was in pretty rough shape. But then something weird happened:

Around the 60 minute mark of the film, there was a reel change scheduled (right around the time the Titanic sinks), but rather than going to the next reel, they managed to flip to the film's final reel! Thus we all sat stunned as the climax of the film began playing out before our very eyes, with what was obviously a lot of movie missing. The worst part of this? During the film's introduction, a programmer had asked how many were seeing this film for the first time...and a lot of hands went up.

Oops.

In the end the problem was fixed, and even with the early climactic glimpse, it was time well spent. Oh, and for the inconvenience, TIFF has given every ticket holder a voucher to come back for another screening. Can't argue with free movies!

Edit: Per Kurt's comment below, if you want to get one of the best reviews of the movie you're likely to witness, go here and check out what his little ones had to say about TIME BANDITS.

Days of The Week (Films Watched 2/5 - 211)

Down to even fewer watches this week. Perhaps this is the norm, and less the exception?

On the bright side, three out of my five were first-timers, and two of the five were on a big screen. So I suppose the motto that could be assigned to this week is quality over quantity.

The next two weeks promise to be more of the same. Somehow I have broken my reclusive cocoon and turned into quite the social butterfly for the rest of this month. Thus I'd expect at least the next two of these to be equally as short, but in every case to be mostly made up of new watches.


Screenings
THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING - You'd be amazed how packed the theatre was ten years after the fact. Thankfully I talked my way out of staying for the whole trilogy.
RABBIT HOLE - A beautiful bummer.

Blu-Rays/DVD's I've Never Seen
ANIMAL KINGDOM - Solid simmering cinema
LAYER CAKE - Badassery done well by Matthew Vaughn. Someone wanna loan me STARDUST now?

Blu-Rays/DVD's I've Watched Before
DESPERADO - I wanted to feel seventeen again.


Boxscore for The Year
22 First-Timers, 28 Re-Watched
50 Movies in Total

How's about you - seen anything good?

Ready to Start

Today, I Feel Like This...

Everybody's Talkin' 2 - 11 (Chatter from Other Bloggers)

Happen to notice that this post was a few hours later than it usually is? You can thank Bob and James for that.

Strangest thing, even though the weather in Toronto lately has brought the words "huskie's nutsack" to mind, I've been quite the social butterfly over the past week...with no signs of slowing down next week either!

My big quest at the moment is to see all the nominated films in the big eight categories by Oscar night. I only have two more to go (BIUTIFUL and ANOTHER YEAR), so I should make it handily...but with immediate plans to see a few classics at The Lightbox in the coming days, I'm not really helping my own cause. Should make for some good blog fodder if nothing else, and after a week of late nights trying to come up with blog fodder, I will gladly take a few gimme's.

But enough about me, let's turn the mic over to some smarter people, shall we?

For your reading and listening fulfillment, I give you...


The Franklies Are Back! The Franklies Are Back!! The Franklies Are Back!!!

I watched THE ILLUSIONIST back at TIFF, but I might need to go watch it again this week to refresh my memory a tad. Pretty sure I liked it more than Rich did, but as always his accounts of moviegoing around Manhattan is worth the price of admission alone.

The folks at Anomolous Materials discuss what happens when one meets an acclaimed film with a "meh" (By now, I'd wager most of you know my advice for what to do when that happens).

Univarn wants to know which scene you'd live out if you could.

One of the most affecting 2010 movies for me was BLUE VALENTINE. Blake over at Bicthin' scored himself a pretty nice get by managing to interview the film's director Derek Cianfrance.

The LAMB is knee-deep in its LAMB Devours the Oscars feature for this year's awards (read my entry for Best Editing yet?). An Oscar race that I'm truly interested in this year is Best Director. Sebastian has us covered...and in a neat bit of turnabout, he has linked me this week in his version of 'Everybody's Talkin'.


Enjoy!

Wicked Game (For Those Who Dig Jess' Movie Mash-Up)

A few months ago, Jess from Insight Into Entertainment and I must have been watching the same episode of "Cougar Town" (which is somewhat amusing, since I never watch that show). On this particular episode, the characters were playing a movie guessing game...and not days later did it make its debut on Jess' space.

It's a fun game, and one that I'm sorta good at - though I'd happily trade that off for being able to give Lady Hatter a run for her money at Scrabble.

I wouldn't dream of making this a regular thing, since Jess already has that covered...but for just one day I thought I'd provide people with a glut of entries and see who can get what.

Here's how the game works: The plot synopsis of two movies are mashed together into one description, and the titles of the two will overlap. For instance "An Irish artist with cerebral palsy moves to a southern town where dancing has been banned" would be MY LEFT FOOTLOOSE.

Take a look after the jump and see how many you can get (Correct answers will be marked with red x's as the day goes on)

1. "Middle earth faces its ultimate battle while a hack comedian coerces his way on to late night TV" X - MN14

2. "A British schoolteacher is brought to the far east to modernize a country and hires absurdist detectives to prevent a department store from being built" X - A

3. "An alien orphan is sent to protect earth from a barber offered a chance to invest in a dry cleaning venture" X - CC


4. "A young girl gets her wish to be an adult working at a magazine, but must first survive the vampires taking over her wintery town" X - JR

5. "A relationship is recounted in a broken narrative while a serial killer stalks New York City" X - MN14

6. "One hit wonders rise to fame on hot summer day in Brooklyn" X - R

7. "A young lady is cursed when she doesn't approve Pinhead's loan" X - MN14

8. "High school cheerleaders struggle with violence and corruption at the docks." X - MN14

9. "James Bond battles a cajun druglord and a diamond smuggler at the same time" X - DB

10. "Two musicians hide from the mob in drag while cops investigate strange goings on in a sleepy British town" X - CC

11. "An EMT driver consoles a death row inmate"X - CC

12. "A bachelor party in Vegas leads to arm wrestling" X - CB

13. "An altar boy is charged with Gonzo journalism" X - MN14

14. "A groggy princess runs a salon in Atlanta" X - JR

15. "A cartoon murder leaves two parents distraught" X - CC

16. "A father tells tall tales about an English diamond heist gone awry." X - CC

17. "A wager is made as to whether proper english can be taught to a pair of lovestruck dogs." X - CC

18. "A subway is hijacked and used to free refugees and steal Kuwaiti bullion." X - CB

19. "A mouse is adopted and sent to work at a particularly weird florist" X - CB

20. "Imprisoned poultry goad a schlub into competing in the London Marathon" X - MN14

21. "A family comes together on a road trip to see the Rolling Stones play New York City"X - CC

Edit: Decided to add a few more

22. "A family adopts a teenaged football player who takes a road trip to wine country." X - CC

23. "We go back to the 80's with an underweight insomniac" X - CB

24. "A shy man falls for a doll who is a high class prositute." X - B

25. "A boy becomes friends with the strange girl living next door who plans a daring bank heist." X - CB

26. "After a drug deal goes wrong, a passer-by makes off with the money before meeting a marine unit obsessed with using psychological warfare." X - DB

27. "A texas oil tycoon wants to expose shady jewel dealings in Africa" X - R

28. "A movie star hangs with his daughter in a magical land of monsters" X - R

29. "People in London screw up relationships trying to meet 'the one' who's life is actually happening in a book". X - DG

Review: RABBIT HOLE * * * 1/2

Sometimes in life we lose sight of who we are, and instead allow what we are to set the course. Eventually that course becomes so defined, that trying to continue on without it is like a streetcar trying to run without rails. When this loss of direction takes place - and in every life, it will take place - we're left in a state of excruciating self-doubt.

And the worst part of being in this mental state, is how it takes so much effort for your every waking move.

RABBIT HOLE is the story of Becca and Howie Corbett (Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart). When we meet them, we quickly learn that they are trying to come to grips with the death of their four-year-old son Danny. The problem with a tragedy like the death of a child is how it takes people who have spent years becoming one, and instantly tears them apart.

The Corbetts, like many couples, grieve the loss so very differently. Their story is not just about how they try to keep themselves together as functioning adults, but if their relationship can survive a moment of such indescribable and deeply personal grief.
The deepest difficulty facing Becca and Howie is the fact that everybody deals with such trauma differently - even people who love each other so much. It's these differences that take something so terrible and make it feel infinitely worse. Coping in different ways gets called into question, and before long, questions arise as to whether we are coping, denying, or disrespecting.

Where The Corbetts seem to be having the most trouble is in balancing reflection and motivation. They both know that they aren't done mourning Danny - hell, they don't even seem to be done blaming themselves for Danny's death. But with that comes another insecurity...that of moving on. When fathers and mothers are suddenly yanked back to only being husbands and wives, there's suddenly an omnipresent feeling of "Now what?". How long do you tough it out with someone in that situation? Do you even tough it out at all??

Every day and every decision suddenly becomes a test:

How you talk about it, if you talk about it, what you do with your days, how often you glance at a photo, how long you keep drawings taped to the fridge, how many days you can go without crying, who you decide to share your grief with, and ultimately how you move on.

These people are both still so visibly shaken, but they don't understand the place each other is in. Howie seems to want to dress his wounds with connections - going to group therapy, talking things out, and even trying for intimate moments with Becca. On the other hand, Becca seems stuck in a place of rudderless instinct. She makes desperate snap decisions like visiting her old workplace unannounced, and giving away Danny's old clothes - always seemingly in the hope of moving forward. Sadly though nothing is working, and it all begins to seem like she's holding her hand over a flame just to feel something.

While this story is tremendously sad, it is also one of hope. It's hope after all that allows people like Becca and Howie to get out of bed every day...allows them to walk out the front door in search of the smallest bit of comfort. The trick at that point is to understand that solace will not arrive like a double rainbow on the horizon. Odds are that it will find its way to us in the smallest of tokens. It could be a plant budding in the springtime air, or even just the faintest notion that somewhere out there is a parallel universe where a different version of you is having a good day.

While the human pain of RABBIT HOLE can be difficult to endure at times, it is a very real and tender look at what happens when people begin to let loss be their guide. In times like these, it's important to remember that even though our journey has seemingly come to a screeching halt, that the tracks are still there...and it is possible to continue forward.

What did you think? Please leave comments with your thoughts and reactions to RABBIT HOLE.

Look What You've Done (Best Picture in Hindsight)

There has been a lot of talk this Oscar season (including on this site) about films that people presume will win and what that means in the grand scheme of things.

However, the more I think about it, the more I realize that Oscar voters lack any access to what ultimately lauds a movie as a landmark film - they have no sense of legacy. This isn't their fault of course, hindsight being 20/20 and all. However I wonder how things might change, if awards were given out well after a film's release. And I'm not talking months - not even thirteen months as was the case with SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. I'm talking years here kids. What would happen if in two weeks, The Academy were to hand out awards for films from 2005?

See, giving a film a chance to breathe could actually provide perspective on its actual place within the scope of film history. So if you'll indulge me a moment, I'd like to offer my thoughts on a few years' worth of Oscar races, with the perspective of passing time in mind.

2005
Oscar went to CRASH

Also in the running BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, CAPOTE, GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK, MUNICH

CRASH is a fine film, but there's no way anybody can still think it's the best of this lot. For my money, no film summed up the times or the decade better than GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK, and it has aged handsomely since then.

(Unnominated Wild Card - I'd have enjoyed seeing A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE in the running)

2004
Oscar went to MILLION DOLLAR BABY

Also in the running THE AVIATOR, RAY, SIDEWAYS, FINDING NEVERLAND

This is a year where I think Oscar got things as right as they could have with this list of nominees.

(Unnominated Wild Card - I say as right as they could have, because one of the decades very best movies THE ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND wasn't in contention. Had it made the cut, it gets my vote in a walk)

2003
Oscar went to THE RETURN OF THE KING

Also in the running LOST IN TRANSLATION, MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD, MYSTIC RIVER, SEABISCUIT

The Lord of The Rings trilogy deserved recognition, and Oscar decided to pile it on here at the end giving the epic a record-tying 11 statues. None of the other four are more deserving, and this is the most appropriate time to honour the series, so no real complaints.

(Unnominated Wild Card - In the face of middle earth, does it really matter?)

2002
Oscar went to CHICAGO

Also in the running GANGS OF NEW YORK, THE HOURS, THE PIANIST, THE TWO TOWERS

Giving this musical top prize seems a day late and a dollar short in hindsight. I could make a case for TWO TOWERS, but there wasn't no a way a story with no beginning and no end was taking this category. That said, I must say that THE PIANIST has aged rather well. Pity it doesn't have a Best Picture trophy to match that Best Dirctor trophy.

(Unnominated Wild Card - Odd that CATCH ME IF YOU CAN was primarily missing from the night's proceedings, no?

2001
Oscar went to A BEAUTIFUL MIND

Also in the running THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, GOSFORD PARK, IN THE BEDROOM, MOULIN ROUGE!

Here's where Oscar begins a string of getting things wrong. besides the fact that they could have awarded Lord of The Rings right off the get-go, we have what is still one of the most unique musicals in film - the movie responsible for re-launching an entire genre. Ron Howard's whitewashed biopic pales in comparison...no pun intended.

(Unnominated Wild Card - MEMENTO anyone?)

2000
Oscar went to GLADIATOR

Also in the running CHOCOLAT, CROUCHING TIGER HIDDEN DRAGON, ERIN BROCKOVICH, TRAFFIC

Big as a fan as I am of GLADIATOR, this is one of the biggest head-scratchers in the decade. TIGER/DRAGON and TRAFFIC are so much better crafted, with TRAFFIC even getting a Best Director win to prove it. Yet somehow, this crowd-pleaser walked off with the big prize. As the years have passed, and GLADIATOR has withered into a TNT sword & sandal Sunday afternoon filler, you gotta believe that Oscar would love a mulligan on this race.

(Unnominated Wild Card - There's the brilliant-but-bleak REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, and my personal favorite ALMOST FAMOUS for your consideration).

1999
Oscar went to AMERICAN BEAUTY

Also in the running THE CIDER HOUSE RULES, THE INSIDER, THE GREEN MILE, THE SIXTH SENSE

Chalk this up to "Seemed like a great idea at the time". 1999 was a watershed year fir films, but you'd never know it from all of these safe choices in the mix. Compounding matters is that AMERICAN BEAUTY, which felt wonderfully avant garde at the time, now leaves audiences scratching their heads and wondering what the big deal is. The unfortunate bit is that with this crop of nominees, we couldn't have done much better.

(Unnominated Wild Card - Oh, where to begin? There's MAGNOLIA, BEING JOHN MALKOVICH, THREE KINGS, FIGHT CLUB, THE MATRIX, BOYS DON'T CRY, etc, etc, etc)

1998
Oscar went to SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

Also in the running ELIZABETH, LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, THE THIN RED LINE

Perhaps the grandaddy of all Oscar fuck-ups. SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE is a fine film, and certainly seemed like a great idea at the time ("That script!"). But time has not been kind to the 1998 Best Picture honouree. What's worse is that two of its classmates have taken up the mantle as some of the greatest war films of all time...and two of the best movies period. Heavy studio campaigning won this Oscar for SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, and I wish I could tell you that The Academy learned its lesson.

(Unnominated Wild Card - One could make a case for AMERICAN HISTORY X OR PLEASANTVILLE)

1997
Oscar went to TITANIC

Also in the running THE FULL MONTY, AS GOOD AS IT GETS, GOOD WILL HUNTING, L.A. CONFIDENTIAL

So no real complaint here, even if TITANIC isn't exactly my cup of tea...but do you get thr impression that if they could go back and do it all over again, Oscar might resist the hype just a little bit? The biggest movie of all time felt too big to fail...but when you fast forward the tape twelve years, they had no problem passing over an even bigger Best Pic nominee from the very same director.

(Unnominated Wild Card - In this instance, none are coming to mind)

1996
Oscar went to THE ENGLISH PATIENT

Also in the running FARGO, JERRY MAGUIRE, SECRETS & LIES, SHINE

I'll always remember this year as the crop of nominees that did two things at the same time. It had critics hailing "Oscar got it right!" and it had mainstream audiences asking "Have you heard of these movies?". Again, I have no real complaint with THE ENGLISH PATIENT...but I think a heavy case could be made for FARGO and it's black absurdity. Oscar voters would go on to begin loving all things Coen later anyway, why not jump in here and recognize a modern classic? It's hard to distract from the sweeping epic that is THE ENGLISH PATIENT, but I'd wager that if voters were to give this another go with fifteen years of hindsight, the race would be a lot closer than it was at the time.

(Unnominated Wild Card - It was the year of the indie anyhow, why not toss SLING BLADE into the mix?)

Call and Answer (aka "Ask Hatter") - Episode II

I did this six months ago, and had so much fun with it I thought I'd give it another go.

It's another interactive day at The Matinee...

Ask me any movie related question about myself that you'd like. As the day goes on (and as long as the questions keep coming) I'll continue to update this post and answer them.

If you were in charge of programming the Great Digital Film Festival this year, what changes would you make to the line-up? Which movies would you take off the list, and which would you replace them with? (Susie Q)
MH: While I didn't have the endurance to get through it, i liked the idea of the entire Lord of The Rings trilogy playing on one day. So to give that another spin, I'd drop HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER, LETHAL WEAPON, and GHOST and play the original Indiana Jones trilogy in their stead.

What movies (if any of course) that you wish you could obliterate from the existence of this world, that happens to reside on Lady Hatter's side of the DVD shelf. (G Man)

MH: You're looking to get me a night or two worth of sleeping on the couch! I'll play it safe and answer the three Twilight films, which she only owns in a guilty pleasure sort of way.

Two parter: a.)What is the least prestigious film on your side of the dvd shelf? b.) What is the most prestigious film on LadY Hatter's side of the dvd shelf? (Rachel)

MH: Sorta builds off the previous question - I like that. The beacon of prestige on Lady Hatter's shelf is easily the deluxe editions of the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. Likewise all of the animation is hers, so I could make a case for WALL-E, TOY STORY, and SNOW WHITE. And much as I make fun of her collection, she does have quite a few keepers like JUNO, LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, SINGIN' IN THE RAIN, WEST SIDE STORY and THE WIZARD OF OZ.

As for my shelf, I have a lot of crappy action films like TOP GUN, THE ROCK, CON AIR, and FACE/OFF. There's also some dumber comedies in there like DODGEBALL. I thin mine out ocasionally so some of the ones I've bought over the years are now in "Previously Viewed" bins around Toronto.

(Much more Q & A beyond the jump)

Now that you've jumped into Blu-Ray - do you feel the need to purchase the Blu-version of each new movie you decide to purchase? I'm currently debating the Stieg Larsson trilogy - if I should go Blu or DVD - the difference in cost is no issue - just format. (CBlaze)
MH: I thought about this long and hard when I did my first bout of Blu-ray shopping after Christmas. Going forward I'll likely buy blu for new releases (watching my blu copies of WINTER'S BONE, SCOTT PILGRIM, and SHUTTER ISLAND cemented that decision). The hitch is that because they are so much more expensive, I'll likely be buying more of them previously viewed...I'm in no hurry to go back to paying $25 or more a title.

Apart from horror movies, what's another genre of film you're inexperienced in? (Movienut14)

MH: Much to the chagrin of my blogger buddy Univarn, I have a massive blind spot for anime. I'm likewise lacking in many foreign films, and at the risk of sounding unpatriotic, I'm pretty bad with Canadian cinema too.

Through some absurdly fantastic twist of fate, you've come into ownership of The Doctor's TARDIS. You can go anywhere in time, and you decide you want to go to whatever year and see what films it has to offer. Do you go forward or backward? Which year? (Sebastian Gutierrez)

MH: I'd go ahead to 2030. On the one hand, I'd want to see the legacy of the films from this past decade twenty years on (Perhaps THE LAST AIRBENDER becomes some sort of odd cult classic), and on the other hand I'd be curious to see what sort of technological evolutions take place for the moviegoing experience.

Oh - I'd also get to see what happens in SAW 38!

Vanilla or Fully Loaded? When it comes to DVD’s do you pay extra for special edition, deluxe, box sets etc or go for the basic version. And to what extent do you watch the extra features? (Fandango Groovers)

MH: Left to my own vices? Fully loaded. There are dvd's I've refrained from buying for years because they came in the wrong sort of package - BLADE RUNNER and THE GRINDHOUSE come to mind. I have tried to curb back a bit and only go whole-hog on my very favorites. As for the featires, I try to at least skim through them...sometimes it even heightens my appreciation of the film, as was the case with BENJAMIN BUTTON. I seldom watch every last one, but I like to give a good set the full once-over.

IF you could choose any profession in Hollywood, what would it be? (Castor Troy)

MH: That's easy - Steven Spielberg's cinematographer.

How many silent films do you think you've seen and which is your favorite? (Marya the Cinema Fanatic)

MH: Not all that many actually. I think I've only seen VOYAGE TO THE MOON, MODERN TIMES, CITY LIGHTS, THE GOLD RUSH, and THE GENERAL. Of all of those, THE GENERAL is my favorite...narrowly edging out CITY LIGHTS.

What's your favorite memory from TIFF? (Rich)

MH: Well *besides* the day that I met my wife, it'd have to be getting to talk to John Cameron Mitchell the day after he premiered SHORTBUS and getting a hug from him when I told him how a mutual admiration for HEDWIG & THE ANGRY INCH brought Lady Hatter and I together.

Have you ever said you thought a film was incredible, when, upon watching it a second time, you realised it was awful? (Simon Columb)

MH: Historically, it tends to go the other way around - I quite disliked FARGO and THE THIN RED LINE on first watching. But films that qualify to your parameter tend to be movies I loved as a kid...films like MAJOR LEAGUE and EMPIRE RECORDS.

Jurassic Park: Best Film Ever? (Simon Columb)
MH: No.

If given the choice, which would you rather be: A professional novelist, musician, or filmmaker? (Univarn)

MH: Believe it or not, I'd go for musician...just because I believe that music is more of a universal language than the other two media. I can sing, though not nearly well enough to get paid for it...but I've never been able to play anything, let alone compose. There's a romanticism in composing music that I would really love to achieve. So if that genie poppped out of the bottle and asked me that very question, you can bet that you'd hear me behind a piano or guitar within short order.

What are three movies that you're scared to see? (Nick)

MH: THE EXORCIST, because the audio screws with my head too badly and the whole concept tap dances squarely on my Catholic upbringing. THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE just because the entire concept grosses me out. And Any TWILIGHT film after the first one took away two hours of my life that I'm never getting back.

If the world ended right now (right the fuck now), every working actor of today was petrified, and unfrozen fifty years later on Mars, who would you cast as the lead in the movie version of said events? (Ripley)

MH: I think that Christoph Waltz could do wonders with such a project.

Who is one actor you will watch, no matter how crappy the movie is? (Movienut14)

There's still no actor that gets my hard-earned loot no questions asked, but the ones that merit a long hard look include Brad Pitt, Sean Penn, Johnny Depp, Zooey Deschanel, Julianne Moore, and Marion Cotillard.

Who is your actor mancrush? (Nick)

MH: I wouldn't kick Daniel Craig out of bed for eating crackers.

What are some movies that you feel have truly changed your perspective on life?(david Bishop)

MH: Tricky one. Recently, BLUE VALENTINE made me value the importance of communication and honesty in a relationship...going back further there was DEAD MAN WALKING which really made me reconsider my views on forgiveness in life. Thise are the two that jump to mind most readily, though I'm sure there have been more.