From Here to Eternity (1953) (2nd time)

In 1941 Hawaii, a private is cruelly punished for not boxing on his unit's team, while his captain's wife and second in command are falling in love. [imdb]

Nominated for 13 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Fred Zinnemann (WINNER)
Best Actor: Montgomery Clift
Best Actor: Burt Lancaster
Best Actress: Deborah Kerr
Best Supporting Actor: Frank Sinatra (WINNER)
Best Supporting Actress: Donna Reed (WINNER)
Best Writing, Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (WINNER)
Best Original Score
Best Editing (WINNER)
Best Costume Design, Black-and-White
Best Sound (WINNER)

I'm continuing my Best Picture series with winner number 26, a film that still enjoys a certain amount of popularity. I myself was not a fan the first time I saw it - not that I've changed my mind, but now it feels a bit better. Of course, the film was much more relevant back then, considering only 12 years separated it from the attack on Pearl Harbor - respectfully ilustrated towards the end of the picture.

Otherwise, the film carries a bit too many stories, none of them fully described; it's a bit too segmented and often enough relies on hard-to-believe screenplay decisions. The acting itself seemed a bit different the 2nd time: now I think Monty is pretty bad in the role and I just don't get it why he was considered a good actor in those days. Frank Sinatra himself is quite loud here and the performance seems to be far from Oscar material. I was more impressed with the ladies: Deborah Kerr has much too limited screentime to be considered a lead, but she's intriguingly playing an against-the-type character and she gives a good performance. Donna Reed was better than I remembered, while Burt Lancaster does justice to a very macho role.

While it was a huge success in its era, it feels dated. It has good acting moments, one or two wise directorial choices, but I just don't see it as a classic or anything.

My rating for the film: 6.5/10. The final scene is completely wrong, and I just don't see what they were going for.

Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) (2nd time)

An aging, reclusive southern belle, plagued by a horrifying family secret, descends into madness after the arrival of a lost relative. [imdb]

Nominated for 7 Oscars:

Best Supporting Actress: Agnes Moorehead

Best Cinematography, Black-and-White

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Editing

Best Art Direction, Black-and-White

Best Costume Design, Black-and-White

The story behind this film is maybe much more interesting than the film itself; as you know, it was supposed to reteam real-life rivals Bette Davis & Joan Crawford, but Bette did all she could to push Joan away from the project, and got it her way. An entire soap opera behind it, and I recommend the trivia page on imdb for details.

I knew this was gonna be cheesy, with a feeling of B-series horror. I remembered it like that, but it actually proved much more satisfying. The second time around I learned to appreciate Agnes Moorehead's performance - I actually thought she was quite great as the loud-mouthed noisy housekeeper; it's overacting at its best. The screenplay is kinda messy, but Aldrich's directing is quite solid, something you wouldn't expect from a horror flick. Personally, I'm also a bit surprised Bette Davis didn't get nominated for this; sure, it's a performance gone to far at times, but it does have its highlight, and the field was pretty weak.

My rating for this film: 7.5/10. It's no Baby Jane, and I might be a bit too generous, but it does have its charm, for sure.

The Bells of St. Mary's (1945)

At a big city Catholic school, Father O'Malley and Sister Benedict indulge in friendly rivalry, and succeed in extending the school through the gift of a building. [imdb]

Nominated for 8 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director: Leo McCarey
Best Actor: Bing Crosby
Best Actress: Ingrid Bergman
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Editing
Best Sound (WINNER)

I usually like to put here the original poster of a film, but I just couldn't do that for Bells of St Mary's because it was way too ridiculous: the original one has Crosby & Bergman on it, but in street clothes, as if just coming home from dinner. :)) how silly is that, considering they stay in their priest / nun outfits during the entire film.

Also good to note that this is the first sequel to get nominated for Best Picture. It is, of course, the sequel of Going My Way, the film that had won way too many Oscars in the previous year, including Best Picture, Director & Actor. Considering I wasn't a fan of it (look for my review in the tags on the right), I had hoped that the new presence of Ingrid Bergman might bring a breath of fresh air and avoid another dull film. It succeeded in a way, but not completely.

Ingrid is fine, though the role could've been richer. Crosby, I thought, was actually better than in Going My Way, mostly because of the emotional scenes at the end. The biggest problem can be found in the screenplay which, sometimes predictably, goes for plenty of cheesy moments, mostly boring ones and any excuse to make Bing Crosby sing another song. I was actually well prepared to give it a 5 until the last 10 minutes, which completely changed the quality of the film; not only is Bergman fantastic in the end, but the screenplay finally brings some emotion to the leads.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Too bad it didn't make the right choices earlier that it did; but better than Going My Way, for sure.

My Favorite Wife (1940)

Ellen Arden arrives 7 years after being given up for dead in a shipwreck, to find her husband Nick just remarried to Bianca. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Writing, Original Story
Best Original Score
Best Art Direction, Black-and-White

I've seen this film of course because it had Cary Grant & Irene Dunne in it, because I've heard it was a romantic comedy, and I knew it would be easy to watch. And it proved easy to watch, but it sure didn't have the comedy that The Awful Truth gave. Leo McCarey produced this one, but didn't direct, though the direction is not its problem.

Unfortunately, the screenplay isn't that funny. It has a great idea, but doesn't know what to do with it. The film tries too much to be like The Awful Truth and it fails for most parts (the ending & the pretending scenes are practically reinterpretations from the 1937 comedy, but without that charm & freshness). Irene is wonderful, but Cary is completely unfocused. It could've been much much better.

My rating for the film: 6/10. A couple of kinda funny moments, but almost no laughs.

The Tempest (2010)

Shakespeare's epic play is translated from page to screen, with the gender of the main character, Prospero, changed from male to female. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Costume Design

This was, I think, the only Oscar nominated film I didn't get to see in time for my annual AIM Awards. Having seen it now, I can't say I've missed too much, and it would've definitely not made any of my lists. With the major box-office failure of this, and the failure of Spider-Man on Broadway, 2010 really hasn't been much of a year for director Julie Taymor.

The Tempest sure has a style of its own, and I appreciated that. But the occasional flashy style and Ben Whishaw as Ariel, the spirit (he's unusually erotic with this performance) are the only elements of the film to go above average. Helen Mirren is ok, but the role is not challenging enough. And the worst is how boring the film is - I couldn't care less about the characters, and there's only so much of Shakesperean language I can take when there's no major plot to carry the weight.

And don't get me started on Sandy Powell's costumes... Sure, some are fabulous, but at one point the young man was wearing what looked like black jeans and undershirt... Really, Sandy, I know it's part fantasy, but why make him look so L.A.?!

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. A film I could definitely live without. They should make one all about Whishaw's spirit.

Leave Her to Heaven (1945)

The story revolves around a femme fatale who entraps a husband and commits several crimes motivated by her insane jealousy. [wiki]

Nominated for 4 Oscars:

Best Actress: Gene Tierney
Best Cinematography, Color (WINNER)
Best Art Direction, Color
Best Sound

According to Wikipedia, this film was Fox's highest-grossing picture of the 1940s, it got only positive reviews, it has 100% positive on Rotten Tomatoes and it's one of Martin Scorsese's favorite films... The only thing I can say is that all of them need a reality check. This is a film that hardly makes any sense, and that's because of the completely unjustified actions of the leading character.

While watching it I could only think: who wrote this?! Who actually believes that this woman would've deliberately done all those things. Don't tell me she's a psycho, that's not how the film presents it. SPOILER ALERT (though it happens in the first hour): What woman would kill her husband's younger brother just because she doesn't want him around, because she's too possessive?! Few things in this film make sense. Gene Tierney is not talented enough to make it coherent, the direction is ignorable, the cinematography is fine but not Oscar worthy; and I've seen 2 Cornel Wilde films in a week, and let's just say I'm not in the mood for more.

My rating for the film: 4/10. I'm being generous; it's easy to watch just because it's mediocre all around.

The Greatest Show on Earth (1952)

The dramatic lives of trapeze artists, a clown, and an elephant trainer against a background of circus spectacle. [imdb]

Nominated for 5 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Cecil B. DeMille
Best Writing, Story (WINNER)
Best Editing
Best Costume Design, Color

I'm continuing to see the Best Picture winners, and winner number 25 was Greatest Show on Earth, a film I've heard only bad things about. Many seem to consider it one of the worst to get Oscar's big prize, but as I always say: You've probably never seen Cavalcade. Anyway, I started watching it with low expectation and guess what: it's not a good film, but it's definitely not the least deserving. I can defend it by saying some of the scenes were entertaining and the film itself never annoyed me.

Its biggest problem is that it doesn't take itself seriously - sure, the costumes are fine, the art direction is good, the story has potential to be interesting, but the direction is lazy, the editing is sloppy and the film as a whole feels quite cheesy, and very dated today. Betty Hutton is a charismatic lead, while Gloria Grahame is definitely more interesting than in her Oscar-winning role in The Bad and the Beautiful. James Stewart gives a nice, low-key performance, while the big train scene at the end is nicely shot.

My rating for the film: 5.5/10. I hear all other 4 nominated film from that year were much more deserving. It's possible, I won't argue with that, I've only seen Moulin Rouge.

The Valley of Decision (1945)

It tells the story of a young Irish house maid who falls in love with the son of her employer, a local steel mill owner. [wiki]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Actress: Greer Garson
Best Original Score

Finally a Greer Garson film without Walter Pidgeon as a co-star... this was one of Gregory Peck's first films, and what a chance starring opposite a star like Garson... who was also I think 12 years older than him... but the romance is not the biggest problem of Valley of Decision. The main thing I can accuse it of is that it has nothing special or surprising in the screenplay; it's a flat story, doesn't feel intelligent enough and it loses focus in the 2nd part.

The highlight of the film is the acting - no, not from the 2 leading stars, but from the strong supporting players. I don't understand how Hollywood legend Lionel Barrymore didn't get a nomination for this - he's GREAT as the angry, obsessed father of Mary; and has enough screentime and emotional shots to create a good performance. A young Jessica Tandy is also impressive as the female villain and Gladys Cooper does something I never seen her do before: she gets to play a gentle, kind, loving woman, which is very different from the roles she used to get.

My rating for the film: 5/10. OK to see for the acting, not for the story.

An American in Paris (1951)

A struggling American painter in Paris, is "discovered" by an influential heiress, while falling in love with a young French girl. [imdb]

Nominated for 8 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Vincente Minnelli
Best Writing, Story and Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Cinematography, Color (WINNER)
Best Music, Musical Picture (WINNER)
Best Editing
Best Art Direction, Color (WINNER)
Best Costume Design, Color (WINNER)

I am continuing my series of trying to watch all Best Picture winners, some for the first time. And that's how I got to winner number 24, An American in Paris, a musical I was never really interested in seeing. My instincts were right: had it not been for my dedication to the blog, I might have not bothered. It's not as bad as I make it sound, and definitely not the worst BP winner, but far from the top of the list.

Its biggest problem is that it has no humor; it also doesn't have any great songs. All that it has is good dancing, and a lot of it. The film is never really bad, just terribly boring until it gets closer to the end: I will admit I thought those 20 minutes of dancing moments were mostly nice. Not all, the one with Lautrec was ridiculous, but some were really ahead of their times and one cannot deny the great camera work. It sure helps the film redeem itself a bit. And Leslie Caron looks like a terrific ballerina; I was impressed. The acting lacks greatness, with Nina Foch being the only intriguing one.

My rating for the film: 5.5/10. I still feel like I'm giving it waaaaay to much. And no, no word on Kelly, we all know he's more of a dancer than an actor. The film certainly DIDN'T deserve the Best Picture win.

***Best Picture winner number 23rd, All About Eve, has been previously discussed: click HERE.

Love Letters (1945)

Allen Quinton writes a fellow soldier's love letters; tragedy results. Later, Allen meets a beautiful amnesiac who fears postmen. [imdb]

Nominated for 4 Oscars:

Best Actress: Jennifer Jones

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Art Direction, Black-and-White

I'm not sure if you have to be a romantic to like this film or just to ignore the big number of screenplay silly-choices and way-to-convenient solutions. I went through the film constantly surprised by how uninspired the writing is, and can you believe the screenplay was written by the (in)famous Ayn Rand? I would've expected much more. Sure, the subject is interesting, but it's very far from reaching its potential.

There's hardly any mystery going on, with the exception of the scenes towards the end, which are good, but spoiled by a fake-looking Hollywood ending. I generally couldn't care less. The acting is mediocre, even though Gladys Cooper has 2 good scenes as the adoptive mother.

My rating for the film: 4/10. Would only recommend it to Best Actress & Oscar fanatics, who'd see it no matter what.

Mildred Pierce (1945) (2nd time)

After her husband leaves her, Mildred Pierce proves she can become independent and successful, but can't win the approval of her spoiled daughter. [imdb]

Nominated for 6 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Actress: Joan Crawford (WINNER)
Best Supporting Actress: Eve Arden
Best Supporting Actress: Ann Blyth
Best Writing, Screenplay
Best Cinematography, Black-and-White

I was quite young when I saw Mildred Pierce on TCM one night, and I was really impressed by it. Now, many years later, I'm not as crazy about it as I used to be back then. It's easier to notice the flaws, but even so it remains an interesting film. It has a great leading role, and Joan Crawford delivers one of her classic performances, though also not as flawless as remembered.

The performances are ok, the direction is good and the cinematography special, definitely helping with the noir mood of the film. The one element stopping the film from being great is the screenplay, which feels very rushed at times, not exploiting enough scenes with a lot of dramatic potential. And it's a pitty, because you can tell there's a lot of juicy stuff here. But at one point it just becomes a succession of scenes and actions.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. I would've given it an 8, but Mildred lost Best Picture to The Lost Weekend, and that one got a 7.5 from me; so now I'm thinking that I'm not really sure if Mildred is a better film. They're very different.

It's worth mentioning that I've seen only 5 minutes of the Winslet mini-series, and have no clear intention of giving it a try; I hate the character Veda, so 5 hours of something that annoys me doesn't seem like much of a treat.

It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World (1963)

The dying words of a thief spark a madcap cross-country rush to find some treasure. [imdb]

Nominated for 6 Oscars:

Best Cinematography
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Editing
Best Sound
Best Sound Effects (WINNER)

I saw this film because I suspected I might find it to be entertaining - and it really was. And quite easy to watch for a film way longer than 2 hours. It's a wacky comedy that would probably never work today, but it sure seemed right for that era. It has a couple of boring parts, but also outloud funny scenes, and I love this kind of film chases.

Its biggest asset is the incredible stunt work - those guys who actually drove the cars did more than an impressive job. The acting is as fun as it gets for this kind of comedy - except for Spencer Tracy: sorry to say it, but he was quite bad here, maybe because of age, maybe because of not getting the silly rhythm of the story. The treasure performance for me: Ethel Merman who is crazy funny in the annoying mother-in-law kind of role.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Not always interesting, but easy to watch, with a satisfying feeling to it. I do recommend it for a light-comedy mood, despite the 7 I gave it.

Predator (1987) (2nd time)

A team of commandos, on a mission in a Central American jungle, find themselves hunted by an extra-terrestrial warrior. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Visual Effects

For every heavy film, one must see a predator - either to appreciate the previous heavy film if that's the case OR just to relax his mind with something so silly it's entertaining. Predator was easy to watch, unfortunately it was far from being as good as I remembered it. The problem is not the excessive bloody-mood, but the ridiculous choices in the 2nd part.

Truth is: there should've been more Die Hard in the story. Predator starts out well, but it sure loses focus along the way, especially when Arnold is the last man standing. There were some really stupid choices in the screenplay, the monster walked like a guy in a costume and the screenplay solutions are above what's imaginable or partially reasonable. But guess what: even then it was easy to watch & captivating at times.

My rating for the film: 6/10. Mindless fun. But that Oscar nom: quite undeserved, the visual effects don't impress.

7th Heaven (1927)

A street cleaner saves a young woman's life, and the pair slowly fall in love until war intervenes. [imdb]

Nominated for 5 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director, Dramatic Picture: Frank Borzage (WINNER)
Best Actress: Janet Gaynor (WINNER)
Best Writing, Adaptation (WINNER)
Best Art Direction

It's true, I might've had high expectations for this film, because people tend to write only good things about it, and it's easy to see it came very close to winning Best Picture on Oscar's 1st edition. As it usually happens, the film just didn't do it for me. It started nicely, with a good story and character introduction and the first half an hour or so really worked. But after that, for me it turned uxpectedly boring.

The problem is in the screenplay, which goes silly in the 2nd half: in one continuous scene Chico asks Diane to marry him, someone comes and tells Chico the war has just started and they have to leave in 15 minutes :))), Diane puts the wedding dress on, Chico informs Diane he has to go, they change vows, Chico leaves, 30 seconds later Diane is attacked by her abusive sister, Diane wins. All this in 15 minutes :D kills believability like you can't imagine and turns from romantic and easy-going into soap-opera that's hard to rally behind.

Janet Gaynor turns the little she has to do into something nice, but this is yet another Frank Borzage film that sinks in misogynism and often poor choices. It has its charm, that's for sure, but the story lacks consistency and I just can't justify the Writing & Director wins. I'm very happy Wings won Best Picture, because it's a far superior film.

My rating for the film: 6/10. Why do the fans ignore the major flaws?!

Hey, guys! I'm on twitter now, because I'm tired of reading so much stuff and not being able to reply! :)

So tell me: who else is outthere. Let me know! :D

If interested, you can click on the right or just go at my link here:

http://twitter.com/#!/AlexInMovieland

Sadie Thompson (1928)

Sadie Thompson arrives in Pago-Pago on her way to a new life, but extremist missionary Davidson lashes out against her lifestyle. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Actress: Gloria Swanson
Best Cinematography

The film seems to be considered today a great classic from the silent era. That's of course because of Gloria Swanson, and the much-deserved popularity that Sunset Blvd. has nowadays. I'm not gonna say Sadie is not a good film in some ways, and Gloria truly is wonderful to look at, but this is hardly a classic.

The attraction towards the film must come from the 2 leading performances. As I said, Gloria is quite likeable and gives a strong performance (she might've won had it not been for Janet's 3 different films) and just as intriguing is Lionel Barrymore, veteran Hollywood actor, very convincing as the fanatic missionary. Those who've seen it might recall that unforgettable devilish look in his eyes.

While it doesn't really have to do with judging the film, you might know that the last 8 minutes of Sadie Thompson are completely lost, and what they did was to recreate the ending using the screenplay and some production stills. It's a pitty, considering it was the ending above all and Gloria seemed to look smashing in the photos of the final scenes. But putting that aside, the ending itself is disappointing and doesn't live up to the tension created up to that point.

My rating for the film: 6.5/10. It has its good, intense moments, but misses opportunities just as often.

All the King's Men (1949) (2nd time)

The rise and fall of a corrupt politician, who makes his friends richer and retains power by dint of a populist appeal. [imdb]

Nominated for 7 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Robert Rossen
Best Actor: Broderick Crawford (WINNER)
Best Supporting Actor: John Ireland
Best Supporting Actress: Mercedes McCambridge (WINNER)
Best Writing, Screenplay
Best Editing

I would've probably not have seen this again, had it not been for my desire to catch up (again) with all Best Picture winners and write about them here. It's been a very VERY slow project, but it's rewarding in its own way. For example, I discovered that All the King's Men is not as ok as I remembered it to be: it's actually messy and inconsistent in many ways.

The highlights are the 2 Oscar winning performances, especially Crawford's - he's very energetic and convincing in the role, a scene stealer and way above his acting company. Mercedes is also fine, though seeing all nominees from her category, I might say one of the ladies from Pinky would've made for a worthier winner.

The lowest points in this film come from the screenplay which has no focus on dialogue or character motivations and, of course, the acting of some of the cast members. John Ireland is actually a co-lead and he was nominated for an Oscar here, but it's gotta be one of the WORST acting nominees I had ever seen. He brings nothing to the character, nor to the film, he just floats around with no ability for emotion. Also, the actress playing Anne Stanton: awful.

My rating for the film: 6/10. The beginning is much much better than the second half; and someone should've taken the Costume Designer aside: I've never seen such poorly fitted clothes in a film.

Special Best Picture Ranking

Once every film decade, I update this list. I hope it will go a bit faster from now on. :) In bold, the Best Picture winners of the 40s. Some predictable love (Casablanca), some very low-ranked shockers (Best Years... , Hamlet). To get to them, look for the film's name on the Tag list on the right.

There we go:

1. Gone With the Wind (1939)
2. Casablanca (1943*)
3. Rebecca (1940)
4. Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
5. All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)
6. Mrs. Miniver (1942)
7. Wings (1927-1928)
8. Gentleman's Agreement (1947)
9. It Happened One Night (1934)
10. You Can't Take It With You (1938)
11. The Lost Weekend (1945)
12. Grand Hotel (1932)
13. The Great Ziegfeld (1936)
14. The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)
15. All the King's Men (1949)
16. How Green Was My Valley (1941)
17. Going My Way (1944)
18. Hamlet (1948)
19. The Life of Emile Zola (1937)
20. The Broadway Melody (1929)
21. Cimarron (1931)
22. Cavalcade (1933)


Is there anyone who doesn't think Casablanca is the best of the 40s winners?!

She Done Him Wrong (1933)

New York singer and nightclub owner Lady Lou has more men friends than you can imagine. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Picture

This film was a delight and it opened my appetite for Mae West and her work - unfortunately, she didn't get to do as many films as she would've wanted. Boy, was she something; no one came close in matching the combination of outrageous and classy and feminine.

Of course, she was a better writer than an actress and that applies to She Done Him Wrong too. The film is just 66 minutes long (making it the shortest film ever nominated for Best Picture), so we don't get to see enough of Mae. But when she's on screen, it's hard to match that dialogue. Her lines are always funny, smart, seductive.

I didn't care too much about the supporting cast, Cary Grant included - trivia break: Mae discovered him while looking through the window and she cast him in this film, his big breakthrough. The direction itself is shaky. But I can't be tough on this film, it's ahead of its time in many ways.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. Why don't you come up some time and see me? I'm home every evening. :))

Outside the Law (2010)

A drama about the Algerian struggle for independence from France after WWII. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Foreign Language Film: Algeria

There are so many bad things to say about this film, I have to take a deep breath before starting. First of all, allow me to be shocked that THIS made the list of 5 nominees for Foreign Language Film - do we need a bigger proof the system is flawed? Who from the committee sat through 135 minutes of this film and thought: I want Outside the Law to be nominated because it's so good?!

Don't get me wrong: it's not Country Strong bad, which takes the crown by far. But at least there was some unintentional humor with that one and I was curious how bad the screenplay will continue to be... With this one is pure boredom. Maybe one good scene, but boring boring boring.

Its biggest sin: it takes itself too seriously. Also, it's completely narrow in perspective, anti-French till it becomes ridiculous, historically inaccurate, old fashioned and not in a good way, filled with silly writing, directed in an amateurish way, cheesy and much more. Ok cinematography and maybe one good performance, but otherwise from messy to mediocre.

My rating for the film: 3/10. Too generous am I. The nomination is a sad shocker.

The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)

In 1930s New Jersey, a movie character walks off the screen and into the real world. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Original Screenplay

In bed with high fever again, so it seemed like a good opportunity to sit and watch a classic. The Purple Rose of Cairo was the only BIG Woody Allen film I never saw, so I kept it there because I knew it would be special, and I just wanted to save one from his good ol'days. The film is a great achievement in many ways, but maybe not my type of film.

On the good side: the direction which is creative, impressive, and also the dialogue with a lot of smart one-liners. I know there are many people who think it's his best: it wouldn't really get close to a top 5 for me, because I just couldn't fully connect to it and the silliness. I loved the scenes in the movie, but the real-life just felt flat at times. I also am not a fan of the ending, even thought I can guess what he was going for.

Mia Farrow gives a good performance, not the year's best, but she sure gets the character and as always works out well with delicious, complicated dialogue. Jeff Daniels is just fine, and I loved the supporting players: Dianne Wiest, plus all those actors in the film.

It's ridiculous to have Witness win Original Screenplay, with both Purple and Back to the Future way better. I have yet to see Brazil and The Official Story - but I suspect them to be interesting and highly creative.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. A must-see, but give me Annie Hall, Interiors or Husbands and Wives over this.

Biutiful (2010)

Connected with the afterlife, Uxbal is a tragic hero and father of two who's sensing the danger of death. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Actor: Javier Bardem

Best Foreign Language Film: Mexico

First of all, why was this film nominated for Mexico, when it all takes place in Spain? I get it: the director is Mexican, but otherwise there's hardly a connection. On the film itself: it's a special one that I'm sure it gets better in time. I understand why some don't like it, but I fell for it, especially for the second half.

Javier Bardem is, of course, fantastic! He starts on the right foot giving a subtle, quiet performance that turns spectacular as we're heading towards the end. There's a scene with him giving the two magic stones to his children - really touching and emotional and beautifully acted. The film itself is slow at first, but after the first hour I was really engaged. Inarritu does a good job afterall, with an incredible care for details; the cinematography also stands out.

My rating for the film: 8/10. The scenes with the wife were uncomfortable, I wish there were less of those.

Barney's Version (2010)

The story of the politically incorrect, fully lived life of the impulsive, irascible and fearlessly blunt Barney Panofsky. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Makeup

The films I have to see to stay connected to Oscar... :) I'm exagerating a bit, Barney's Version is not one of the year's worst. But I would've probably not have given it 130 minutes of my life. It has its good moments, but it's really uneven throughout, going from bad to fine, from mediocre comedy to sometimes relevant drama.

I don't think the Oscar nomination for makeup is worthy, there were notable mistakes especially is Rosamund's aging makeup. Its other big award recognition was the Golden Globe win (Comedy/Musical) for Giamatti: it seemed like a pretty weak category in the funny department and I'm sure he won more for the dramatic scenes (which is called cheating!) than for the more funny ones which are rather superficial. And he does give a good performance, but boy is that character dislikeable. There's always a problem when I don't give a damn if my lead character lives or dies, is happy or not.

Dustin Hoffman is a scene-stealer, in a small but very effective role. Rosamund has her good moments but nothing terrific, while Minnie brings the comedy to the film. There are some bad casting choices with the grown-up kids, the direction is shaky: never deciding if we're seeing a comedy, a drama, switching too suddenly from one register to another. But there are also a couple of key scenes that do feel powerful: if I'd mention them, I'd spoil the story...

My rating for the film: 5.5/10. It needed a better grip on the story, and I could never really call myself a Paul Giamatti fan, even when I admit his successes.

Incendies (2010)

A mother's last wishes send twins Jeanne and Simon on a journey to Middle East in search of their tangled roots. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Foreign Language Film (Canada)

I've actually seen this film days ago, but because it's so difficult to rate and because I had little free time, I had to postpone writing about it. Incendies is quite an unusual film and it gives me stuff to think about: what the hell was going on with this year's Best Foreign Language Film category?! I didn't think I'd see something more outrageous than in Dogtooth... :)

The idea in Incendies is a great one, but the subject is poorly developed; even so, it would make for a good film, if it weren't for the biggest WHAT THE F*UCK moment of them all. Those who've seen it know I'm talking about "the twist" - I myself thought it would be too kinky to be used, but they went there. Even if we put that aside, it's something so hard to believe that it destoys any believability from there on. This is because the biggest problem with Incendies has to be the casting; it's the WORST casting I've seen in a while because it completely takes away from the believability of the story (those who've seen it know I'm taking about the age of some actors).

My rating for the film: 7/10. 7 was randomly chosen. The film has a couple of powerful scenes, the idea is great, but bad casting caused by bad directorial decisions make for a messy ending.

Street Angel (1928)

A woman on the run from the law finds her past catching up to her just as she is on the verge of true happiness. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 (1+2) Oscars:

Best Actress: Janet Gaynor (for 1928) (WINNER)
Best Cinematography (for 1929)
Best Art Direction (for 1929)

I'm looking at the official poster on the right: the girl there looks nothing like Janet Gaynor :)) oh, Hollywood, using "photoshop" even back then. :) Getting back to the film: this is of course one of the 3 films for which Janet collectively won Best Actress in Oscar's first edition. I have no idea why the film was also nominated for 2 categories in the following year, but those mentionings are worthy.

The cinematography and the art direction are both quite interesting, especially the set decoration which is efficiently used to tell the story. Frank Borzage also directed the big hit of 1928: 7th Heaven - also starring Janet, and I'm very anxious to see that one. Street Angel makes for no big breakthrough in silent films and it's mostly carried by Miss Gaynor lovely emotional performance and the incredible use of music, with a very distinctive main theme. The story could've been worse, but it's really her charm that makes the film a bit more believable and attractive to the audience.

My rating for the film: 6.5/10. Its biggest problem is the general misogynistic tone of the story.

Death on the Nile (1978)

A murder is committed on a Nile steamer, but Hercule Poirot is on board to discover who did it. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar: Best Costume Design (WINNER)

This was mostly campaigned as connected to Murder on the Orient Express (1974); even the poster wears a striking resemblance. Yet, while Murder itself is not considered a great success, this one is even less. What it does share with its Agatha Christie predecessor is a just-as-impressive allstar cast: Peter Ustinov, David Niven, Bette Davis, Maggie Smith, Angela Lansbury, Mia Farrow, George Kennedy and a couple more names.

As a murder mystery, it's a weak film. It's not that well directed, the screenplay is shaky and I guessed who the killer was as soon as the first murder happened. That's not because I'm a genius at such things, but because all the others were too less-striking to earn the title of the murderer. The performances are ok, none spectacular (Lansbury is the highlight) and the costume design win is pretty worthy. Bette Davis was fine, but she had already reached the age where she lost a bit of her acting hunger.

My rating for the film: 5/10. Nice to see the actors together, but not an interesting film.

A Ship Comes In (1928)

It tells the story of a family of immigrants coming to the United States. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar: Best Actress: Louise Dresser

Not much to say about this film, nominated in Oscar's first edition. It's a silent film with a lot of clichés, no character development, no interesting plot, just a series of actions and the way the characters are reacting.

Watching it nowadays, it's difficult to sit through, because, unlike Sunrise or Wings, it brings nothing interesting to the table. Louise Dresser gives a short, ok performance mostly based on the intelligence in her eyes and not on anything that the screenplay might offer her.

My rating for the film: 3/10. Recommended to Oscar fans only.

The Way Back (2010)

During WWII, Siberian gulag escapees walk 4000 miles overland to freedom in India. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar: Best Makeup

In the summer of 2010 people were already talking about this film. I myself thought at that time that, based on what we knew about it, it was a serious contender for Best Picture and Best Director. I had it for months on my prediction chart, but as nobody was picking it up, embracing it, etc, it just faded away. In the end it scored a Makeup nomination, and might I say a worthy one.

But it wasn't just the poor film distribution/campaign stopping The Way Back from making it big at the Oscars. It was also its poor quality to blame for the lack of success. I didn't like it. I might've enjoyed short scenes and some beautiful landscape, but I thought overall it was messy. Peter Weir is a good director, sometimes an incredible director, but definitely not successful as a writer. The dialogue is plain stupid at times, there are some casting mistakes and simply put the film just goes nowhere.

I thought Jim Sturgess's performance was awful at times and one of the 2 Romanian actors didn't do great either. Harris is fine, Saoirse is ok, Colin is cool - but nobody is great. And also: this film would've been much better in Russian; it feels confused and undecided and it lacks believability everytime the actors open their mouths and throw in some silly accents.

My rating for the film: 4.5/10. Way too long.

Dogtooth (2010)

A husband and wife keep their teenage children imprisoned on their property, creating an alternative, abusive reality for them. [wiki]

Nominated for 1 Oscar: Best Foreign Language Film: Greece

As some of you might remember, I have a special relationship with Greece, as I had lived here for a while and I still come with work once every couple of months (actually, as I'm writing, I'm in Athens for 2 weeks). So I was hesitant to see Dogtooth, first because it's my first Greek film (and what a way to start) and mostly because I had heard of the controversy surrounding it and I didn't want to completely tear it apart, because of the respect I have for the people here - who were super excited it got nominated.

I was happy to discover it is not that bad. Dogtooth is a pretentious, arrogant, in many ways imature film, with a subject that will definitely not please everybody. On the bad side there's also the screenplay - taken too far and for no real reason, the ending which could've been much more powerful and, most of all, the unnecessary nudity. Keep in mind: it's not a film to watch with your parents: lots of vaginas, breasts, a penis in erection, and other forms of nudity. :) Also, an explicit sex scene which I suspect wasn't even simulated or acted. Why do I have a problem with this?! Because I don't think big-screen films should make you either horny or show excessive, unnecessary-for-the-story nudity just in an attempts to shock - for that we have porn. I don't want to be distracted while I'm focusing on a serious, cinema-related film.

On the good side: well, the direction. This guy is a much better director than a writer. Sure, he needs to tone it down a bit, stop showing off, but I swear: there's at least a scene I have no idea how he managed to film it!!! Either there was real torture involved, or he has a technique that is terribly surprising at times - those who've seen it probably know I'm referring to the dogtooth scene towards the end. How did he make it so real? Visual effects maybe? No idea.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Because it makes no sense at times, but it surprises in others. I will remember it more than I'll remember In a Better World, but I'm lowering the grade as I was annoyed by the nudity.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)

As Harry races against time and evil to destroy the Horcruxes, he uncovers the existence of three most powerful objects in the wizarding world: the Deathly Hallows. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Art Direction

Best Visual Effects

The confusion called Harry Potter continues. To say that it's hard to follow would be unjust: because they never even bother to give you enough info to put it all together. Talk about screenplay gaps! This might make sense for those who are reading the books, but the rest of us: we got lost a couple of episodes ago.

Plot over twist over plot over twist... I hope they can glue them for the final part. Really, know, why do they make them so complicated, not to mention those silly screenplay solutions. Otherwise, the film is nicely done from a technical point of view, the Art Direction is fine, the Visual Effects are fine, and Ralph and Helena BC are both cool to watch. Hope we'll get a lot of Ralph Fiennes in the next one.

My rating for the film: 5.5/10. And I still feel like I'm being too generous.

In a Better World (2010)

The lives of two Danish families cross each other, and an extraordinary but risky friendship comes into bud. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Foreign Language Film: Denmark (WINNER)

I have to admit this is the first Susanne Bier film I'm seeing, as I've never got the chance to see After the Wedding, Brothers or not even Things We Lost in the Fire. The main reason I saw it of course is because it was nominated and moreso: it won! It's also the first film I'm seeing out of the 5 nominees, so for now I cannot compare them.

In a Better World is a serious film, quite well put together, with no obvious flaws in both screenplay & direction. Even so, due to its subject, I found it hard to enjoy and it really became a bit difficult to watch at one point. It's not a feel-good movie, it's quite slow at times and it didn't make me curious until the very last end.

On the very plus side: the beautiful cinematography that captures both African landscape and also magnificent close-ups with the characters. The actors all give very good performances, especially the men. Watch out for the kid named William Johnk Nielsen, in his first role - he's got both the looks and the talent to have a great career in the following years.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. It could've been a 7, but some scenes are too honest and well acted to be ignored.

Country Strong (2010)

A drama centered on a rising country-music songwriter (Hedlund) who sparks with a fallen star (Paltrow). [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Original Song

I don't remember the last time I saw such a bad Oscar nominated film, and it's not like I suspected it: it came out of nowhere. Because Country Strong is almost unwatchable in its first hour: the screenplay is one of the worst that ever came my way, with dialogue and scenes that go beyond cliche, and so badly put together that they don't even create a cheesy enviroment, but an ambitious yet failing mess.

The one decent scene is with the sick child, but other than that: pure nonsense. Gwyneth has lost any real hunger for acting, and if I would've been in the Razzie judging group I would've definitely considered her for a nom. The rest of them are just floating around, because there's no real direction to this film. The songs are ok, none that seemed spectacular to me, but they couldn't save this trainwreck anyway.

My rating for the film: 2/10. I was considering a 2.5 or 3, but that wouldn't be fair to Alice in Wonderland, which seems quite thrilling by comparison.

Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927)

A married farmer falls under the spell of a woman from the city, who tries to convince him to drown his wife. [imdb]

Nominated for 4 Oscars (as a 1927/28 film):

Best Picture, Unique and Artistic Production (WINNER)

Best Actress: Janet Gaynor (WINNER)

Best Cinematography (WINNER)

Best Art Direction

Don't get fooled by its "Best Picture" win, the Academy doesn't recognize it today as the standard BP winner, as this was a second category to a more relevant one, which was won by Wings (1927), which now stands as the officially first Best Picture winner in Oscar history.

But the voters at that time clearly liked Sunrise, and there are a lot of elements to enjoy, especially the technical part: the cinematography is impressive even today and I got a feeling that Sunrise was a road opener with a lot of technical aspects. The direction is very effective, even when the screenplay goes dry in its more uneventful scenes.

While the acting is ok, I can't help but look at it as a very dated film in story and acting. I'm sure it was a hit back then with the critics, but there's something uncomfortable about the story and it did lose my interest at one point. Technically beautiful, but overall I prefer Wings.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Good ending, though.

The King's Speech (2010)

Seen on January 18th, 2011

The story of King George VI of Britain, his impromptu ascension to the throne and the speech therapist who helped the unsure monarch become worthy of it. [imdb]

Nominated for 12 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)

Best Director: Tom Hooper (WINNER)

Best Actor: Colin Firth (WINNER)

Best Supporting Actor: Geoffrey Rush

Best Supporting Actress: Helena Bonham Carter

Best Original Screenplay (WINNER)

Best Cinematography

Best Original Score

Best Editing

Best Art Direction

Best Costume Design

Best Sound Mixing

It has nothing to do with he fact that it won Best Picture: King's Speech is my least favorite film of the 10 nominees. I don't think it's a bad film and I'm not one of those haters... but Social Network, its obvious runner-up for the win, was a better film and while I'm not the biggest fan of TSN, it's good to call it like I see it. My biggest problem with The King's Speech is that it didn't really keep me interested throughout, and I needed a bit of a suspense - because it was so damn predictable, even to the last shot. It would've been more uplifting, had it had a less cheesier ending.

On the good side there's definitely the acting. Colin Firth gives a good, difficult performance, but Geoffrey Rush is best in show, bringing unexpected humanity, while Helena Bonham Carter makes the best of her character and I actually cared for these 2 more than for the king itself, a character which kind of bored me. The screenplay is fine, but nothing groundbreaking; the win for Best Director is ridiculous given the competition and I still found it hard to believe even though it was obvious to happen. Tom Hooper's directing style definitely has its good moments in creating scenes that work properly, but often enough it's too flat to be worthy of Oscar praise.

The film is easy to watch, nothing to hate, but I didn't get much excited either.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Not one of those winners to make film history, but definitely not one of the worst.

127 Hours (2010)

Seen on January 16th, 2011

A mountain climber becomes trapped under a boulder while canyoneering alone near Moab, Utah and resorts to desperate measures in order to survive. [imdb]

Nominated for 6 Oscars:

Best Picture

Best Actor: James Franco

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Editing

127 Hours is the kind of intense experience I would probably never watch twice; even so, it was hardly as brutal as I expected it to be. I thought Danny Boyle made a smart choice with that: keeping the difficult to watch scenes as short as possible and allowing us to spend enough time with the character so that the hand-thing becomes just an aspect of the film and not the defining one.

Other than that, of course the film is a bit over-directed, just like Slumdog was, and I've also had a bit of a problem with the cinematography - it gives an unique touch to the film, but everything is too colorful at times, too eye-popping that it distracts from the story and gives it an unnatural feeling.

The material is very good, so the film could've been better. But when it comes to the acting, I thought James Franco was sensational, making it look as believable as possible and definitely bringing some humanity in a couple of key scenes. A terrific performance, in my opinion.

My rating for the film: 8/10. And I still love If I Rise, it should've been a much stronger contender for Best Song.

The Fighter (2010)

Seen on January 15th, 2011

A look at the early years of boxer "Irish" Micky Ward and his brother who helped train him before going pro. [imdb]

Nominated for 7 Oscars:

Best Picture

Best Director: David O. Russell

Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale (WINNER)

Best Supporting Actress: Amy Adams

Best Supporting Actress: Melissa Leo (WINNER)

Best Original Screenplay

Best Editing

This is a film that could've actually won Best Picture in a less complicated year. I didn't think it was very challenging when it came to the writing or the directing (though they're both fine), but it has a nice story people can relate to and it has some terrific acting.

I know many who appreciate Mark Wahlberg's performance, I thought he was just fine and it was a smart and generous choice for him to step back on the acting and let his co-stars really shine. Christian Bale is quite terrific, another character for him to get lost into - from the 5 nominees, I think he definitely deserved the win; he grabs all the attention everytime he's on screen. The 2 ladies are also great: Amy Adams delivers an unexpectedly bitchy performance, but always vulnerable and relatable. Melissa Leo is loud, but never cartoonish on screen and I thought overall she did a fantastic job, even though I would've voted for Jacki.

The film has its slow moments, but it's generally entertaining and it's always nice to see great actors giving some of their best performances.

My rating for the film: 8/10. Nothing more to add.

Inception (2010) (2nd time)

In a world where technology exists to enter the human mind through dream invasion, a highly skilled thief is given a final chance at redemption which involves executing his toughest job to date: Inception. [imdb]

Nominated for 8 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography (WINNER)
Best Original Score
Best Art Direction
Best Sound Mixing (WINNER)
Best Sound Editing (WINNER)
Best Visual Effects (WINNER)

When I first saw it on the big screen last summer, I was a bit confused, but definitely impressed - of course it works best when seen in a theatre, because it's such a visual & sound experience, and it deserves to be enjoyed the right way. But once the haters started to show up, I knew I had to give it a second look, in case I missed something; and I've watched it again on the small screen - and while it didn't get better, it was definitely quite fabulous.

Yes, I think not nominating Christopher Nolan is quite stupid; today nobody's doing action films like he does - his attention for detail when it comes to directing is breathtaking, and he's such a visionary, at least admit that. Never boring. Getting to the writing: of course it has its flaws, and it's a complicated structure (how could Mal have kidnapped Robert Fischer??), but I liked the idea, the fact that he really tried to make it clear yet never pushing it too hard (seriously!), and I loved the twist and the emotional love story.

Ellen Page shouldn't be in this movie, other than that: they're all great. I had a thing for Marion of course, I though Joseph was just right for the part, Cillian Murphy gives a fabulous limited performance, and Leo is not bad at all. I think the Cinematography definitely deserved the Oscar win, and I consider Hans Zimmer's music to be best in show and no doubt one of the most haunting, perfectly used scores of the past years. Genius.

My rating for the film: 8.5/10. Just because the 3rd act goes a bit too long, but it was closer to a 9, and what an achievement it is, in my opinion.

Animal Kingdom (2010)

Seen on January 5th, 2011

Tells the story of seventeen year-old J (Josh) as he navigates his survival amongst an explosive criminal family and the detective who thinks he can save him. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actress: Jacki Weaver

Animal Kingdom is a good film. I liked it, I respected, I admired it. I was also a bit annoyed by the emotional blackmail, but other than that: it's such an enjoyable film to see. The screenplay & direction are smart & interesting, and the actors are quite great, so let's just go to Jacki Weaver. She is what makes the film so fascinating for me, because it's such a subtle, original performance.

Yes, I think she should've won the Oscar, but the nomination itself was a pleasant surprise, I admit I didn't think she'd make it. Because unfortunately not many people had seen Animal Kingdom, but the voters from the acting branch made justice and gave her the chance to compete. While I love the ending of the film (I do, I know some don't, I do), the final chapter is all about Jacki. She's fascinating, she's mesmerizing, she knows where the camera is, she knows how to keep you connected, how to make the performance special & unique, how to subtly show the vulnerable side of the character and how to fabulously deliver every.damn.line.

My rating for the film: 8/10. I hated the psychotic brother; but this is top 10 material.

The Town (2010)

Seen on December 27th, 2010

As he plans his next job, a longtime thief tries to balance his feelings for a bank manager connected to one of his earlier heists, as well as the FBI agent looking to bring him and his crew down. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actor: Jeremy Renner

I don't think I've ever written this, though I've surely thought about it: Ben Affleck is definitely a better director than an actor. Both The Town and Gone Baby Gone were executed with a certain degree of easiness, both so focused on the story, which made for a surprisingly subtle, efficient direction. The Town has its share of problems, but some elements of greatness really stand out.

From the point of an action movie, it's constructed the right way. The 2 or 3 big action scenes are entertaining, dynamic, impressive, and I still remember them with a lot of admiration. Jon Hamm is fine, Rebecca Hall is pretty good, Blake Lively is surprising, but the best performance comes by far from Jeremy Renner, who seems perfect for this role and gives a certain likeability to a more of a villain character. His performance is worthy of the nomination. Ben Affleck, on the other side, keeps his acting a bit too low-key and the writing choices he makes with the ending of the film are confusing to me: he should've ended it on a much more meaningful note.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. A good action flick.

Tangled (2010)

The magically long-haired Rapunzel has spent her entire life in a tower, but now that a runaway thief has stumbled upon her, she is about to discover the world for the first time, and who she really is. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:


Best Original Song

If you see me giving a 5/10 to an animated feature, than you know I must've really really disliked it; because I'm generous with this genre, and it so happens I think Toy Story 3 is one of the year's best movies, so I'm very opened to such entertainment. And I was anxious to see Tangled, but it truly felt like a disappointing, rather boring experience.

There's no real villain, there no funny supporting character (no, the horse is not enough). The storyline is too simple and definitely not worthy of the Disney tradition, and the animation looked just a bit strange to me. How boring is the ending and, with the exception of one scene, I hardly cared for these characters. Of course, I see the light is the best moment, and I still believe it should've clearly won the Oscar for Best Original Song. But other than that: not much.

My rating for the film: 5/10. They should start making them smarter, or at least funnier.

Hereafter (2010)

A drama centered on three people - a blue-collar American, a French journalist and a London school boy - who are touched by death in different ways. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Visual Effects

I know people have kicked this a lot, and I understand it: the film is wrong in so many ways. But the beginning of the film is so powerful, I still had it in my mind once the film was over. When it's good, Hereafter is pretty awesome: the one single most important visual effect is great, even if it doesn't justify a nomination; truth be told: those 5 minutes are very cool.

And also functioning quite ok is the Matt Damon storyline, especially in the beginning, when he's trying to build this character out of so little - and bringing some emotion and managing to create a believable person. But the other aspects of the film are quite messy: the screenplay, especially, becomes really stupid at one point, and I was so sick of hearing the word weightlessness every 5 minutes. Seriously: even in the lines of a 7 year old.

My rating for the film: 6/10. One of the year's best opening scenes, but clearly downhill from there. Bryce Dallas Howard is quite fabulous though, in a limited but perfect performance.

Another Year (2010)

A look at four seasons in the lives of a happily married couple and their relationships with their family and friends. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Original Screenplay

I've waited quite a while to see this film, but that was not my choice. At one point, it was actually one of my most anticipated films of 2010 as all the raves about Lesley Manville made me curious. Also, I've really enjoyed Mike Leigh's 2 previous films and I wanted to see if he can continue making intriguing, believable, well acted motion pictures.

To me, Another Year is a bit of all that. The performances are the highlight: Lesley Manville is really something, but no wonder she didn't get a Best Actress nomination, because to me she's a supporting character in the film, and should've been campaigned as such. Ruth Sheen is quite great herself, in a subtle performance, and the other actors also deliver good, natural performances.

I know some people had issues with the story and the way it's constructed, I thought it was fine, some scenes slower than others, but overall good writing and nicely constructed dialogue. It IS a depressing film, but he surely didn't go too far with it. My favorite part has to be the final chapter and the film has a good ending. I don't think it's a brilliant film or a must-see, but it definitely kept me curious throughout.

My rating for the film: 8/10. Imelda Staunton is fabulous in a very limited role.