Anonymous (2011)

The theory that it was in fact Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford, who penned Shakespeare's plays. Set against the backdrop of the succession of Queen Elizabeth I and the Essex rebellion against her. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Costume Design

This is a film that starts with plenty of potential, but quickly becomes too complicated for its own good, with a screenplay that would be a match to any juicy soap opera. While I can accept the main idea of the film: Shakespeare didn't write all those plays, the film really loses me when it portrays him as a complete moron. Just the same: I can accept changing small historical facts about the Earl of Oxford's story to fit the context, but the conclusion of his story is simply ridiculous (I don't wanna spoil it).

I am a bit surprised by the Costume Design nomination: there are plenty of costumes, but none that really stands out to me; for sure they could've found worthier films to score in this category. On the other hand, the one pleasant surprise was Rhys Ifans' dynamic performance: he has great presence, but also handles well the more dramatic scenes.

My rating for the film: 5/10. Vanessa Redgrave is ok as an old Elizabeth, but Joely Richardson is not so convincing, playing the younger part.

Puss in Boots (2011)

A story about the events leading up to the sword fighting cat's meeting with Shrek and his friends. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Animated Feature

Just because I like cats so much, this film is gonna get a higher rating from me than it might actually deserve. The story is fine, there are plenty of good jokes here, the leading character is quite adorable, but this isn't a film people will be talking about next year. It's quite forgettable, considering this is the category that in the past years nominated stuff like Wall E, Toy Story 3 and Illusionist.

Puss in Boots has good animation, an ok screenplay, good technical stuff and a couple of well executed action scenes. But as I said: nothing to write home about, except for some adorable cats & kittens; I think I was the target for it, and it succeeded, as I went awwwwwww more than once. :)

My rating for the film: 7/10. Thankfully, it has no Shrek in it.

Warrior (2011)

The youngest son of an alcoholic former boxer returns home, where he's trained by his father for competition in a mixed martial arts tournament - a path that puts the fighter on a collision corner with his older brother. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actor: Nick Nolte

Even with the poster on the right, can you believe this film wasn't a box office success? To quote Mae West, "so much meat and no potatoes". :)) Getting back to the film, I was pleasantly surprised by it, as it made for a pleasant movie experience. It helps that the cast is so amazing: both Tom Hardy & Joel Edgerton give Oscar worthy performances (I mean it, they definitely deserved some awards' recognition).

But truth is, and no shame about it, that Warrior is a soap opera with boxing; while this doesn't completely take down the film, it does hurt its credibility - the fact that the 2 brothers end up fighting eachother (in the final - not a spoiler, it's in the trailer) is hard to believe (of course!) and kills the credibility that the film longs for.

The actual fights are great and very very well directed, but to see the commentators talking and all other stuff from behind the scenes of the fights seem quite silly and cheesy. The film IS quite inconsistent, both in writing & directing and I often question their choices, but the actors & the boxing actually make it work. Nick Nolte's nomination seems justified, he was really good in a couple of scenes, though I've heard some of the performance was taken out during editing - which is a pitty.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. Had it been more dramatic & less commercial it would've made for a more serious Oscar contender.

A Separation (2011)

A married couple faces a difficult decision - to improve the life of their child by moving to another country or to stay in Iran and look after a deteriorating parent who has Alzheimer's disease. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Foreign Language Film: Iran (WINNER)
Best Original Screenplay

In such uncertain times, this film is the best ambassador Iran could've asked for, and Asghar Farhadi's Oscar speech was the most inspiring of that evening. Putting that aside, A Separation really is a good film. While the acting is top class and the direction is what the film needs, the success of the film is in the screenplay - a complex look at Iranian traditions and the juridical system, without being too judgmental which I much appreciated.

The story is interesting and very captivating at times, with twists and turns that were a delight to follow. Sareh Bayat gives a heartbreaking supporting performance and she's by far the best in the film as a suffering wife with a moral dilemma. The direction is quite subtle, but given that the writing gets most of the attention, it couldn't have been otherwise. A Separation is a good film; I'm not sure I loved it and I'll probably never see it again, but it tells an interesting, captivating story.

My rating for the film: 8/10. I could go for more, but the 8 makes sense for now. What it isn't is the masterpiece some claim it to be: it's just a very well written film that works.

A Better Life (2011)

A gardener in East L.A. struggles to keep his son away from gangs and immigration agents while also trying to give him the opportunities he never had. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Actor: Demian Bichir

What a waste of a nomination! And more importantly - I think I even tweeted it: I can't believe the movies I see for Oscar! And that's because I try to see all the nominees from all the feature film categories. And given that Best Actor is such an important one, I couldn't miss this. But I swear, it was painful to get through. All the cliches are there; and it's bad even for a TV movie.

It's predictable, with poor writing and it creates these supporting character that are embarassingly written and even more tragic: embarassingly acted. The casting hurts, i don't think they could've found least talented teenagers; the leading kid is ok-ish, but the rest of the gang made my eyes roll till I fainted. :D

Demian Bichir gives a good performance, but NOT one that would become worthy of a nomination. He gets a more emotional scene towards the end, but that's just about it: it's true, the screenplay doesn't help much, but I am surprised that some voters actually had him as their number one choice (and moreso, that they saw A Better Life to begin with, and not Shame or other indie films).

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. The film tells a predictable story that didn't need to be told.

Hugo (2011)

Set in 1930s Paris, an orphan who lives in the walls of a train station is wrapped up in a mystery involving his late father and an automaton. [imdb]

Nominated for 11 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director: Martin Scorsese
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Cinematography (WINNER)
Best Original Score
Best Art Direction (WINNER)
Best Costume Design
Best Editing
Best Sound Mixing (WINNER)
Best Sound Editing (WINNER)
Best Visual Effects (WINNER)

The most outrageous loss on Oscar night was The Tree of Life not winning Best Cinematography. It wasn't hard to anticipate, but it still broke my heart. It lost to Hugo, a film I had seen that exact week, a film Oscar voters liked enough to throw in some technical wins, but not enough to give it any of the big prizes. I do not love Hugo, but I can't really argue with some technical elements.

The main reason I don't love this film is by far the screenplay; the fact that the writing was nominated makes me sad and I'm surprised to say the least: the story is weak, not very interesting and with little motivation behind the characters. It often fells flat and ends every storyline on a disappointing note. On the negative side I'd also add the booooring performance of Miss Moretz - no performance stands out for me, I thought Ben Kingsley was fine, so was the leading star Asa Butterfield, but Miss Moretz was just annoying.

The film is well directed, but it was hard to get over the superficial glow of the writing. The Cinematography was ok, though Robert Richardson is becoming a one-trick ponny with the blue-light and blue-green-colors that he's already used at least in The Aviator and Inglourious Basterds; and I'm getting tired of it. The best element of the film has to be the fantastic art direction, with impressive and very creative sets.

My rating for the film: 7/10. It didn't feel magic to me.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (2011)

A nine-year-old searches New York City for the lock that matches a mysterious key left behind by his father, who died in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Supporting Actor: Max von Sydow

I think this is the first year that the more-than-5 nominees for Best Picture worked fine with me. I didn't really like The Artist, Hugo, Descendants & Midnight in Paris, so with only 5 nominees it would've made for the worst line-up in history for me. But with 9 I got Tree of Life (masterpiece), Moneyball, War Horse & our Extremely Loud - all of which make my top 4 of the 9. Without these, I'd be lost.

But this doesn't mean I think Extremely Loud is a great film... It's not a masterpiece, but I liked it and it had more emotion in a scene than Artist, Descendants & Hugo put together. Of course, everything about 9/11 is heartbreaking. The scene with Sandra in the office looking out the window breaks your heart; the scene with Oskar's big reveal is also incredibly emotional & touching... For all this, I appreciate the film a lot.

But it does have its problems: I think it's a bit too long and it doesn't always balance well - some parts are less interesting than others. So the fault is mostly in the screenplay, which doesn't mean it's bad writing. The performances are all fine with me, Thomas Horn gives a real breakthrough performance and I believe Sandra was one Oscar scene away from a potential nomination - she is really playing against type.

Max von Sydow's nomination is what makes Oscar seasons more exciting - I didn't see it coming and we had almost no warning sign for it. But the performance is there, which makes it a worthy nomination.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. The direction is fine and the original score beautiful. In the end all I can say is that it's a really underrated film & I have no idea what the critics are bitching about.

The Help (2011) (2nd time)

An aspiring author during the civil rights movement of the 1960s decides to write a book detailing the African-American maids' point of view on the white families for which they work, and the hardships they go through on a daily basis. [imdb]

Nominated for 4 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Actress: Viola Davis
Best Supporting Actress: Jessica Chastain
Best Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer (WINNER)

Just like I tweeted yesterday, The Help seemed better the 2nd time around, as I was less annoyed by all the scenes Emma Stone has. It's not that she delivers a bad performance, but I prefer the more dramatic storylines that the film has to offer. I would've liked The Help more had it been less commercial; though, had it been less commercial, it's quite possible it wouldn't have been made at all.

Just like SAG noticed, what stand out in this film are the performances: Viola Davis, Allison Janney and especially Jessica Chastain are amazing. Octavia Spencer gives a fine performance that I respect a lot, but in my opinion Jessica should've been the one to actually win the Oscar. She creates such a memorable character, both fun & heartbreaking like this category hasn't seen in a while; it feels special. No point writing about Viola's performance here, I'll do that on Alex in Movieland, but I liked it quite a lot.

I think the film is well directed, easy to watch, the screenplay is ok for the most of it (minus the shit pie scene; it's distracting and I don't think it's something Minny would've done), but the film is overall too long.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. The performances turn it into something special.

Beginners (2011)

A young man is rocked by two announcements from his elderly father: that he has terminal cancer, and that he has a young male lover. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer (WINNER)

Best Supporting Actor has been such a flashy category for the past 4 years, with winning performances that were really... out there: Bardem as a killer, Ledger's Joker, Waltz's Natzi, Bale's drug addict boxer; all of them fantastic performances. Which doesn't mean that Plummer isn't worthy of the win (he is), but that his performance is much more quiet & subtle than we're used to in this category. What I love about this character & the performance is how little idealized it is, how he's not playing a kind old man, but a real character, a real person with flaws and weaknesses. It's a good performance, a worthy winner, also my choice from the 5.

Getting to the movie, I'd say I admire it more than I like it. The performances are all good, but the film just ends up being too slow at times (and not slow in the Tree of Life kind of way); it just didn't always challenge me, so I guess that could be the screenplay's fault. The love story of the two leads feels honest and it's nicely constructed, but I wonder now if the film isn't a bit overdirected.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. I just can't love it.

Albert Nobbs (2011) (2nd time)

Albert Nobbs is a woman living as a man in order to find work in the harsh environment of 19th-century Ireland. [wiki]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Actress: Glenn Close
Best Supporting Actress: Janet McTeer
Best Makeup

Whoever did the Oscar campaigning for Albert Nobbs did a mighty fine job; sure, it didn't win anything, but 3 nominations is a lot for a film that has received so many bad reviews and nobody seems to like; at least from the people I know. I dislike it less than others do, I actually thought it was ok-ish the first time, but you can definitely tell the flaws the second time around. Even so: there's nothing SO bad about it, and I still think it's very watchable and fascinating in a weird way.

Its weakness has to be the screenplay: when Glenn Close & Janet McTeer are on screen, it all works much better, but those supporting characters and story with Mia & Aaron make you lose interest quickly. Had the film been a more intimate study of Albert Nobbs, I think it would've made the film weirder, but also more attractive. The acting is ok, even the boring characters are well played. Congrats to Glenn Close for her movie comeback, Janet McTeer gives a convincing performance and I must mention Pauline Collins for her deliciously funny supporting performance.

My rating for the film: 6/10. A nice effort and you can tell the passion that went into it; but the screenplay needed changes, and maybe also a better director. The makeup nomination is a bit of a surprise: I'll keep saying it: Janet's nose looks different from one scene to another.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

Eight years of being raised by humans and now left behind in an abusive sanctuary, a hyper-intelligent chimpanzee will lead a revolution of apes towards freedom from man's torturous exploitation. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Visual Effects

As I was catching up with Oscar nominated films, I could only think how many overrated films 2011 has given us; I dunno what was wrong with critics the past year, or maybe it's just me: how is it that Rise of the Planet of the Apes got so many good reviews?? Ok, so maybe Andy Serkis's work IS revolutionary from a technical perspective, but the film is crap, one of the worst written movies of the year!

The visual effects themselves are not so impressive, so let's not imagine that this is on an Avatar level. They're ok and I can understand the nomination. But all the other aspects make for a gigantic mess: the screenplay is RIDICULOUS, with screenplay gaps like never before (brilliant scientists were making tests for weeks on a female chimp and they couldn't tell she was expecting?! :)), just to give an example). All the humans in this film are complete idiots; and the acting isn't helping either. John Lithgow, Freida Pinto, Tom Felton and especially James Franco (!) deliver AWFUL performances. The directing is a mess (nobody ages over the course of 8 years, obviously; they don't even change their hairstyle; none) and the action scenes are held back until too late in the film.

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. I don't understand the fans of this.

Rango (2011)

Seen on December 28th, 2011

Rango is an ordinary chameleon who accidentally winds up in the town of Dirt, a lawless outpost in the Wild West in desperate need of a new sheriff. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Animated Feature (WINNER)

It really wasn't a great year for animation, right? I haven't seen most of them yet, but I hear people saying that a lot and I suspect they're right. I'm usually up for a great animation, let's just remember that my favorite 2010 film was the instant classic Toy Story 3... But this year we have Rango. It's gonna win the Oscar, it might actually deserve it, it's not a bad film, but not a memorable one either.

The 2 elements about it that stand out are the technical part which is quite impressive if you pay attention and some funny lines from the screenplay. It's creative, it gets better towards the ending, but it still lacks a likeability factor that would make me actually love it. Maybe because it's about a... chameleon? It could be. Though I probably don't like it so much because of how slow the first part is and it did test my patience.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. Hey, at least it wasn't a princess fairytale... It does feel more different that many others.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)

Seen on December 26th, 2011

Harry, Ron and Hermione search for Voldemort's remaining Horcruxes in their effort to destroy the Dark Lord. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Art Direction
Best Visual Effects
Best Makeup

...And it has finally reached an end. I really hope 10 years from now someone will make a mini-series adaptation of the Harry Potter books, something in like 20 episodes so that the ones who haven't read the books (myself included) could understand a bit what this was all about. This final chapter might just be the messiest of them all, with gigantic plot holes for anyone who bothered to follow the story.

And of course the screenplay has to be blamed for this. I'm sure there was a lot of screenplay editing going on, but I'm convinced they could've done a better job. The Oscar nominations make sense and I have to mention Ralph Fiennes, who gives by far the best acting performance of the entire series, not just this film. He is FANTASTIC, and an Oscar nomination should've followed; seriously. I'm not that impressed with Alan Rickman here, though many seem to be.

The film is a confusing piece of work, with a couple of good scenes (anything with Voldemort), but mostly very poor writing & directing choices. Don't even get me started on the ending, which is ridiculous to say the least.

My rating for the film: 5/10. Not a film to go down in history; let's move on.

Drive (2011)

Seen on November 27th, 2011

A mysterious Hollywood stuntman, mechanic and getaway driver lands himself in trouble when he helps out his neighbour. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Sound Editing

This film was probably the biggest pleasant surprise I've had all year, because I wasn't prepared for the stylish action classic film it is. It's such an unusual, intense, original film, with incredible direction, fantastic cinematography and good performances. I am disappointed that Oscars didn't give it the attention it deserved.

At least they could've went for Albert Brooks, which is quite great in a flashy supporting performance. Ryan is perfect for the role, his character is less showy, but he does his best with what's given. The real star of the film, however, is director Nicolas Winding Refn, who has grown a lot as an artist since Bronson, that weird Tom Hardy film from 2008. Drive is almost perfectly put together, with a fantastic care for detail and a clear point of view.

My rating for the film: 9/10. I am not sure if Carey Mulligan was right for the part, I kinda wish they'd chosen another actress.

The Ides of March (2011)

Seen on December 13th, 2011

An idealistic staffer for a presidential candidate gets a crash course on dirty politics during his stint on the campaign trail. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Adapted Screenplay

I was really hoping this film won't get nominated for anything, so that I won't have to write about it and justify the rating I'm about to give it. I know I stand alone here and I need to defend myself, but to me this is by far the worst Not-so-obviously-awful film of the year; it was a failure, a mass of clichés thrown in together and made up to look like something interesting and new.

I rolled my eyes at the cheating candidate theme, Marisa Tomei gives one of her most boring, clichéd performances in a stupid role, the writing is just silly, either completely predictable (the suicide) or filled with dialogue that would never happen (the confrontation). I blame Clooney for this: for writing a lazy screenplay and directing it in a lazy way. Ryan is fine, Philip Seymour Hoffman is fine, but this film annoyed me a lot.

My rating for the film: 4/10. Clooney, put some effort into it the next time!

Bridesmaids (2011)

Seen on October 20th, 2011

Competition between the maid of honor and a bridesmaid, over who is the bride's best friend, creates chaos right before the big wedding. [imdb]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Supporting Actress: Melissa McCarthy
Best Original Screenplay

It needs to be said that I liked this more than I liked The Hangover, I thought it was very funny in a silly way, and it's the kind of movie that I recommend to everyone - because everyone seems to enjoy it. I rarely laugh while watching a film, and this definitely had me smiling and laughing from start to ending.

Oscar got it right with the 2 nominations: Melissa McCarthy is my favorite of the Supporting Actress line-up, she is so damn funny and makes those crazy lines into classic quotes; her character introduction is simply fantastic. She'd get my vote. Bridesmaids was lucky that this year's Original Screenplay category was quite weak, because it secured a nomination early on; I'm not saying it doesn't deserve it, I actually prefer it to Artist or Midnight in Paris, just that Oscar doesn't tend to recognize this type of writing. And I'm happy it did this time: the film is one funny scene after another, with the kind of jokes that I like.

My rating for the film: 7.5/10. It can be easily described as a silly comedy that's not to be taken serious, but I've enjoyed it a lot.

Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)

Seen on October 16th, 2011

The Autobots learn of a Cybertronian spacecraft hidden on the moon, and race against the Decepticons to reach it and to learn its secrets. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Visual Effects
Best Sound Mixing
Best Sound Editing

I must confess the Transformers series is one of my guilty pleasures; the first one was the best, no doubt about it. The second one had big writing issues and this one... well, sure, plenty of annoying characters, but the visual effects are fantastic, with the last 30-40 minutes as a series of one stunning visual effect after the other. For me, it was probably one of the most relaxing actions flicks of 2011.

Unfortunately, it has no chance of winning anything... the first Transformers lost the Visual Effects Oscar to the talking bear from Golden Compass and this Transformers will probably lose the award to the talking ape from Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The acting is all over the place: I like Shia LaBeouf and he always does the best he can, while Turturro & Frances McDormand are simply awful and Razzie-worthy.

My rating for the film: 6/10. Those who appreciate an unpretentious summer movie will like it; but the screenplay is often enough nonsense.

Rio (2011)

When Blu, a domesticated macaw from small-town Minnesota, meets the fiercely independent Jewel, he takes off on an adventure in Rio de Janeiro. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Original Song

We can all agree how messy this years's Original Song category was, with only 2 nominees... ridiculous! But this nomination for the film was the only motivation I had to see Rio, and it wasn't as bad as I expected it to be. Getting back to the song: it's ok, it's nicely used in the film, especially at the ending and, as I still have to see Muppets, I can't say if it deserves to win or not.

Rio doesn't really bring anything new to the table; it's colorful, but otherwise nothing too impressive in the visual department. The characters are nice, but not so memorable, and Jesse Eisenberg's voice for the leading character was distracting to me: I don't think he was the right choice to carry the film. On the good side is the some of the writing: there were 2 or 3 scenes where I laughed (I think all of them had to do with the monkeys) and there is a REALLY touching scene that maybe should've been exploited more: when the chain is cut and Blu is left behind watching as the others fly away... it was unexpectedly heartbreaking and you could feel the loneliness of the character.

My rating for the film: 6.5/10. Could've been better; unfortunately the human characters are poorly constructed.

Moneyball (2011)

The story of Oakland A's general manager Billy Beane's successful attempt to put together a baseball club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to draft his players. [imdb]

Nominated for 6 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Actor: Brad Pitt
Best Supporting Actor: Jonah Hill
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Editing
Best Sound Mixing

Just like your regular European guy, I know nothing about Baseball, I don't know the rules of the game, I don't know the teams; it's strictly American. But otherwise, I love competitions in general, and you don't have to be a baseball expert to enjoy Moneyball. This is a smart film, one of the smartest I've seen in the past year.

I'm happy for Brad and the wonderful year he's had, with this & Tree of Life, both as producer and actor. I really admire his career, because he consistently gives good performances, sometimes even great ones. In Moneyball, he gives one of his most likeable performances yet; it's not a ground-breaking one, but it's so damn natural and he makes it look so easy: from delivering the lines that aren't always so flexible to the way he moves his hands or talks on the phone. He was very much connected to the character and this is reassuring for the audience.

The screenplay is good, it has Sorkin's fingerprints all over it, and I'm sure the final version is more his than Zaillian's. Sure, the ending could've been shorter, that's a weakness, but I wasn't bored or anything. The editing is fantastic, the direction is sharp and Jonah Hill... well, I don't see the Oscar potential in his performance, but he does a good job and I liked him (though not enough to justify the nomination).

My rating for the film: 8/10. It's well put together, so I enjoyed it, even if I don't seem to be the target of the film.

The Descendants (2011)

Seen on January 18th, 2012

A land baron tries to re-connect with his two daughters after his wife suffers a boating accident. [imdb]

Nominated for 5 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director: Alexander Payne
Best Actor: George Clooney
Best Adapted Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Editing

It's good to know I've never been much of an Alexander Payne fan and I didn't become one after watching this film. Strangely enough, I guess this IS my type of film and I was definitely charmed by some elements from it. But overall, just like most of the 2011 film, this is also overrated like hell. What's most surprising to me is the amount of awards for Adapted Screenplay, which is an obvious mess at times.

I guess the problem really IS the writing, too many scenes just thrown in there: the guy going back to the hospital and shouting at the wife who's in a coma and clearly not hearing him?! WTF... And that's not the only weird oh-I-am-trying-to-impress writing choice: there's plenty. The verdict with the land is also predictable, while the film does have an incomplete feeling to it.

I generally like Clooney as an actor, I thought all of his previous nominations were GREAT, but this is far from his best. It's not as bad as the haters suggest it, but it's not much of a performance, outside that touching goodbye scene. So, then, what's good about it? The mood, the pace, the fact that it felt relaxed, sometimes enjoyable and easy to watch (like a soap-opera or a bit better). What made this a 6.5 for me (and not a 5, let's say) was Judy Greer's presence, especially in her final scene; she's quite great and, in a limited role, definitely improves the ending of the film, and saving it as much as she can.

My rating for the film: 6.5/10. Another film that doesn't feel like a Best Picture contender.

The Artist (2001)

Seen on January 21st, 2012

Hollywood, 1927: As silent movie star George Valentin wonders if the arrival of talking pictures will cause him to fade into oblivion, he sparks with Peppy Miller, a young dancer set for a big break. [imdb]

Nominated for 10 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Michel Hazanavicius (WINNER)
Best Actor: Jean Dujardin (WINNER)
Best Supporting Actress: Berenice Bejo
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Original Score (WINNER)
Best Art Direction
Best Costume Design (WINNER)
Best Editing

This is a film I don't feel comfortable talking/writing about; the film itself is a dilemma for me, and also I have no idea how to judge it. If I judge it based on my experience while watching it, then it doesn't sit well at all. If I judge it based on my respect for it, based on my movie-knowledge and stuff like that - then I can easily admit The Artist is an achievement. But what's the right way to look at it?

I don't really like it for one simple reason: it's a silent film and it has all the problems that come with a silent film. Yes, the dog is adorable; Yes, Dujardin gives a wonderful performance, but this doesn't stop the film from looking like it's 60 minutes too long (which is bad for a 100 min film). It really was difficult to watch, and I often hoped it would end sooner; the story is nice, but, by respecting rules & cliches of silent films, it becomes quite predictable.

As I said, the work put into this film is impressive. I liked the direction much more than the film itself, I think Hazanavicius did a fine job, considering the film needed a lot of care for details - and it succeeds. I even liked the ending, which again is to he director's credit. Dujardin is wonderful and I kinda hope he wins on Oscar night. The music is nice and the dog is adorable.

But is it worthy of Best Picture? Probably not. In any other year, I suspect it wouldn't have been a front-runner and The King's Speech (another film I'm not a fan of) would've easily kicked its ass. But this is weak year, and somehow most Academy voters seem to embrace a black-and-white French-produced silent film. How this film got so far in the race is still a mystery to me.

My rating for the film: I have no idea... let's say 7/10*. It would've made a nice SHORT film.

***updated it to a 7, instead of a 6.5

War Horse (2011)

At the outbreak of World War I, Joey, young Albert's beloved horse, is sold to the cavalry and shipped to France. [wiki]

Nominated for 6 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Cinematography
Best Original Score
Best Art Direction
Best Sound Mixing
Best Sound Editing

I didn't have any expectations going into this film, I knew very little about the book or about the play - only knew that the play had won the Tony award. And I actually think my lack of info or expectations helped a lot here. What I discovered was a very traditional film, following a familiar structure, but overall it was a very pleasant experience.

I was afraid the film was gonna be all about the boy & the horse, and thankfully it wasn't. Once the war started, it was nice to see new characters and each of them was an interesting discovery. Of course, the screenplay exagerates at times and there's a bit too much epic attempt going on here, but the story is interesting, it rarely gets boring and I was quite curious to see what will happen in the end.

I guess people had too many expectations going into this, which might explain the lack of love from critics AND Oscar. This wouldn't have made it had there been only 5 nominees for Best Picture and the rest of the nominations are for techical stuff, which of course I appreciated. I wouldn't be surprised if it won Sound & Sound Editing, it's a beautifully shot film, nicely put together and with an interesting story.

My rating for the film: 8/10. Maybe a more realistic ending would've gained it more fans.

Midnight in Paris (2011)

Seen on October 15, 2011

It tells the story of Gil, a writer who is forced to confront the shortcomings of his relationship with his fiancée after he experiences magic events when walking at midnight in Paris.

Nominated for 4 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director: Woody Allen
Best Original Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Art Direction

The success of this film is still surprising to me; next to The Artist, this might just be the most overrated film of the year. This could be an explanation: his 2 previous films (Whatever Works and You Will Meet...) were so disastruous that, by comparison, a mediocre film such as Midnight in Paris feels like a masterpiece.

This film is nothing new when it comes to Woody Allen films, all the chichés are there and the style of the film is pure Vicky Cristina, with the main difference being that he's replaced Barcelona for Paris; but the cinematography has the same style, the story has a similar rhythm, not so many differences. Though truth is I thought Vicky Cristina Barcelona was much better, more focused and funnier.

The contemporary parts of Midnight are mostly boring and predictable. Owen Wilson, the actor playing the typical woody allen character, is fine, but it's a copycat of what Woody would do in this role. Poor Rachel McAdams gets an annoying character, while Michael Sheen is as annoying as ever, regardless of whoever he's playing. The midnight part of the film, aka Paris in the 1920s, is a bit more fun, but all those supporting characters just don't glue together. Marion is nice to look at, the guy playing Hemingway overdoes it, Kathy Bates is nice, while Adrien Brody probably gives the best cameo.

It's nice to see Woody stepping away from monstrosities like Whatever Works, but the step taken is not far enough: the screenplay feels way too familiar, with characters that he's been doing over and over again. Sure, it's an easy film to watch, the direction is ok, but it's far from anything original or his best work.

My rating for the film: 6/10. The Art Direction nomination is not bad, but there were better contenders.

The Tree of Life (2011)

Seen on December 27th, 2011

The story centers around a family with three boys in the 1950s. The eldest son witnesses the loss of innocence. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Director: Terrence Malick
Best Cinematography

What do you write about a film that is almost perfection?!

I have no idea.

What makes Tree of Life so miraculous for me? That I don't remember ever feeling something like this when watching a film. The best way to describe it is that I saw it with my soul, as cheesy as that might sound; I don't know how to say it in any other way... If you are open to see it and feel it than it's an unmatchable experience. It is a film that feels alive, and yes, an experience more than anything else.

It's poetry. So it needs to be seen with an open heart and an open mind, otherwise... well, otherwise you won't like it. It doesn't need to be explained, because that is not its purpose, it's a pure sensorial film.

Of course, I think it's technically perfect, it should've been nominated for everything, Pitt & Chastain probably deliver their best work. Terrence Malick is a fantastic director and this might just be the best Cinematography I have ever seen.

My rating for the film: 10/10. But that's because I'm exactly its target.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)

In the bleak days of the Cold War, espionage veteran George Smiley is forced from semi-retirement to uncover a Soviet agent within MI6's echelons. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Actor: Gary Oldman

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Original Score

Well the good news is Gary Oldman is finally an Oscar nominee... we can take him out of the list for the best never-nominated actors outthere. And this makes me happy: I adored him in Dracula, thought he was impressive in Leon and The Contender and I even liked him in The 5th Element. It was about time. That being said, Tinker Tailor itself is not much of a film.

It needs to be said this was directed by Tomas Alfredson, the Sweedish director behind the 2008 masterpiece Let the Right One In. He has such an unique style and I can see his fingerprints all over Tinker Tailor, though this can't overcome the problems in the screenplay. But this would be a higlight: the film is mostly well directed, it has a mood, it's stylish, cool and everything. Also, on the plus side: Gary's performance; while he doesn't get that much to do, his simple presence is mesmerizing and he does give an impressive almost-monologue describing an episode from his past. The supporting actors are equally great (especially Firth, Hardy and Cumberbatch), the cinematography is beautiful and the art direction seems appropriate.

Then, where's the problem? I'd say in the screenplay or maybe in the book, which I haven't read. This is a mystery film, but it doesn't build up to anything; in the end, I couldn't care less who the spy was, and this is something the film tries to put a lot of attention into. The whole film just moves along too slowly, I thought the screenplay would've needed some heavy editing or some serious restructuring. And there's something else that bothered me about the ending, but I wouldn't wanna spoil it right now.

The elements are there, but in the end it feels incomplete in the suspense department, overcrowded when it comes to unnecessary details, and overall nothing to get that excited about. Though I'm sure some will really like it. Even its more tense scenes felt a bit flat and not so creative.

My rating for the film: 6/10. I didn't get to talk about it's 3rd nomination for Original Score: Alberto Iglesias does a fine job, as usual, and it's a worthy nomination.

Bowling for Columbine (2002)

Filmmaker Michael Moore explores the roots of America's predilection for gun violence. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Documentary, Features (WINNER)

This really was the first time I've seen Bowling for Columbine, even though I'm a fan of Michael Moore: Fahrenheit 9/11 is a 10/10 for me, at least on a documentary level. So why did I stay away from Bowling? I have no idea; I was probably saving it for later.

And it was worth the wait: it's an impressive, very interesting, very captivating documentary on violence in America. As a European, I really enjoyed it and was moved by it in a couple of key scenes; I'm not sure I would've been as excited had I been an American. He's criticizing the American society in a manner that would really annoy conservative patriots.

The comedy is also there and I liked a lot the short animation inside the documentary, about the history of violence in the United States. It really is the kind of film that people should learn a lesson from.

My rating for the film: 9/10. Truth hurts.

Morocco (1930)

It's the story of a Foreign Legionnaire who meets and falls in love with a singer. [wiki]

Nominated for 4 Oscars:

Best Director: Josef von Sternberg
Best Actress: Marlene Dietrich
Best Cinematography
Best Art Direction

The only thing people remember about this film is Marlene wearing a man's suit during a musical number and kissing a woman. Wow! Shocking! And I bet it was shocking, for 1930. And once you go past that scene, this isn't much of a movie. The worst thing about it is actually the love story, which I found hard to believe and not something that would come naturally to these characters.

Marlene is beautiful, Gary Cooper is gorgeous, the cinematography impressive for that era. The musical numbers were a bit flat for me, but even with the unconvincing screenplay, I am surprised this wasn't among the 5 films nominated for Best Picture: while I am not a fan, this is much better than winner Cimarron.

My rating for the film: 5.5/10. But it had real potential.

A Free Soul (1931)

An alcoholic lawyer who successfully defended a notorious gambler on a murder charge objects when his free-spirited daughter becomes romantically involved with him. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Director: Clarence Brown
Best Actor: Lionel Barrymore (WINNER)
Best Actress: Norma Shearer

In a movieworld dominated by trailers and spoilers, it's nice to see a film you know so little about. I had little expectations while watching A Free Soul, but I quickly became involved in the story. While it's not a masterpiece, nor a very complex film, it sure tells an interesting story and the acting is quite good.

What also impressed me is the way some scenes were shot, and I'll give credit to the director for that. Norma is a delight and I can totally understand why Lionel Barrymore won his Oscar for this - it could easily be classified as more of an Honorary win, given he was a veteran actor; but there's plenty of good stuff in the performance. Where it does disappoint a bit is in the screenplay: the final scene especially is really out of nowhere, and also Leslie Howard is not giving his best.

My rating for the film: 7/10. Clark Gable creates a charistmatic bad boy.

Holiday (1930)

The story of two sisters and a young man who is torn between his free-thinking lifestyle and the tradition of his wealthy fiancée's family. [wiki]

Nominated for 2 Oscars:

Best Actress: Ann Harding
Best Writing, Adaptation

This was the first film adaptation of the play written by Philip Barry, but not the best known one. Nowadays, there's seem to be a lot of passion for the 1938 version, with Katharine Hepburn & Cary Grant, a film I have yet to see. Almost nobody talks about this 1930 stagey film, as few have heard of an actress called Ann Harding.

And it's true: nothing groundbreaking about this film, but it's not bad either. Ann Harding has lots of charisma and energy, so I can understand why the nomination. But it was her bitchy sister played by Mary Astor (gorgeous!) that I would've wanted to know more about. The film itself moves along fine, never too boring, never demanding, but not a great thrill either.

My rating for the film: 6/10. And I will also watch the Hepburn version at one point.

Min and Bill (1930)

Min, the owner of a dockside hotel, is forced to make difficult decisions about the future of Nancy, the young woman she took in as an infant. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Actress: Marie Dressler (WINNER)

Not much to write about this film, which unfortunately holds a length of only about 65 minutes. I don't think it's bad by 1930 standards, but it just looks dated and rushed. And also predictable.

To me, there are 2 reasons why the film is not a massive failure: first, there's Marie Dressler, who is above material here, even if her performance is not without its flaws. However, she's an undeniable presence and a consistent acting force. The second is the fantastic (!) Marjorie Rambeau in a supporting role as the drunken selfish villain; she steals every scene she's in and, had there been a Supporting Actress category back then, she would've easily been in the run for a win. Her big moment towards the end makes for the most delicious 5 minutes this film has to offer.

My rating for the film: 5/10. Many will be much more generous. I'm not. And can someone explain that silly fighting scene?!

Gigi (1958) (2nd time)

A rich playboy and a youthful courtesan-in-training enjoy a platonic friendship, but it may not stay platonic for long. [imdb]

Nominated for 9 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Vincente Minnelli (WINNER)
Best Adapted Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Cinematography, Color (WINNER)
Best Music, Scoring of a Musical Picture (WINNER)
Best Original Song (WINNER)
Best Editing (WINNER)
Best Art Direction (WINNER)
Best Costume Design (WINNER)

Yes, Gigi is the musical that could; it won Oscars for all of its 9 nominations, including Best Picture: making it the 31st winner of this category. It's incredible how memory plays a lot of tricks on you: I remember liking this film a lot, as I had seen it once, many years ago on TCM. I was probably fascinated by all the costumes and nice sets, because otherwise, today, I'd find it hard to explain. The film is a mess in many ways.

While I don't think it's among the worst this category's ever seen, how could I defend the song Thank Heaven for Little Girls, sang by 70-year-old Maurice Chevalier... Unfortunately, I suspect this is a pedophile's dream... But even getting past this, I don't remember/admire ANY of the songs - and when the film is a Musical, that's a huge problem (a very similar problem that I had with An American in Paris, the previous Minnelli BP winner that fails in the music department).

So the songs are either outrageous or uninspired, the film is mostly boring... what's left: ah, the performances - no, nothing there worth mentioning as they're all either mediocre or just ok. Leslie Caron, however, is among the best of the group, at least because she looks so sweet, and does create a character outside the musical numbers.

The costumes are dreamy, the art direction is beautiful, the cinematography is ok, but what makes me more forgiving of Gigi is the subject of the film - this is the thing that charms me: romances with great costumes, rich people, sentimental dilemmas, and there's a scene or two (with Gigi's hesitation of becoming only his mistress) that speaks plenty of truth. I also found the film to be surprisingly & pleasantly non-misogynistic, considering a rather delicate subject matter.

My rating for the film: 6/10. I'm being too generous, but what can I do...

The Color Purple (1985) (3rd time)

The life and trials of a young African American woman. [imdb]

Nominated for 11 Oscars:

Best Picture
Best Actress: Whoopi Goldberg
Best Supporting Actress: Margaret Avery
Best Supporting Actress: Oprah Winfrey
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Cinematography
Best Art Direction
Best Costume Design
Best Makeup

You know when you've seen a film once or twice a couple of years before and you are certain it's one of your alltime favorites? So much that you include it in your Top 5 ever? Well, this is what happened to me and The Color Purple - but when I've seen it now, years later, for my blog: some of the magic was lost. :( And I can see the flaws, which are plenty. This doesn't mean I've stopped liking the film, I still think it's magic: only that I can't call it an alltime favorite anymore, if I'm being honest with my choices.

The first 30 minutes are really the weakest, with the story lacking a clear focus and with more of a naive way of telling us what happens. As soon as Whoopi gets on screen as grown-up Celie, everything moves better, with the characters of Sophie & Shug also bringing plenty of great stuff to see. Overall, it remains an impressive achievement, and the film grows in quality as we get more used to the characters. Two scenes are filled with emotions and so representative for the heart of the film; both towards the end: God Is Trying to Tell You Something and the cheesy, but so heart warming reunion at the ending.

Talking Oscar, you surely know the film holds an unfortunate record: it ties The Turning Point (1977) for most nominations for a film, without a single win; it deserved better than this. Also, its director, none other than Steven Spielberg, didn't get nominated although he had won the prestigious Directors Guild Award, usually an Oscar indicator. Whoopi Goldberg was a favorite to win and had the chance to make history as the first African American to win Best Actress, but lost to veteran actress Geraldine Page. Margaret Avery & Oprah Winfrey give fantastic supporting performances, and any of them would've deserved a win.

I hope I'm never asked to choose a Best Picture winner for 1985, as you might remember my renewed love affair with winner Out of Africa. Having to choose between that one and The Color Purple would be an impossible task for me.

My rating for the film: 9/10. If you haven't seen it, run to it immediately.

The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)

After settling his differences with a Japanese PoW camp commander, a British colonel co-operates to oversee his men's construction of a railway bridge for their captors - while oblivious to a plan by the Allies to destroy it. [imdb]

Nominated for 8 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: David Lean (WINNER)
Best Actor: Alec Guinness (WINNER)
Best Supporting Actor: Sessue Hayakawa
Best Adapted Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Original Score (WINNER)
Best Cinematography (WINNER)
Best Editing (WINNER)

The Bridge on the River Kwai is an excellent film that is also the 30th winner of the Best Picture Oscar. I had seen scenes from it before, I knew the ending, but I never enjoyed it from beginning to end and I gladly did it now for my Best Picture series. It's a beautiful action film, interestingly divided in chapters with some that are simply fantastic. The first hour-hour and a half is the best. Guinness and Hayakawa both deliver remarkable performances and it's in their scenes that the film reaches the highest quality of writing, acting, directing.

It was very enjoyable seeing the two working together, as their scenes of rivalry are really entertaining, in a dramatic way. While I didn't care so much about the William Holden part of the film, I understand its role and it does contribute to the action element of this picture. The cinematography, the music, the editing, the art direction are all fascinant and very efficient. David Lean's direction is subtle and it's another proof that he was a great storyteller.

The film's final hour is not as captivating as the first part, but the fabulous ending is exactly the right choice. It probably deserved most of its wins, though I'm holding back a bit on Guinness - he's great, he really is, but he was competing against Charles Laughton in Witness for the Prosecution, so it's difficult to choose between such fascinating performances.

My rating for the film: 8.5/10. Good piece of action-drama.

Sweet Dreams (1985) (2nd time)

Lange portrays Patsy Cline, the velvet-voiced country singer who died in a tragic plane crash. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Actress: Jessica Lange

Sweeeeeeeeeeet nonsense. And it's not even sweet. Whoever wrote this (by the way, he also wrote Mommie Dearest) has real limitations as a screenplaywriter. The film fails massively and mostly because of the writing, and also because of a very very lazy direction.

I actually HATED the writing, to be honest: the film is so much about the relationship between the two, and not enough about her music, her personality, her individuality. Also, it sickens me how much it justifies the abusive behavior of the husband. Seriously! It's insane! Other than Patsy's songs, there isn't much (or anything for me) to rally behind; and it's not even accurate for most part.

I know some go crazy over Jessica Lange here, I don't; had problems both seeing her as Patsy and dealing with her Southern girlish atittude. But more on that performance on the other blog, in a day or two.

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. To have Patsy calling her abusive husband's name right before she dies (something we know didn't happen) is BEYOND offensive.

The Chalk Garden (1964)

A grandmother seeks a governess for her 16 year old granddaughter, Laurel, who manages to drive away each and every one. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actress: Edith Evans

There isn't much to say about this film, as it was mostly a very uninteresting cliched experience. The film focuses on 4 performances, of which I'm sorry to say Deborah Kerr's is the most boring. Nobody is fantastic, or even great, but each of the other actors has a good scene to put a bit more effort into.

Famous teenage-actress Hayley Mills does the best she can and shares an intense scene with her real-life father, John Mills. But I mostly payed attention to Oscar nominated Edith Evans, waiting for something to justify the nomination. It's a fine performance, which I'm sure some would really like. She gets plenty of screentime in the role of the grandmother, but I was not entirely convinced and didn't find the role to be as demanding... so a win would've seemed too much for me. Though she surely had a shot at the trophy.

The film lacks in story; it's based on a successful play, but judging from the film it's hard to say why the success. There's nothing fascinating and it ends up looking too predictable, with a flawed direction.

My rating for the film: 4/10. I don't hate it, but it's hard to find real qualities.

Around the World in 80 Days (1956)

Adaptation of Jules Verne's novel about a Victorian Englishman who bets that with the new steamships and railways he can travel around the world in 80 Days. [imdb]

Nominated for 8 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Michael Anderson
Best Adapted Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Original Score (WINNER)
Best Cinematography (WINNER)
Best Editing (WINNER)
Best Art Direction
Best Costume Design

The Best Picture winner for 1956 is considered by many to be one of the worst in Oscar's history. As I go to each of them chronologically, I was quite happy to reach this one, as I suspected it would be easy to watch, maybe even fun. And I was right: I think the critics are overreacting; it's not a terribly smart film, it doesn't even explore its own potential, but it's far from worst.

Out of its competition, I've only seen Giant which is a better film, and definitely more serious & important. Around the World starts out very well, but loses focus along the way, or maybe it all seemed to rushed. It has a good story, but the writing could've been better in the second half, and the ending is not what I might've hoped for. Best in show is Cantinflas, a Mexican celebrity/actor playing the servant: he's very funny here and most of all likeable, and the success of this film depends a lot on his charisma.

How did this win Best Picture? Probably because it was the cool stuff, and it was also a competitive year, so Giant and The King and I were real contenders and could've split the votes. The Art Direction is very impressive and the film looks well-done technically.

My rating for the film: 6/10. I just wish they had paid more attention to the second half.

Out of Africa (1985) (2nd time)

In 20th century colonial Kenya, a Danish baroness/plantation owner has a passionate but ultimately doomed love affair with a free-sprited hunter. [imdb]

Nominated for 11 Oscars:

Best Picture (WINNER)
Best Director: Sydney Pollack (WINNER)
Best Actress: Meryl Streep
Best Supporting Actor: Klaus Maria Brandauer
Best Adapted Screenplay (WINNER)
Best Original Score (WINNER)
Best Cinematography (WINNER)
Best Editing
Best Art Direction (WINNER)
Best Costume Design
Best Sound (WINNER)

I had a farm in Africa at the foot of the Ngong Hills... [I melt]

I really like this film. It's no masterpiece, but I really really like it, because it's so pretty and well put together. It's definitely one of my favorite Best Picture winners of all times. It has a nicely organized screenplay, allowing the story to flow properly, and I'm sure it was not an easy adaptation to do. Its focus is on Meryl's character, the very interesting real-life Baroness Karen Blixen, and I especially appreciated the way the character is put together - there's nothing incredible about this woman, but on her feelings and reactions I could really stand behind, and found them believable.

Redford is just a pretty face, Klaus has charisma, but I don't think it's an awards-worthy performance. Meryl is beautiful & great, but more on her on the other blog. The original score is one of the best I've ever heard, and the cinematography is dreamy. Pollack's direction is not perfect (what's up with the obvious studio screen in 2 scenes?!), but he sure also made some smart choices. I think the beginning of the film is perfect, and the ending is nearly just as good. Yes, you should always start a film with fabulous music & a voiceover from Meryl. All films should have that.

My rating for the film: 9/10. From its competition, I'd probably go for Color Purple, but this is a great winner.

Agnes of God (1985)

When a naive novice nun is discovered with a dead newborn in her convent quarters, a court appointed psychiatrist investigates her case. [imdb]

Nominated for 3 Oscars:

Best Actress: Anne Bancroft
Best Supporting Actress: Meg Tilly
Best Original Score

I'm not gonna spend too much time writing about this; to keep it short: I honestly believe it's a mess. The worst thing about it is the screenplay, offering some RIDICULOUS dialogues, not only too stagey, but with no rhythm and sense of how people really talk. It's predictable, overhyped and doesn't live up to the tension and mystery it tries to build.

The performances are nothing special. Meg Tilly is in her own universe, I'll write about Anne on the other blog very soon & Jane Fonda is trying the hardest, but there's only so much you can do with such bad dialogue. A big mess, with only one or two better scenes, one of them being the second hypnosis (nicely shot, but a silly idea to begin with).

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. The deconstruction will continue on the other blog.

Swing Shift (1984)

A woman finds romance when she takes a job at an airport plant to help make ends meet after her husband goes off to war. [imdb]

Nominated for 1 Oscar:

Best Supporting Actress: Christine Lahti

Oh boy, this film is a mess. I wanted something easy to watch, also with some Oscar nominations, and I chose this, because I had previously seen some scenes on TV. But it wasn't really what I expected (some romantic drama); in fact, it's a boring, predictable, melo non-sense with only one good performance.

Christine Lahti did deserve the Oscar nomination, because she's clearly the best by far; her acting gives such a contrast it's embarassing for the rest of the cast. With such a bad screenplay, she manages to create a likeable character, and the only real emotional one. Ed Harris is ok, Kurt Russell is ignorable, but Goldie Hawn gives... her worst performance ever. She can't even manage the easy scenes, while also being surprisingly dislikeable. It's sad.

My rating for the film: 3.5/10. I can't believe Jonathan Demme directed this waste of time.