Rating: A

I may be a succor for allegoric film, but so is the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences who chose the film for best picture this year, along with No Country for Old Men. Really good allegories make you scratch your head, and often interpret your own translation. I have this knack for discovering symbols, but no skill in interpreting them. Here are some that I noticed.

At nearly every moment in the film where you should have been cringing with disgust, you found yourself in hysterics. This thematic fusion of opposites is abundant within There Will Be Blood.

Take for example the two lead characters. Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) is the prime industrialist. Paul / Eli Sunday (Paul Dano) is the model charismatic preacher. The film acts as a mirror which reflects these opposites, and by so doing compares them.

Another example is the two contrasting musical choices. First were dark and eerie compositions by Radiohead guitarist Jonny Greenwood (which reminded me of minimalist Philip Glass). Second was one of my top ten classical pieces, Violin Concerto in D Major by Johannes Brahms. Not only were the musical selections well qualified, but perfectly positioned as to amplify this theme of opposites. For example, Brahms’ concerto is amazingly uplifting, yet the two times it is played is after the two darkest moments of the film. The opening scene of the movie opens with Greenwood’s screeching violins during a still shot of the desert. It sets the stage for the dualism to come.

I wouldn’t agree with the theory that this is an anti-religion / anti-industrialism message-movie. I hate movies like that, and just because the two characters are very bad, doesn’t suggest their choice of profession is the reason for their corruption. In fact, many movies of this type stay far away from a clear cut message. They show, they don’t preach.

There are two unforgettable scenes, which could have been successful independent mini-movies - and which also illustrate this thematic dichotomy which is carried throughout. First is the baptism of Plainview. Second is the last scene of the movie. Not only are they hilarious, but insanely disturbing. The shear entertainment value is beyond compare, but intellectually stimulating as well. I won’t spoil too much, but notice how they are inverses of each other. Then ask yourself why.

Who will get the Oscar?

Dang good question. I’ve seen 4 out of the 5 nominees, but I believe the race will be between There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men. I’m always biased toward the film I just saw, so I currently lean toward Blood. Interestingly enough, they are both based off novels: There Will Be Blood - Upton Sinclair’s Oil!  And No Country for Old Men - Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men.  Also, they are both apolitical and amoral. That’s a stark contrast between the 78^th Annual where it was between Crash (racism message-movie) and Brokeback Mountain (homosexual message-movie).

You can see a film any time, but they’re the most ripe when “in season” …

The few months before the Academy Awards.

The actual awards show is way too long, even with Jon Stewart as the host. But the honor associated with the award is just the right amount of motivation to make producers and directors achieve their best. It is we the viewers who benefit most from this prestigious war.

The nominees for best picture are:

Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

I have a couple more to see before I make my final decision. Of those I’ve seen, No Country for Old Men is my best guess.

Rating A

I was sold to this movie from the preview when her Dad says to her, “I thought you were the kind of girl who knew when to stop.” Juno then says, “I don’t really know what kind of girl I am.”

This movie makes no assertions or sermons, and it’s certainly not a teenage comedy. It’s a love story. It’s a work of art. It’s hilarious! You know something is good when you constantly ask yourself “How did they think of that?” or “Why didn’t I think of that?”

I remember at one point in the theater leaning over to my wife and commenting, “I like this because it’s real.” I don’t know how they pulled it off, but kudos to director Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking), writer Diablo Cody, and actress Ellen Page. Together, they made real entertaining, which is the greatest task in film. Sure at some points it’s a bit sexual and crude, but it never becomes offensive. If Ellen Page isn’t nominated for an Oscar then I’ll punch myself in the face. She may not win, but her performance was Oscar worthy and deserves at least a nomination. The film itself could take away Best Picture, but my opinion is that No Country for Old Men will get it. Both are this year’s “must-see” films.

Rating A-

The major complaint of film vs. literature is film’s inability to elaborate due to time constraints. No matter how great the movie is, nobody wants to sit through more than 3 hours (and that’s the max).

TV shows however transcend that barrier. The average book takes what, 15-20 hrs to read? Hour long sitcoms (about 43 minutes commercial free) have roughly 22-24 unique episodes per year. That is about 15-17 hours, the same as a book.

With TV shows the issue is lack of quality. Lost has made it into what I call HQE (High Quality Entertainment). HQE invokes inspiration. HQE stimulates the emotions. HQE requires intellectual investigation. Like literature, it requires an active mind, not merely a passive browsing. Even more impressive, Lost is in it’s third season. That’s like the freaking Lord of the Rings.

Can Lost propel the TV drama into the media-of-choice over film? Has it “one-upped” the movie industry? The cinemetography, direction, acting, writing and budget (perhaps most important) of Lost have certainly rivaled if not surpassed the best films that Hollywood produces. Lost deserves an A because it is better than a movie, but I gave it an A- because I hope other shows will step up to the plate and make something better.

Even my bookshelf is becoming jealous of my entertainment center. Lost occupied that time block I normally reserve to a good book. Like I said, it’s better than the average movie and just as good as literature. But don’t watch Lost on-air, buy/rent/borrow/steal the DVD. Personally, I don’t know how anyone can stand watching TV shows on TV!   How can you wait a week!

Guaranteed, if you don’t want to miss out on future lunch break conversations, you need to catch up on Lost. It will be a certain addition to the social cannon.

Rating: F

I grew up watching reruns of The Simpsons and Seinfeld, but I’ve never been a die hard loyal to any television show until six months ago. I was getting some ice cream at Wal-Mart when my eye caught the first season of 24. A few of my friends always hyped it up like some crazy religion. Without ever seeing an episode, I felt like I knew Jack Bauer: the modern mythical legend who’s an indestructible prince charming.

We watched the entire season in two point five weeks. Nina! That ending was classic. I returned a second time from Wal-Mart with seasons 2-5. It took about 3 months to finish those. There were some pretty predictable episodes, but for the most part, the cliffhangers kept us interested.

We’ve been on a 3 month fast from 24 because Season 6 hadn’t been released. We’ve been waiting patiently until December 5th. I sliced off the plastic, popped out the dvd, and pushed play. Sarah even made popcorn. After three episodes I verbally shouted at the screen, “WE’VE ALREADY SEEN THIS BEFORE!”

I think the writers for 24 have been on strike for years. They left the producers with about 1000 words, and now to make an episode of 24 you scramble all those words up and viola! Here is my quick episode:

This is Bill Buchanan, infiltrate satellite surveillance CTU protocol. On your knees terrorist. Jack, please hold for the president. I strongly advise interrogation Mr. President. Suspect in quadrant perimeter, send tac-team for pursuit. Cloe Curtis Palmer Bauer. DROP THE WEAPON! [Cliffhanger here].

It was SO stupid. Wayne Palmer — the whiney moron brother of David Palmer — the guy they make you hate in season three — the pin prick goatee scratching fool — IS PRESIDENT. I can’t stand that idiot! I hate how every president has an evil turd following them around. Wayne Palmer WAS one of those, HE’S president, and now HE has a turd (who might be president in season 7).

They’ve always been slightly political, but this side story with the Guantanamo-ish muslim secret prison is ridiculous! RIDICULOUS! The president’s sister is the lawyer in charge of representing the “victims” of the “power abuses” of the “administration.” C’mon 24! You’re entertainment - not propaganda!

I can’t return this $50 complete waste of money, and I can’t give it away any more than I can give away my clipped toenails. Trust me, if you’re thinking about buying this DON’T. Get Lost, no pun intended. Season 3 comes out this week. Hopefully some sucker on ebay will take my Season 6 of 24; it’s worse than 24 hours of C-SPAN.

Rating: A

I realize it may appear that I throw A’s out to every movie I see. First of all, I never see a random movie. I don’t read specific reviews, but Yahoo! Movies provides a consensus of all reviews. This movie is one of two that I have ever seen to get an A (the other was Godfather). Second, it’s Oscar season. The good films always debut toward the end of the year.

I’m a sucker for Coen Brothers films (O Brother, Where Art Thou, The Big Lebowski). I pretty much drove to the theater straight from work after reading about it on Yahoo! There wasn’t a moment of let down.

This movie has the greatest villain in the history film: (at least the ones I’ve seen) Anton Chigurh. He is French, dark, massive, cold, brilliant, mysterious, cunning, murderous; and happens to know quite a bit about medicine and self-surgery (he performs a few on himself). The actor’s name is Javier Bardem, and we’ll have to see if his role as the infamous drug lord Pablo Escobar can one-up this one. The film Killing Pablo debuts in 2009.

It’s great Tommy Lee Jones back in his element. The film is set in South Texas and Tommy fits right in as the horse mounted sheriff Ed Tom Bell.

Cinematography A+. Acting A+. Plot A- (an ending you may need to see twice). The audio track to this film was incredible. The actors and their guns was pretty much the only sound throughout the movie. That’s right, not a single note of music (there was a part with a Mexican band however). This movie also features the coolest pit bull on earth.

What really gives this movie an A are the implications. The symbols are open to interpretation, but they’re there. Chigurh is always flipping a coin while Sheriff Bell is always reasoning and analyzing. The American/Mexican border. The drugs and money. What do all these mean? That is the question YOU have to ask. Remember, the question IS the answer, and this film is A all the way.

Rating A-

Last weekend every movie we wanted to see at Redbox (huge fan) was unavailable in a 20 mile radius, except one copy of Waitress. Judging by the cover it looked awful: Keri Russell in a yellow waitress uniform holding a pie. I thought I could predict the entire plot just by the cover.  But the ratings were promising.

Within 5 minutes I knew I was wrong. Each character has these bizarre quirks you end up loving; I imagine because it’s the oddities which we can relate with. The plot takes you from laughing to near crying several times. You enter the psyche of the main character when she imagines new pies. I was thrilled to see old Andy Griffith who has a humorous role.

The subject matter is relationships: good ones/bad ones, right ones/wrong ones. The setting is a Pie Diner in The South. It has an independent film feel, yet still leaves you warm and fuzzy by the end. Acting, writing, directing, and cinematography were all superb.

On a side note, Adrienne Shelley wrote, directed, and acted in the movie. We were so impressed we watched all the special features. About the time we were convinced this could be the most talented woman in the film industry, we watched a segment entitled: Adrienne Shelley: Memorial. It was vague, but apparently she dies before the film is shown. Curious, we searched her name in Wikipedia and found out she was MURDERED! Randomly. She was working alone in her apartment, went to tell the guy below to be quiet, and he kills her. It’s really sad too because the last scene of the movie features her little 2 year old daughter.

Rating: A-

The minus comes from the genre. I just don’t think I can ever give a romance/romatic comedy an A for a few reasons. They’re highly predictable (Dan in Real Life is no exception). They come out of the same mold: Two people unexpectedly bump into eachother, stuff happens throughout the movie to make it seem impossible they could be together, and finally, they get together.

That said, Dan in Real Life is the best romantic comedy I’ve ever seen (my wife loves them, so I’ve seen a lot). And it wasn’t Steve Carrell/Micheal Scott carrying the movie on his shoulders. This is another masterpiece from Peter Hedges (What’s Eating Glibert Grape, About a Boy). The famous French actress Juliette Binoche (Chocolat, The English Patient) plays Marie, the ‘almost perfect’ love interest.

I won’t give any spoilers, but my favorite parts are the “pig face” song, and the line, “You murdered love.” I don’t think there was 10 minutes without a big laugh, and at least 5 scenes that made me laugh so hard it was painful. It’s very family friendly, no raunchy language or sexual scenes. It makes a reference to masturbation, but so did Transformers. It definitely gets an A+ for this particular genre, but overall an A-.