Annie Hall

Allen stars as Alvy Singer, a stand-up comic reflecting on his love affair with the quirky, lovely Annie Hall (the great Keaton). They meet, fall in love and eventually break up. Except, that’s not all there is, as Allen breaks the fourth wall on a number of occasions, offers glimpse inside his character’s minds while their involved with pointless conversations, and even shows Annie’s subconscious remove itself from her physical body while she and Alvy have sex. Influenced, in part, by the European cinema he was drawn to at the time, Allen crafted a film that jumps around in time, showing us the various loves of Alvy’s life and how his neuroses and faults destroyed all of those romances, as well as his one with Annie. Allen does a fine acting job in the film; I don’t think he gets enough credit for how well he holds everything together. But the real star is Keaton, who simply shines as Annie and became an icon because of the role.

Allen followed up Annie Hall with the drama, Interiors, which threw his new fans for a loop, most of them expecting another romantic comedy. In 1979, his released Manhattan, his love letter to his hometown. With its beautiful black and white photography and a score consisting of Gershwin classics, Manhattan certainly gives you the feel of New York City in the late 1970’s and a sense of the great city’s history. As a narrative, it is much heavier than Annie Hall, as if some of the darkness of Interiors had seeped into the screenwriting of Manhattan.

Allen stars as Isaac, 42-year-old divorced writer who is dating Tracy, a 17-year old high school student played with real depth by young Mariel Hemingway.  Isaac’s best friend, Yale (Michael Murphy) is married, but having an affair with Mary (Keaton).  When Isaac first meets Mary, she annoys him. As they get to know each other, an attraction grows.  Yale breaks up with Mary and convinces Isaac to ask her out. Since Isaac has always felt that his relationship with Tracy would never last, he begins seeing Mary. Two love triangles form and Isaac is stuck in the middle of both of them. Whether he will end up with Mary or Tracy in the end leads to one of the greatest and most imitated endings in modern cinema (see When Harry Met Sally…). Elsewhere, Isaac must deal with his ex-wife (Meryl Streep) who is writing a tell-all book about their failed marriage.

Manhattan finds Allen falling into the storytelling pattern of most of his 80’s films: large ensembles with multiple storylines and a skilled blend of comedy and drama. If you are a fan of Hannah and Her Sisters or Crimes and Misdemeanors, then Manhattan is right up your alley. The cast is phenomenal, even the minor roles played by Wallace Shawn and Emily Byrne. Keaton and Allen are great, once again, and the relatively new Streep sizzles on screen. Despite all of the film’s fine qualities, I’ve always had trouble with the “ick” factor of a middle-aged man dating a teenage girl (no matter how mature she is). While the film is filled with many wonderful moments and some very insightful writing, I just can’t get past that part.

Both Blu-rays come with no bonus features to write home about. The theatrical trailers are included. If you want to find out more about Woody Allen and the making of these films, you’ll have to hunt down the PBS American Masters documentary that aired last fall.

After some finagling, C.C. finally gets the promotion he’s been waiting for.  However, the company’s personnel director, Mr. Sheldrake, is suspicious that there’s something going on.  When Sheldrake discovers the truth, he doesn’t have C.C. fired. Instead, he demands the use the apartment himself. McMurray, at the time best know for clean cut Disney films and his sentimental television series, My Three Sons, was reluctant to take the role of a real louse like Sheldrake. Wilder convinced him that it would be one of the best roles of his career. Never doubt Billy Wilder. Sheldrake sets out to conquest an adorable elevator operator named Fran, played with the right amount of spunk and naivete by Shirley MacLaine. Unfortunately, C.C. is also smitten with Fran. As the film progresses, C.C. has to decide what’s more important to him, his livelihood and career, or his heart and soul.

The Apartment is one of those films that defies categorization (Wilder, the great director, didn’t like to classify his movies). It has comedy, yes, but it’s also full of drama, romance and poses enough serious questions to leave us with something substantial to ponder after the movie fades to black. The influence of this movie, co-written by Wilder and I.A.L. Diamond, has been felt ever since its initial release. Jason Reitman’s Up in the Air, from 2009, immediately comes to mind, as George Clooney’s Ryan Bingham could be the son of C.C. Baxter, struggling to retain a conscience in a corporate world.

The Blu-ray release of The Apartment is a nice transfer of the movie, maintaining the crispness and subtleties of the black and white cinematography. The sound is crystal clear and does not contain any hiss that sometimes accompanies older films. The bonus features are minimal, but excellent. Audio commentary by film producer and historian, Bruce Block, adds great insight to the movie. Two featurettes are also included, one about the making of the film, the other a nice look at the artistry of Jack Lemmon, one of the true legends of the silver screen.

Blu-ray owners looking to expand their collections should include this one on their next shopping list. The Apartment isn’t just one of Wilder’s best, but one of the best ever.

Cassie Jaye is a young filmmaker whose work has included the award-winning documentaries Daddy I Do and Faces Overlooked.  She started in the film industry at the age of 16 and has worked as an actress in film and TV and had appeared in The O.C., Alias, Entourage, and much more.  In 2008, Jaye wanted to explore the topic of marriage in the United State when voters in California passed Proposition 8 that amended the state constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry. Being single, straight, and raised as an evangelical Christian, Jaye became fascinated with the issue and set her sights on making a film that would enlighten many folks in the straight community whose views of gays are often framed by cultural stereotypes, religious dogma, and fear of difference.

I had a chance to interview Cassie about the film, the family she chose to focus upon, the upcoming premiere at the Castro Theatre, and how Popdose readers in the Bay Area can win ticket to see The Right to Love:  An American Family on February 6^th.

Ted:  Thanks for taking time to talk about your film The Right to Love: An American Family.

Cassie:  Absolutely.  Thanks for your interest in the film.

Ted: The subjects of your film are Jay and Bryan Leffew –a gay couple with two kids living in the Bay Area. So what drew you to their story?

Cassie: Well, at the time, I was making my first documentary Daddy I Do.  We started thinking about our second film, because we enjoy filmmaking so much. When I say “we” I’m talking about my family. Because we are a family production company – which consists of me, my mom, my sister, my step dad and my uncle. During post-production work for Daddy I Do, we came up with the idea to make our next documentary about marriage, which was a natural extension of our first film [that centered on] sex education and the debate between abstinence only programs and comprehensive sex education which says you can wait until marriage if you want, but if you don’t, here’s how to protect yourself.  And when we starting working on the next film on marriage, Proposition 8 happened, and it was impossible not to look at the issue of same-sex marriage – and that really fascinated us.

I think for The Right To Love, no one involved on the production end of the film was gay or lesbian.  So, we’re all straight and my whole family never had any first hand experience knowing anyone who was a gay.  So we came to the movie as a kind of blank canvass – because we didn’t know a lot about the issues. And we wanted to take on this topic from this perspective of being straight all of our lives — and having a background of being evangelical Christian.  We all grew up very strict, Bible-believing Christians and were taught that homosexuality was wrong. And with The Right to Love … well, we are all for the right of same-sex marriage, but we (my family)  all come from that point of view of knowing the opposing views of same-sex marriage.  We used a lot of footage in the film that really affected us, and made us believe that equality for all is what’s right.

Ted:  How did you connect with Jay and Bryan?

Cassie:  It was originally my sister, Christina Clack, who was researching marriage and same-sex marriage, and she found the Leffew’s You Tube channel called Gay Family Values. And at this point, they only had  two or three videos on their You Tube channel as a kind of indirect protest in response to Proposition 8 passing.  They wanted to show the humanity of their family, and how they are like any other family… very loving, normal, and nothing to fear. And the You Tube channel really took off. There was a lot of support from the LGBT community for showing a loving, committed family. There were a lot of opposing comments (about their videos) that said their life was wrong and they were an abomination. We contacted them right away, and asked if we could interview them for our film. Jay and Bryan were a little hesitant at first because Jaye Bird productions didn’t have anything on the map like a resume of films that they could search for.

Ted:  They must have thought “Oh great.  It’s a student film maker who wants to talk to us.”

Cassie:  Exactly.  They didn’t think much of us at first.  So we went to meet with them in Santa Rosa, and when we left the meeting, we gave them a copy of our film, Daddy I Do, and that was when their attitude to us changed because they saw our filmmaking style – which is very much fly on the wall. We don’t tell the audience what to think. We just show the story and the people and let the audience make their own opinions.  We’re not like a Michael Moore type of filmmaker…

Ted:  Right… advocacy documentaries.

When the movie trailer premiered, there was some hubbub over a scene where the entire family was shown praying at the kitchen table.  Can you elaborate on what got people’s dander up about this?

Cassie: Yeah, that was such an odd thing to arise. I think it happened last October or November.  We included the shot of the family sitting at the table for breakfast — where they hold hands and pray – on the trailer.  As the one who edited the trailer, I never thought that scene would have been as controversial as it became. What happened was that we actually filmed that shot at the table on the very last day, and they (the Leffews) didn’t know that we were rolling sound on that.  They just thought we were getting B roll – which is the imagery of the family getting ready to go to school.  And looking through that footage, I thought the prayer was…from my background growing up in a evangelical household, you always thought that the LGBT community was anti-religion…anti-Christ, you know, something like that. But there was so much love and humility in their prayer and…I just love that scene so much that I thought putting it in the trailer would be a nice way to open the trailer as a kind of non-threatening thing. Ironically enough, that was the most threatening thing to some people who watched it.

Ted:  The controversy kind of came from an unusual source.  These were some LGBT folks who were not thrilled by the depiction of this family as having religious views, and incorporating it in their family ritual before eating a meal.  Like I said, it seemed like an odd source of criticism to me.  You know, when gays and lesbians are put in the spotlight in front of a mainstream audience, there’s a kind of expected criticism from the more culturally conservative parts of the country.  But this came from individuals who would most likely self-identify as progressives – which surprised me.

Cassie:  I agree.  I think some people in the LGBT community were kind of damning them (the Leffews) for still being part of the church that attacks their community. So, why would you want to be part of a religion that doesn’t support the LGBT community?  That’s a pretty bold statement to make from a 30 second clip in the trailer.  They don’t know where the Leffew’s prayer comes from, or what kind of spirituality they subscribe to. So, like I said, it was a pretty bold statement from part of LGBT community to say that they don’t support the Leffews because they are religious.

Ted: Do you explore Jay and Bryan’s religious views in the film?

Cassie:  We do, but not in a big way. We do mention that one of the dads (Bryan) did grow up very religious and is still Christian. And with Jay – the other husband — we don’t really explore it in the film, but he is more open to spirituality, but he doesn’t consider himself a member of any one religion, nor does he pray to any one god.  With the prayer at the table, it’s really just more of a tradition of uniting the family together – which is kind of sweet.  There aren’t many families that have breakfast together or say grace before their meals.  I think that’s one thing about the Leffew family …they are a kind of bridge between [parts of] the straight community – who are very traditional, and wanting to protect the tradition of marriage.  The Leffews are very traditional. They are very much about family and being together for dinner and doing everything together.  And that’s hard to find in a lot of families today.

Ted:  What would you say you’ve learned in process of making this film?

Cassie:  Before I started The Right to Love, I supported marriage equality in the voting booth, but I wasn’t vocal about it to my family or strangers.  And now after making the film, I realize the importance of speaking out –and especially for the straight community to stand with the LGBT community to say “we support you.”  They (the LGBT community) are not going to get equal rights ‘til the majority stands with the minority.  I think that’s been the biggest change through this process…you know, the importance of speaking up and standing up for marriage equality.

Ted: The question of the constitutionality of Prop 8 is now in the federal courts.  As the constitutional question of marriage equality goes through the justice system and will ultimately reach a conclusion, do you think you’ll need make a “part 2” to your film?

Cassie:  I would love to make a part 2.  I’d really like to show the kids because I think a lot people raise questions about how kids will be raised with two dads or moms.  That would be a great part 2 to the film…show how Daniel and Selena (the Leffew’s kids) grow up. And hopefully at that point, there will be equal rights for everyone and they are one of the families that helped make that happen.

Ted: I had a chance to look at a number of videos that Jay and Bryan posted on their You Tube channel, and they are pretty compelling.  The Leffews decided that they were going to show the world how normal and loving a gay couple with kids could be.  But I gotta tell you, the Alice in Wonderland birthday party they threw for their daughter was way more than any birthday party I’ve either thrown for my daughter or have been to.  If anything, these guys are making poor, schlub parents like me look bad!

Cassie: (Laughs)  Jay and Bryan go above and beyond expectations on how to raise kids.  Their kids are their world…and I don’t know how much you know about Daniel and Selena, but Daniel was deemed unadoptable by the adoption agency.  The reason why is that he as a medical condition called Goldenhar syndrome – which causes half of the body to develop at a slower rate than the other half.  I believe he was in foster homes for the first six years of his life.  And no straight family wanted to take on the responsibility for his medical care.  When Selena was born – who is his (Daniel’s) biological sibling – she was placed with him in foster care.  They tried to keep them together for two years. But once the two-year mark was reached, and the kids weren’t adopted, they split up the children to better their chances of getting adopted. So Selena had parents on the waiting list wanting to adopt her when she was separated from Daniel. And the adoption agency actually called Jay and Bryan (who had filed adoption forms with the agency) and told them that they had two siblings who were about to be broken up, and would they be willing to adopt them both so they could stay together.  And that’s how their family came together…

Ted: That’s a great story!

Cassie: Yeah, it’s really heart-warming. And that’s the one thing that really touched me was the need for great adoptive parents.  And another thing is that when I was growing up evangelical one of the big arguments against gay adopting children was that kids need a mother and a father.  And I learned through the making of The Right to Love that a great number of single parents can adopt kids, and I’ve never heard the argument that single parents shouldn’t be able to adopt.  And to have two dads – and one is a stay at home dad – who are loving and adore their family… why shouldn’t they have the same rights as straight couples?

Ted: Absolutely.  I was reading Jay and Bryan’s blog, and there’s a great graphic of what makes a family, and there were stick images of a man and woman holding a hand of a child, and two women holding the hand of a child, two men doing the same, and individual adults of various genders holding the hand of a child.  And then there’s just a child alone with the caption “Batman” over him.

Cassie:  (Laughs)

Ted: And in that graphic it just sums up that what makes a family is support from someone who loves you.  And if a child doesn’t have that support, they may end up like The Dark Knight.

So let’s talk about the premiere that’s going to be at the Castro Theatre in San Francisco…You have a whole day’s worth of events planned, so tell us the details.

Cassie:  Well, we’re going to premiere the film on Monday February 6^th and we have three screenings. We have a box lunch mixer starting at 11:30am – with the screening at noon.

And then we have a 4pm screening aimed at high school students — who can get in free with their student ID. Then we have our big red carpet premier at 7:30pm – with the red carpet opening at 6:30pm.  After the film, we’ll do a short Q&A, and then we go to the after party with live music with some of the musicians whose music is featured in the film.  Oh, and we’ll have hors d’oeuvres and swag bags as well.  And one of honored guests is Zach Wahls (who was raised by two women and whose family opposed House Joint Resolution 6 in Iowa House of Representatives that would end civil unions in Iowa). Zach became an Internet phenomenon when the video of him speaking in front of the Iowa House of Representatives went viral.  The video is about Zach speaking about his lesbian moms and how the sexual orientation of his parents has had zero effect on the content of his character – which was the final quote in his really compelling speech.  So he’ll be flying out from Iowa for the premiere.

Ted: And we’re giving Popdose readers in the Bay Area a chance to go to the premier on Monday February 6^th at 7:30pm. All they have to do is email me at Ted @ Popdose dot com.  I’ll pick two winners in a random drawing, and notify them by email they have won the prize pack.  What will the winners get?

Cassie:  The winners will receive two tickets to the 7:30pm red carpet screening at the Castro Theatre, and they will also receive a copy of the soundtrack to The Right to Love: An American Family.  The winners just have to go to will call at the theatre to get their tickets and CD anytime after 6:30pm… and then they can enjoy the film, meet the film makers, and have a good time.

Ted: Cassie, all the best on the film and thanks for taking time to talk to me about your film on Popdose.

Cassie:  Thanks so much, Ted.

Citizen Kane (1941)
The actual winner: How Green Was My Valley.
The other nominees: Blossoms in the Dust, Here Comes Mr. Jordan, Hold Back the Dawn, The Little Foxes, The Maltese Falcon, One Foot in Heaven, Sergeant York, Suspicion.
Listen, I love How Green Was My Valley, one of the many great movies from director John Ford, but it’s hard to argue with the fact that throughout the years, Citizen Kane repeatedly shows up as number one on many lists of the best films of all time. In addition to its non-linear storytelling, Orson Welles’s directorial debut is visually groundbreaking cinema in terms of its use of low camera angles and most importantly its use of lighting, in-camera techniques and optical printing to keep the foreground and background all in sharp focus.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
The actual winner: My Fair Lady.
The other nominees: Becket, Mary Poppins, Zorba the Greek.
It’s a crime that Stanley Kubrick never won an Oscar (other than for Visual Effects for 2001: A Space Odyssey) and this is the year it probably should have happened. One can also make a good case for A Clockwork Orange (1971) but the competition that year, namely The French Connection, was tough. Incredibly, 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) wasn’t even nominated for Best Picture, though Kubrick was nominated for Best Director that year, in which Oliver! took home the top prize. I’ll admit I’m biased because I don’t personally care much for musicals, but — getting back to 1964 — Strangelove is iconic Kubrick and one of the greatest satires of all time.

The Graduate (1967)
The actual winner: In the Heat of the Night.
The other nominees: Bonnie and Clyde, Doctor Dolittle, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner.
Don’t get me wrong, In the Heat of the Night is a solid movie that introduced the world to the unforgettable line “They call me Mister Tibbs!” But thinking in terms of which film became classic American cinema, it really should have been between The Graduate and Bonnie and Clyde, with the slight edge going to the one with the Simon & Garfunkel tunes and that instantly recognizable leg pose on the movie poster. The film’s director Mike Nichols did win the Best Director Oscar that year, so at least the Academy got that one right.

Star Wars (1977)
The actual winner: Annie Hall.
The other nominees: The Goodbye Girl, Julia, The Turning Point.
Because I love Annie Hall so much, I almost didn’t include Star Wars on this list. But how can I argue against the movie that changed the course of film history? In terms of substantiating the summer blockbuster and using epic visual effects to tell a tale of pure escapism, the influence of Star Wars never went away. In terms of total number of Oscars won, Star Wars was actually the winner of the evening with six wins total (Art Direction, Costume Design, Film Editing, Original Score, Sound and Visual Effects, plus a special achievement award for Sound Effects Editing), compared to the four won by Annie Hall.

Raging Bull (1980)
The actual winner: Ordinary People.
The other nominees: Coal Miner’s Daughter, The Elephant Man, Tess.
This should have been Martin Scorsese’s first Oscar. Taxi Driver, you say? Well, 1976 was a tough year with Network also in the field and Rocky winning. The actual Best Picture winner Ordinary People is a very good film, but at the end of the ’80s, Raging Bull was selected best film of the decade by many film critics, including Roger Ebert — so even after only ten years Raging Bull was already demonstrating it would better stand the test of time.

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
The actual winner: Chariots of Fire.
The other nominees: Atlantic City, On Golden Pond, Reds.
Nothing against Chariots of Fire — it’s a good movie — but come on! This was one of very few instances where the Best Picture winner went to a film in which the director (Hugh Hudson) did not receive a directing nomination. The award for Best Director that year went to Warren Beatty for Reds, leaving me to think that Raiders wouldn’t have even been the Academy’s second choice for Best Picture. At best it likely placed third, which shows just how much the Academy doesn’t consider pure escapist cinema to be Best Picture material, no matter how perfect it is. The Academy did manage to get something right that evening: with a total of five Oscars won, Raiders actually took home more statues than any other film that evening. Chariots and Reds won four and three, respectively.

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
The actual winner: Gandhi.
The other nominees: Missing, Tootsie, The Verdict.
So how did it come to be that a serious historical three-hour drama will automatically be the frontrunner for Best Picture? Aside from Citizen Kane losing, this might be the best example of the Academy getting things seriously wrong. Even back in ’82 I knew that E.T. would become an endearing classic and that Gandhi (while a very good movie) would never be remembered in such a way. E.T. is simply filmmaking perfection by a director making the kind of movie he was put on the earth to make.

Goodfellas (1990)
The actual winner: Dances with Wolves.
The other nominees: Awakenings, Ghost, The Godfather Part III.
At the time, my friend Bill summed it up like this: “To say Kevin Costner is a better director than Martin Scorsese is like saying I’m a better quarterback than Joe Montana.” No disrespect intended to the excellent Dances with Wolves, but Goodfellas is Scorsese’s masterpiece — and the second film of his that should have won.

Apollo 13 (1995)
The actual winner: Braveheart.
The other nominees: Babe, The Postman (Il Postino), Sense and Sensibility.
This is the film that should have earned Ron Howard his first Oscar, not A Beautiful Mind (2001). Come to think of it, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) should have taken Best Picture over A Beautiful Mind that year, but at least that was sort of made right when The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) took home all 11 Oscars for which it was nominated. But getting back to Apollo 13, Ron Howard was famously not even nominated for directing this near-perfect film that manages to create considerable tension even though the story’s outcome is known. The Directors Guild of America gave Ron Howard its prestigious DGA award that year, but the Oscar went to Mel Gibson — who Howard happened to making the movie Ransom (1996) with at the time.

Fargo (1996)
The actual winner: The English Patient.
The other nominees: Jerry Maguire, Secrets & Lies, Shine.
Not unlike Elaine on Seinfeld, I find The English Patient an excruciating experience to sit through. The winner that year clearly should have been Joel and Ethan Coen’s perfect blend of crime and dark humor, which at 98 minutes is precisely as long as it needs to be. Fargo was also, in 1998, the only 1996 film to make the American Film Institute’s original 100 Years … 100 Movies list.

Sundance Envy has returned in full force this year, so I figured I’d do something useful with my obsessive following of Sundance coverage and put together a list of films that screened at this year’s festival that I am looking forward to seeing. I wonder how many of these films will wind up being my favorites at the end of the year? Sadly, no films screened at this year’s festival starring my two favorite humans, Michael Shannon and Tilda Swinton.

Films I’m Anticipating the Most:

Marina Abramović: The Artist Is Present – Marina Abramović is one of my favorite artists and I was terribly disappointed that I had just missed seeing her restrospective at MOMA in 2010 (it closed on May 31st and I arrived in the city for vacation in mid-June). So I was thrilled when I first learned about this HBO documentary, directed by Matthew Akers, which takes a journey deep inside Abramović’s world. The film provides insight into her background and process, as well as extensively covering the MOMA retrospective, including giving the viewer the opportunity to experience what it would’ve been like to sit across from Abramović during one of the most remarkable performance pieces of her career. Since this film is an HBO documentary, it will air on the cable giant some time this year and I cannot wait to see it. (Note: the trailer below is a little NSFW.)

The Surrogate – Word on the street is that this could be the role that finally gets John Hawkes a Best Actor nomination. He definitely deserves more attention, as his performances in both Winter’s Bone and Martha Marcy May Marlene were incredible though, unfortunately, overshadowed by the performances of the newcomer actresses he co-starred with. But, from what I’ve been reading, his turn as a writer debilitated by polio who turns to a sex surrogate (Helen Hunt) to help him lose his virginity is brilliant (he got a standing ovation at the film’s Sundance premiere) and should thrust him directly into the limelight, where he belongs. The Surrogate, which was acquired by Fox Searchlight for $6 million, will be one to keep an eye on — in addition to the audience and critical acclaim it has received thus far, it won the Audience Award, U.S. Dramatic and U.S. Dramatic Special Jury Prize for Ensemble Acting at the festival’s awards ceremony.

Liberal Arts – I really like Josh Radnor, who plays Ted Mosby on the sitcom How I Met Your Mother.  Though I haven’t yet seen his directorial debut, happythankyoumoreplease (I have no excuse — a screener was sent to me months ago), I am really looking forward to his latest film, Liberal Arts, which he wrote and directed. In it, Radnor stars as Jesse, a 30-something man who, after being invited to return to his alma mater to speak at his favorite college professor’s retirement dinner, meets a beautiful sophomore named Zibby (Elizabeth Olsen) who stirs powerful feelings in him that he thought were long-dormant. The cast also includes Allison Janney, Richard Jenkins, Elizabeth Reaser, and Zach Efron, and was acquired by IFC Films for U.S. distribution.

Sleepwalk with Me — Mike Birbiglia is one of my favorite comedians, so I was very excited to learn a film was being made based on his stories of sleepwalking, one of which appeared on This American Life and inspired the film. Ira Glass, the host and driving force behind TAL and co-writer and producer of the film, is lobbying hard to get Sleepwalk with Me into as many theaters as possible; if you go to this page on the TAL site, you can express your desire to see the film open in your city by providing your zip code and email address. Sleepwalk with Me won the Best of Next award at the festival’s awards ceremony and it has gotten quite a bit of love from audiences, thus far. I’m hoping it does get a wide release this year and that Birbiglia gets the recognition he deserves as a brilliantly funny storyteller.

Searching for Sugar Man – Winner of the World Cinema Audience Award and the World Cinema Jury Special Prize, Documentary, Searching for Sugar Man seems to be the documentary most beloved at this year’s festival. It’s about two South African fans of ’70s rock musician Rodriguez who set out to learn the truth about him and his mysterious death. I’m a sucker for documentaries about musicians and documentaries that feature a “surprising revelation,” which Searching for Sugar Man promises, so I’m really looking forward to this one.

Beasts of the Southern Wild – By now, you may have heard everyone going batshit over this movie. It won the coveted Grand Jury Prize, Drama (as well as Excellence in Cinematography, U.S. Dramatic) at the festival’s awards ceremony and every review I’ve read has given it high praise. It’s about a father and his six-year-old daughter — whose names, Wink and Hushpuppy, are the best names ever — who live at the “edge of the world.” When Wink gets sick, Hushpuppy is forced to fend for herself as the universe unravels and she goes in search of her long-lost mother.  I’m guessing that this movie’s  buzz means that the indie world isn’t yet weary of end-of-the-world themed films.

For Ellen – I was blown away by the quiet beauty of writer/director So Yong Kim’s 2008 film Treeless Mountain, so when I heard that she had directed Paul Dano in a film about a rock musician battling his estranged wife (Jenna Malone) for custody of their young daughter, I was intrigued. I’m hearing that Dano gives his best performance yet in this movie, and that Yong Kim’s patient, deliberate style of storytelling works well with Dano’s acting style. Jon Heder co-stars and I’m curious to see him in a dramatic film (though, having not seen the film, I don’t know if he turns in a non-comedic performance).

Safety Not Guaranteed – The synopsis of this film, provided by Sundance, is as follows: “A trio of magazine employees investigate a classified ad seeking a partner for time travel. One employee develops feelings for the paranoid but compelling loner and seeks to discover what he’s really up to.” Sounds intriguing enough, right? Well, add to that the fact that the cast includes Aubrey Plaza, Jake M. Johnson, Mary Lynn Rajskub, Mark Duplass, Kristen Bell, and Jeff Garlin, and it’s even more intriguing. Apparently, the script, which won the festival’s Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award for its writer, Colin Tevorrow, is based on a real classified ad that showed up in the “Headlines” segment of The Tonight Show. Regardless of the fact that it might have come about because of Jay Leno, I think Safety Not Guaranteed sounds like a lot of fun.

28 Hotel Rooms – In 28 Hotel Rooms, Chris Messina and Marin Ireland play two people who, though in relationships with other people, have a one-night stand that winds up evolving into something much more complicated. I’m interested in this film for two reasons: one, I think  Messina is a wonderful, underrated actor and I’ve liked him in pretty much everything I’ve seen him in. And two, my friend, Dor, said it was one of her five favorite films of the festival (say that really fast 10 times), and I trust Dor’s taste implicitly.

Oslo, August 31st – I’ve heard that this film, about a day in the life of Anders (Anders Danielsen Lie), a recovering drug addict who takes a short leave from his drug treatment center to go on a job interview and visit friends in Oslo, was one of the most powerful, affecting films to screen at the festival. After watching the trailer, I can see why.

The Invisible War – It may sound strange to look forward to seeing a documentary about rape, and the subsequent cover-ups, within the U.S. military, but I am. It won the Audience Award, U.S. Documentary at the festival’s awards ceremony and I think its subject matter is very important and, though it may be difficult to discuss, I think it’s vital to do so. I have no doubt that watching this film will be an emotional experience.

Other films I’m looking forward to:

Celeste and Jesse Forever 
Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry
The Queen of Versailles
Arbitrage
Black Rock
The Words
Room 237
Teddy Bear
The House I Live In
I Am Not a Hipster
For a Good Time Call…

During what will hopefully be converted into a roundtable discussion about the posters for the upcoming movie What to Expect When You’re Expecting – which quickly devolved into ‘I’d hit that’ speak, much to Kelly Stitzel’s dismay – someone jokingly asked, “How is Katherine Heigl not involved with this?”

It’s a fair question. This would seem to be right up Heigl’s alley. Perhaps she wasn’t interested in playing another pregnant woman after her breakout performance in Judd Apatow’s 2007 hit Knocked Up. Indeed, you could make an argument that she resisted the project for that very reason, that doing the movie would give people the impression that she’s trying to cash in on her former glory. The most likely reason, of course, is that the scheduling didn’t work out.

It’s also quite possible that they simply didn’t want her.

I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Heigl is on a bit of a skid at the moment. Her last three movies, Killers, Life As We Know It, and New Year’s Eve, were loathed by critics and died mercifully quick deaths at the box office (though Life As We Know It somehow managed to break even). The two movies before them, 27 Dresses and The Ugly Truth, were commercial hits, if not critical ones. (I, for one, like 27 Dresses.) The Heigl backlash even popped up in Friends with Benefits, when Mila Kunis saw a poster for an upcoming romantic comedy and shouted, “Shut up, Katherine Heigl!” (This joke actually works on two levels, since Heigl beat out Kunis for the part of Alison in Knocked Up.) This string of bad luck does not look as though it’s about to be broken, either; Heigl’s latest film One for the Money, in which she plays literary gumshoe Stephanie Plum, was not screened for critics. Groupon is also running a discount ticket deal for the movie, a la The Lincoln Lawyer. That’s some bad juju right there, and the strange thing is that the trailer for One for the Money actually makes it look like a decent flick. If anyone can fill the shoes of the wise-cracking Stephanie Plum, you would think it’s Heigl.

Perception, however, is nine-tenths of the law when it comes to Hollywood stars, and right now, the perception – and therefore, reality – is that Heigl is nearly finished, from rom-com darling to box office poison in a mere four years, a precipitous drop in comparison to movie princesses of the past (Meg Ryan had a good 12 years as America’s Sweetheart™, which included her share of bad films along the way). Now, I know that there are several instances in which Heigl did not help herself (we’ll get to those, I promise), but overall, this seems wildly unfair. Does the backlash stem from the general lack of quality of her movies, her willful personality, or a combination of the two? If it is any one of those three, then there is someone else who by definition should be riding this train alongside her, but to date is not.

Jennifer Aniston.

Let’s review: both are rom-com actresses with spotty box office track records. Both are tabloid fodder. (Heck, Aniston has her own wing in the Tabloid Hall of Fame.) The one key difference is that people love Aniston, while Heigl is viewed as being difficult. And why is that, exactly? That’s the funny part, because if anything, it should be the other way around.

Let’s have a little fun here, shall we? Let’s break down Heigl’s best and worst qualities, and see how they stack up against Aniston’s. Let’s start with the one big pro, and then the cons.

She is very good at what she does

There isn’t a single actress on the planet who plays angry funnier or cuter than Katherine Heigl. There is a scene in The Ugly Truth where she’s directing Gerard Butler to get off the set after shooting one of his chauvinist rants, and she’s positively hilarious. If you don’t value that as a skill, you should; doing the angry/cute thing is not as easy as it seems. Take, for example, Leslie Mann – of whom I’m quite fond, for the record – in Knocked Up. When she flips out on Paul Rudd, it’s not funny – it’s sad, because you walk away from the scene thinking that his character is trapped in a marriage to a nasty human being. But more on that later.

That is not Heigl’s only skill, though. Towards the end of The Ugly Truth, she’s won the man of dreams, only to realize he doesn’t really love her; he loves the woman Butler’s character suggested that she pretend to be. Heigl then describes what she’s really like to the man, in all of her neurotic glory, then says, completely demoralized and broken, “And who would love someone like that?” It’s a heartbreaking scene in an otherwise unwatchable movie. You had to think that even Heigl knew that she was not making a masterpiece when she saw that she had to shoot a scene where it looked like she was giving a guy a blowjob in the bleachers, but she still gave this movie everything she had.

Aniston, meanwhile, is rarely the best thing about any movie she does. In fact, someone should invent a drinking game around Aniston grabbing her rack, a move where she’s essentially saying to the world, “As long as I’ve got these, I’m still going to get work.” (To be fair, that philosophy has worked well thus far.) Instead of making a bad movie better, she is often the source of the problem (ahem, The Bounty Hunter). She knocked it out of the park in Horrible Bosses, but where Heigl will at least try to rise above bad material, Aniston seems content to wallow in the muck.

So there’s the pro. Now Let’s look at the cons.

She has a big mouth

Guilty as charged. It does appear that the comments she made on David Letterman’s show about the long work hours she endured on the Grey’s Anatomy set were out of line (the producers insist those long hours only existed because they accommodated her request to do press for a recent film), but the bit that seemed to seal her reputation as a loudmouth diva was when she dared to suggest that Knocked Up is perhaps just a wee bit sexist. And come on, where the hell does she get off saying bad things about the movie that made her a star?

There’s just one small thing: she’s absolutely right.

The female characters in Knocked Up (I’m referring to Heigl and Mann, who’s married to Apatow) are shrill, humorless succubi. In fact, I’d argue that most of Apatow’s female characters are underwritten and oversexed, but that’s another column for another day. What Heigl said about the movie wasn’t untrue, but she came across as ungrateful, and no one likes an ungrateful movie star…unless he’s a dude. Guys talk trash about their old movies all the time, and no one bats an eye at it. If Heigl’s Ugly Truth costar Gerard Butler came out and said that 300 was crap, would anyone make a big deal out of it? No, they wouldn’t. Seems a little…sexist, don’t you think? Yes, well, now you know how Heigl feels.

Aniston, meanwhile, has never taken heat for saying anything out of turn in the press. She has always been very careful to maintain her image as an American Sweetheart™, and she has been rewarded for this by an adoring public. This is hilarious, because in reality Aniston is a ruthless, cunning, stone-cold killer when it comes to promoting her “brand.” If Heigl wears her heart on her sleeve, Aniston’s is secured behind six inches of steel in a vault surrounded by a moat filled with crocodiles. She doesn’t make a single move without first analyzing it from 17 different angles for its potential impact on her Q factor. Look up each time the tabloids went nuts over Jen’s new boy toy, and you’ll see that each one of them lines up with the opening of one of her films. Aniston hasn’t had an unguarded moment, or made an uncalculated move, in over a decade. This makes her arguably the fakest celebrity of all time, which is saying something considering the asshats that we call celebs today.

Her characters are high-maintenance pains in the ass

So were Reese Witherspoon’s, for the most part, and no one’s held that against her. Also, women are complicated. It’s actually nice to see one refuse to play the bimbo or the fool. As for her role in Killers, well, that was just bad casting. She had no business playing a naive shut-in with no self-esteem.

She’s hell to work with

I wouldn’t know anything about that firsthand, and even if she were, using that as a measuring stick to determine which actors to like or dislike is a hypocritical copout. (Psssst: Russell Crowe, Tom Cruise, Edward Norton, Jack Nicholson, Sean Penn, Daniel Day-Lewis, and Christian Bale thank you for not holding this quality against them.)

Her movies are bad

This is mostly true. However, Aniston’s made five times as many bad movies as Heigl has, and she continues to be forgiven. And it’s not as if there are great romantic comedies being made all around Heigl; the genre is suffering a drought, and a girl’s gotta work.

I am not saying that Jennifer Aniston deserves to suffer what Katherine Heigl is going through at the moment. Ideally, both actresses would be treated equally; they are paid to entertain us, and that is all that should matter. But let’s get some proper perspective on them: what Heigl has said and done, in the grand scheme of things, is pretty innocuous, while far greater Hollywood crimes have, for the most part, gone unpunished. Not to mention, the Heigl backlash sends a dangerous message to little girls everywhere that if they want to succeed in life, they should keep their mouths shut. Aniston, meanwhile, is being rewarded for her steely grasp of the media machine, and how she worked the power of her image into a sustainable brand, long past her career peak. She’s not even known for being an actress anymore – she’s known for being a celebrity, and with an entire generation of kids who crave fame more than love, achievement, or happiness about to overtake the entertainment business, that sends an even worse message than the one about keeping quiet.

When it comes down to it, I think the reason people dislike Katherine Heigl is because they’d be scared to death to be friends with her, because if they were doing something she disapproved of, she’d make sure they knew it. Most people don’t want to be friends with that person, but the fact is everyone needs at least one person like that in their lives, because it works both ways. If you were being a bully, she’d tell you to step off. If you were being too passive, she’d tell you to stick up for yourself. She could use some work in the diplomacy department, yes, but who do you want on your back in a bar fight, the person who says the right things in order to please everyone, or the one who will fight to the death to defend your honor? (See: Heigl’s public shaming of Isaiah Washington after he called Grey’s co-star T.R. Knight a faggot.) Heigl may be neither of those people in real life, but based on her comments to the press, she’s far closer to the latter than she is to the former, and I find that admirable. Aniston, meanwhile, is still an enigma, 17 years after most of us met her for the first time. Oddly enough, this earns her a few bonus points for keeping her private life private – at least until such time as it’s convenient for her to sell this or that scoop to a tabloid in order to advance her career – but that raises the question: why do people like her so much, when after nearly two decades in the spotlight, we still know next to nothing about her?

Fight the good fight, Katherine. In an industry that is referred to as high school with money, it’s nice to see someone on the fringe of the popular clique look at the other popular kids from time to time and say, “Wow, you guys are douchebags.” If you ever find yourself in a bar fight, I will totally have your back.

We snuggled on the big chair as the Twentieth Century Fox Fanfare played.

“Drun dun, drun dun, drrrrrrrrrrrrr, drun dun. Ba pa da da, babababababaaaaaaah!”

It was one of those rare mornings- Memorial Day, no less- when my daughter and I were the only ones awake. She was an early riser back when she was 8, even on holidays. As it didn’t seem like her mom or brother would be up anytime soon, she requested to order a movie on demand. Her choice was Night at the Museum, the fantasy comedy starring Ben Stiller. For her seeing the film was about the adventure and humor; for me it was watching Stiller, an actor I’d admired ever since his Color of Money parody aired on Saturday Night Live in the late 80′s. For both of us it was about having some father/daughter time while the rest of the family slept.

I must admit my expectations for Night at the Museum were low, even if the movie featured Dick Van Dyke and Owen Wilson. But you can’t beat having your arm around your little girl and having her prop her feet up on yours while watching a movie at home. As the film progressed, I found myself laughing just as much as she did. Moreover, I found myself getting emotionally involved with the plight of Stiller’s character, Larry, an inventor who takes a job as a janitor so that his son won’t be disappointed in him.

The script by Thomas Lennon and Robert Ben Garant (two men known better for the acting on The State and Reno 911!) adheres to a tight, Hollywood formula. Yet the writers peppered it with enough adult humor, action and mystery to lift Night at the Museum above so much of the treacly crap sold as family entertainment. Director Shawn Levy uses a light touch and allowed not only Stiller room to have fun, but also the great supporting cast that also includes Carla Gugiano, Steve Coogan, Mickey Rooney, Bill Cobbs, Ricky Gervais and a reigned in Robin Williams. Even the cameo by Paul Rudd is a hoot. However, it’s Stiller who really delivers.

The first night on the job, Larry discovers that all of the museum exhibits come to life thanks to an ancient Egyptian tablet. Stiller had the difficult task of making us believe that the walking T-Rex bones were real, or that he was about to get eaten by lions, or that the miniature people who come to life are actually throwing tiny spears at him. Of course, all of the fantastic elements I just described were done with computer effects. Stiller had my daughter and me believing. One need only watch Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, in which excellent actors like Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman appear lost in their CG universe, to appreciate how hard it is to pull off this type of acting.

We had to keep our voices down, laughing loud and often. My daughter clutched my arm during the scary moments, and rested her head on my shoulder when the movie got sentimental. You can’t ask for a better movie experience than this one. We both loved Night at the Museum so much that I recorded it later that day just to make sure that Julie and Jacob had a chance to see it. When they did, they, too, fell in love with the movie. It wasn’t long before Night at the Museum became a Malchus household favorite. Five years later, if there’s a disagreement about what to watch on family movie night, Night at the Museum is a sure way to please everyone.

Since the death of my brother-in-law, Seann, in December, it’s no secret that my family is hurting. I’ve heard that eventually the pain will lessen and I won’t feel guilty when I laugh at a stupid sitcom or an inspired movie. In the meantime, we’re all trying to movie forward and return to the routines of our regular lives. This includes going on dates, as Julie and I did a couple weeks back, a belated anniversary dinner. Our night out happened to take place on the same day that Seann would have turned 30. As you can imagine, the entire evening was very emotional. After dinner, Julie and  I returned home to the kids, who then wanted a family movie night. It could have been a situation when some inane comedy or a loud animated film was chosen. Instead, we all agreed on Night at the Museum.

As the family snuggled on the couch and the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare played, it was like an old friend announcing his arrival, coming to help us heal. I don’t know when things will ever be okay, but for a couple of hours it felt like we’d be able to get through another night and face the next day. And it didn’t feel wrong to be laughing, as long as we were with each other, arms around each other, feet propped up together.

With great fanfare the nominees for the 84th annual Academy Awards were announced early yesterday morning…and then the E! Channel commentators started discussing the more urgent matter of nominee Jonah Hill’s hair. But we have more substantive topics to discuss in the run up to the big show on Feb. 26. Feel free to join us.

Best Picture

The Artist

The Descendants

Hugo

The Help

Midnight in Paris

Moneyball

War Horse

The Tree of Life

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

Oscarwatch: Out of nine nominees only a handful have shown any traction with audiences, so look for host Billy Crystal, unlocked from cryofreeze, to revive his “Who are these people?” schtick from the 1997 ceremony. On the other hand, does an audience that made nine sequels and a comic book movie the Top Ten boxoffice attractions of 2011 really deserve to be catered to?

The Tree of Life love was unexpected. Other than its blah, Vampire Diaries-level lead I had no huge problems with War Horse, which fixes some of the story problems I had with the admittedly more extraordinary play. And The Help must be breathing easier, as according to the tweets and updates and blogs the critical hate bounced off it and zeroed in on the nomination for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, which–groan–I’m now obliged to see. I felt the same obligation toward the steadily declining Stephen Daldry’s last Oscar-winning thumbsucker, The Reader, and it was excruciating. Beyond excruciating. Stephen, return to the theater, follow Billy Elliot on tour, do some fuckin’ thing, as Dennis Farina told an underling in Midnight Run.

I’ve made my peace with The Artist winning BP, the first mostly silent movie to do since the dawn of Oscar time in 1929 (Wings, the first Best Picture, is now on Blu-ray by the way), the first black-and-white one since Schindler’s List in 1993 (and before that Tom Jones, 30 years earlier). It’s nostalgic to the hilt (obviously!), as charming as a panda’s embrace…and not nearly as sharp or as funny as it could have been, nor making much noise at the boxoffice, which Harvey Weinstein will surely attend to. (Look for Uggie to have his own reality show.) It’ll be the fluffiest Best Picture since, what, Shakespeare in Love in 1998? The Sting in 1973? But comedy so often goes unrecognized I’m OK with it…except that there was presumably a tenth slot available, and the superior Bridesmaids isn’t filling it. Just saying.

Best Actor

George Clooney, The Descendants

Jean Dujardin, The Artist

Brad Pitt, Moneyball

Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Demian Bichir, A Better Life

Oscarwatch: Bichir had the SAG wind at his back, and, as importantly, Oscar screeners. I had one (via my membership in the Online Film Critics Society) and let me tell you, they help. But he and Oldman, a truly gratifying first-time nomination for a great talent, are out of it.

Is anyone else a little sick of George Clooney? I love him, too, but I didn’t love The Descendants–did you? It leaves you hanging. I’m much more partial to Brad Pitt in Moneyball, a serenely good star performance there…in another movie that many are just kind of meh about. (The missing Michael Fassbender? He has Oscar gold between his legs, baby.) That leaves Dujardin, who sounds (so to speak!) like a winner to me, a delightful performance that isn’t just part of the movie, it is the movie. If he wins it’ll  be the first comic male performance to win since Roberto Benigni in Life is Beautiful (or, going way back to a comic male performance in a movie that’s issue-free and not morose, Richard Dreyfuss in The Goodbye Girl in 1977)…and if you don’t like it, well, when’s the last time you’ve heard anything about Benigni?

Best Actress

Viola Davis, The Help

Rooney Mara, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady

Michelle Williams, My Week With Marilyn

Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs

Oscarwatch: The two most fabulous female performances in a movie last year? Kirsten Dunst in Melancholia and Kristen Wiig in Bridesmaids. They’re not here. These are the usual–impersonation, artifice, suffering. Unexciting. (Tilda Swinton wasn’t going anywhere with her dour entry.) Davis is a contender but I think the totality of Streep will put her over the top for the first time since Sophie’s Choice (1982), after 12 (12!) nominations in between. (The five years between 1990′s Postcards from the Edge and 1995′s The Bridges of Madison County were her driest stretch.)

Best Supporting Actor

Kenneth Branagh, My Week With Marilyn

Nick Nolte, Warrior

Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Jonah Hill, Moneyball

Max von Sydow, Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

Oscarwatch: I’d love to see Plummer and von Sydow, both 82 (and adversaries in 1984′s Dreamscape), funnel salacious gossip to TMZ and Gawker in an effort to unseat each other from Oscar’s throne. Hey, von Sydow has grounds to be pissed–the Canadian Plummer stole his quintessentially Swedish part in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

Not gonna happen. (Right?) But it’s an interesting contest. Careerwise they both have a lot of paycheck crap on their resumes–but von Sydow (the exorcist himself, for God’s sake, and an elderly part he played convincingly at age 43) will always pull ahead, thanks to his astonishing run with Ingmar Bergman (and, ahem, Flash Gordon. Brilliant.) Plummer, however, has been working the room since spring with the otherwise twee Beginners. It helps.

This is Branagh’s fifth nomination in five different categories and his lame interpretation of Laurence Olivier won’t stick, either. (I suspect he got this one for directing Thor to the top ten grossers list. It’s an industry town.) Nolte continues to gun for an honorary Oscar. The missing Albert Brooks? He’s terrific in Drive, as he was in his nominated performance in Broadcast News, but writing is his true craft…and writers get no respect. (If they did, Lost in America would have been nominated, and won, in 1985.)

Hill has his nice haircut as consolation.

Best Supporting Actress

Berenice Bejo, The Artist

Jessica Chastain, The Help

Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids

Octavia Spencer, The Help

Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs

Oscarwatch: Toothiest nominee: Bejo, carried aloft by The Artist’s updraft. Hardest-working: Chastain, with six movies last year, another five in the can, and her Broadway debut this fall in a revival of The Heiress. But I see Spencer cancelling her out and not the other way around.

Tweet: “The Best Supporting Actress race is between the actress who pooped in a sink and the actress who pooped in a pie.“

Best Director

Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist

Alexander Payne, The Descendants

Martin Scorsese, Hugo

Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Terrence Malick, The Tree of Life

Oscarwatch: No one can pronounce his name, or spell it, but The Artist guy feels like a shoo-in despite strong competition. No one can spell “Scorsese,” either (a second “c” often slips in), but I can say that he keeps as many balls up in the air in Hugo without dropping any. (The second half of The Artist slips a gear.) Will the surprise addition of Malick, the rugged individualist, somehow change the race? Maybe…but I can’t see him gathering the necessary red carpet skills to chat about Jonah Hill’s hair on E!.

Best Original Screenplay

Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Asghar Farhadi, A Separation

Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist

Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumulo, Bridesmaids

J.C. Chandor, Margin Call

Oscarwatch: Margin Call is another movie that benefited from Oscar screeners (it should have benefited more.) A Separation is a gem, and it’s good to see a foreign-language script take a slot–but my heart is with Bridesmaids, which may very well be one if The Artist or Allen (who won’t even show up) surge in this category. You go, girls!

Best Adapted Screenplay

Nat Faxon, Alexander Payne and Jim Rash, The Descendants

Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian, Moneyball

John Logan, Hugo

George Clooney and Grant Heslov, The Ides of March

Bridget O’Connor and Peter Straughan, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Oscarwatch: This is where The Descendants and Moneyball have a chance to shine–but Tinker Tailor is a wondrous streamlining and repurposing of complex source material. Is anyone else a little sick of George Clooney?

Best Animated Feature

A Cat in Paris

Kung Fu Panda 2

Puss in Boots

Rango

Chico & Rita

Oscarwatch: I like the bouncy previews for Chico & Rita but that’s all I’ve seen, previews–it and the Cat cartoon (the other cat cartoon) are unknown quantities. And Kung Fu Panda 2 and Puss in Boots are too familiar, which opens the field for the funny Rango. Motion capture animation hate killed the worthy Adventures of Tintin. My daughter and I vote for the charming Winnie the Pooh–too slight?

Best Foreign Film

A Separation (Iran)

Footnote (Israel)

In Darkness (Poland)

Monsieur Lazhar (Canada)

Bullhead (Belgium)

Oscarwatch: It must be A Separation–but this category has a dismal history of sloppily sentimental dreck winning. Departures anyone?

Oscarscan:

In an Oscar pool? Pick The Artist to win in the technical categories, knowing in your heart that Hugo (which, ha, has one more nomination) has greater craft. (See what the ASC has to say on Feb. 12 before committing to cinematography.)

Original Score? With two more nominations this year John Williams brings his total to a stunning 47–eat your heart out, Meryl Streep. Tintin is the better of the two–but Tinker Tailor is the best. (And poor Kim Novak, who said she was “raped” by the use of a Vertigo theme in The Artist’s score, must feel like she’s in another remake of I Spit on Your Grave now that it’s in contention.)

Original Song? Yeah, I don’t get it, either. Albert Nobbs has a pretty Sinead O’ Connor song, Drive had some good tunes, Elton John and Madonna could have carried over their Golden Globes feud to the Oscars. “Soundtrack Saturdays” colleague Kelly Stitzel says the category is all tied up in a point system that frowns on songs used exclusively in credits sequences. No excuse for excluding the standout number in Captain America: The First Avenger then.

Visual Effects? Welcome to your category, Andy (“Mr. Mo Cap”) Serkis. You’re never going to leave.

Documentary? With their Paradise Lost films Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky stuck with the West Memphis Three for twenty years. They deserve an Oscar for tenacity alone.

Makeup? The Muggles mugged Harry Potter one last time as the series failed to ascend into the above-the-line categories on its last try. What we have left is dueling transformations. If The Iron Lady wins look for Streep to follow (but Close, a future honorary Oscar recipient, won’t get the same bounce.)

Best Hair? Jonah Hill.

5. Gary and Karen in The Last American Virgin

Gary (Lawrence Monoson) is an all around good guy who hangs around with Rick (Steve Antin), a ladies man, and David (Joe Rubbo), who fills the heavy set comic relief role so prevalent in early 80′s teen romps. On the surface, The Last American Virgin is the basic story of three guys trying to get laid while some great 80′s music provides the soundtrack. The movie takes a turn when Karen (Diane Franklin) transfers to their high school. Gary quickly falls for her, but she only sees him as a friend. Slick Rick is more her type, which is convenient since he really wants to bang her. After Rick gets Karen pregnant, he promptly dumps her. Who does Karen turn to when she decides to have an abortion? You guessed it, Gary. Because he cares for her so much, Gary scrounges the money to pay for the procedure and then takes care for her while she’s recovering. Often overlooked in the teen film genre, The Last American Virgin may have all of the hallmarks of your typical sex film, but it also shows how complicated and painful friendship is when you’re in high school.

4. Sam and Farmer Ted in Sixteen Candles

John Hughes classic brings together birthday girl, Sam (Molly Ringwald), and Farmer Ted, the king of the geeks (Anthony Michael Hall). Their unusual friendship comes about after she confesses her love for hunky Jake (Michael Schoeffling) and Ted relays info that Jake’s been asking about her. Sam is so ecstatic that she lends the freshman her panties so that he can win a bet for some floppy discs. Ted also becomes Jake’s confidant and for his friendship gets to drive home the prom queen. The hunk and the sweet sixteen girl may wind up together, but it’s Ted who really wins. I mean, a girl’s underwear, a stack of floppys and and sex with a snobby blond? Legendary.

3. Bill and Ted in Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure

What, you think this list can only have the opposite sex? Bill and Ted’s adventure through time is one of the 80′s best bromance pics. While the plot of Ted passing history so he doesn’t get sent to military school so that he can eventually form Wyld Stallyns is the driving force behind the pic, the core of the movie is the unique friendship and love between the two dimwits in the title. Ted completes Bill and vice versa. This is one great friendship, unusual and charming thanks to the performances of Alex Winter and one Keanu Reeves. When you watch the film, keep and eye out for Diane Franklin, from The Last American Virgin, as one of the princesses.

2. Lane and Monique in Better Off Dead

Better Off Dead is director Savage Steve Holland’s bizarro world of clamation hamburgers, snow sniffing weirdos, Howard Cossell loving Korean drag racers and a psychotic newspaper boy. John Cusack is Lane, a heartbroken high school kid whose girlfriend has dumped him for the captain of the ski team. Lane spends half the film trying to kill himself until Monique, a French foreign exchange student who doesn’t speaks English, moves in with his creepy neighbors. Monique is played by (wait for it) Diane Franklin! These two strike up a friendship in which she helps him restore a classic Camaro and also helps him regain his confidence. Cusack is at his goofiest best and Franklin oozes innocence, sexiness and charm. After an insane ski-off in the final act, is it any wonder that Lane and Monique ultimately wind up together in the final frames?

1. Andie and Duckie in Pretty in Pink

What John Hughes touched upon in Sixteen Candles he perfects in Pretty in Pink. Molly Ringwald’s Andie is a girl from the wrong side of the tracks who falls for rich kid, Blane (Andrew McCarthy). While she struggles to fit in with all of his snobby friends, she also tries to keep her best friend, a flamboyant young man named Duckie (played with flare by Jon Cryer). Andie and Duckie share the same music, the same sensibilities and I believe they share the same clothes (not confirmed, though). Sure, Duckie pines for her throughout the movie, but we all know that these two are better off as friends. Hughes and the director, Howard Deutch, felt the same way, changing the original ending of Duckie and Andie getting together (they would go back to the original when they made the mirror version of Pretty in Pink, Some Kind of Wonderful) and gave us the Hollywood moment of Blane and Andie kissing in the parking lot. Works for me. You know the romance won’t last. And when Andie needs a shoulder pad to cry on, she’ll have Duckie. She’ll always have weird, unusual, loving and understanding Duckie, her best friend.

Set in Oklahoma, 1987, the film opens with the pitch perfect harmonies of Pat Benatar’s “Shadows of the Night.” Any movie that chooses to feature classic Benatar scores points, in my book. We quickly learn that Temple (speaking in a twangy accent) is Danielle, the high school slut. She starts her days banging dudes in their muscle cars before entering the school grounds sporting huge sunglasses and a cigarette poised between her lips. Danielle’s outrageous behavior gets her booted out of her regular classes and placed in “challengers,” the room in the basement where all the “troubled kids” wind up. Danielle is a smart girl and her principal challenges her to straighten up so she can return to the normal kids. “No one likes a dirty girl,” he tells her.   No one likes a teenage boy whose openly gay, either; at least, not in the Reagan-era south. That’s why overweight, obviously gay, Clarke (Dozier) is also in the Challengers class.

Clarke and Danielle are immediately paired up in the old “bag of flour parenting experiment” and a friendship slowly begins to form. As we get to know Danielle better and we learn about the emptiness she has from never knowing her real father (she was born out of wedlock to a teenage mother ) and we start to understand why she swears, is abusive and sleeps around.  Clarke takes Danielle’s abuse because he’s friendless and will do anything to get out is house. At home, his mousy mother (Mary Steenburgen) stands by while her foolish husband (Dwight Yokam) tries to beat the gay out of his son.

Danielle’s mom (Milla Jovovich) is planning to marry Ray (William H. Macy) a strict Mormon with creepy kids, so the clock’s ticking before the hammer comes down and Danielle will have to conform. She thinks that if she can locate her real dad she can live with him. Clarke discovers the identity of Danielle’s real father and the two track him down in California. One thing leads to another and soon enough, Danielle and Clarke have hit the road in his father’s gas guzzling car.

Once the road trip begins, Dirty Girl veers into familiar territory; you can pretty much predict how it will end. Still, Sylvia peppers last act of his film with well executed poignant scenes and several surprises, some that I’ve never seen in a coming of age film before. One particular sweet, dream like sequence involves a male stripper, an abandoned drive-in and an acoustic version of The Outfield’s greatest hit.

Despite it’s flaws, I really liked this movie, in part because it really captured the essence of the films I grew up watching, and in part because there is a joy and musicality to the director’s point of view. While it’s not perfect, Dirty Girl has enough heart, humor and a couple of great performances to make it worth checking out.