Love Stories

Valentine's Day

Director: Garry Marshall

Cast: Ashton Kutcher, Jennifer Garner, Julia Roberts, Jamie Foxx, Anne Hathaway, Hector Elizondo, Shirley McClaine, and a million other people

Released: February 10, 2010

When I start watching a movie, the first thing I usually do is check to see how long it is and this one is a little over two hours. At first, I was surprised (and a little annoyed, ha!) because why would some romcom be over two hours long, but then I remembered that half of Hollywood is in this movie and there are a billion little storylines, so that quickly explained that. 

I feel like Garry Marshall watched Love, Actually (which would have come out 7 years prior) and wanted to do that except have it set in L.A on Valentine's Day. There's even a plot line that's sorta similar to one in Love, Actually, but I'll explain more when I get there. 

It's clear Garry picked up the phone to call many of his favorite people to work with: Julia Roberts from Pretty Woman and Runaway Bride, Anne Hathaway from The Princess Diaries, Hector Elizondo from pretty much everything he's directed, and Patrick Dempsey and Eric Dane from the one episode of Grey's Anatomy he directed. Just kidding. He never directed an episode of Grey's Anatomy, but I did have to double check to see if he did or not since two actors from that show are in this movie!  

As you can imagine, some of the storylines collide with each other. There are at least two, maybe three (hell, perhaps even four) storylines that could have easily been cut and it wouldn't have affected the movie at all, but I'll tell you about those later. 

It's Valentine's Day morning and Reed (Ashton Kutcher) has just proposed to his girlfriend, Morley (Jessica Alba) and she says yes. (By the way, I had to look up pretty much everyone's characters name because I only remembered a couple of their names in the movie!) Reed sells flowers and obviously this is a big day for his business and he's got his friend and co-worker, Alphonso (George Lopez) to help him on this big day. 

Reed is friends with Julia (Jennifer Garner) and she has recently started dating a cardiothoracic surgeon named Dr. Derek Sheperd, oops, I mean Dr. Harrison Copeland (Patrick Dempsey - actually, Dr. Shepard was a neurosurgeon, wasn't he?). Haha, I wonder if they call him Dr. McDreamy at his hospital? Julia is so in love with him and basically has hearts for eyes. Unfortunately, he can't spend the day with her because he has to go to San Francisco for something work related. Later, we'll see him call Julia from his car, telling her he's just gotten to the airport, but in actuality, he's pulling into the driveway of a nice house. My first thought was, OMG! He's married! and not five seconds later we see him take a ring out of his pocket and slide it onto his finger. What a jerk! 

Julia goes to see Reed and she's a little surprised that Morley said yes to his proposal, but is happy for him. When she tells him her new flame will be in San Francisco for the day (so she thinks!), he suggests that she go up there and surprise him. Boy, he's going to regret suggesting that when Dr. Copeland will stop by his flower shop in a few hours to buy two arrangement for his two ladies. Before he gives his credit card to Reed, he asks if he can be discreet about this. He agrees, but then when he recognizes his name on the card, he clarifies that Julia Fitzpatrick is his girlfriend and Pamela Copeland is his wife since she has the same last name as him. 

He's having a huge dilemma of whether he should tell Julia or not that her boyfriend is married. He asks Alphonso what he would do and Alphonso asks him what HE would do if the roles were reversed. Reed knows he needs to tell Julia and he tries to when he delivers the flowers from Harrison to her, but isn't able to. 

Unfortunately, Reed will get hit with his own dose of bad news when he comes home to find Morley packing a suitcase and tells him she is leaving him and can't marry him. I saw this coming a mile away because in an earlier scene he asks why she's not wearing her ring and she tells him she doesn't want people asking a bunch of questions since it's Valentine's Day and that they should keep their engagement secret for now. At the last minute, and I mean at the very last minute, he runs to the airport where Julia is waiting to board a plane. He tells her that Harrison is married, but she thinks this means he used to be married and is still being stubborn. 

We see that Julia did not get on the plane, but instead went to the hospital where Dr. Copeland works and asks a nurse if he's working tonight and she says no. She then asks if he's married and the woman confirms he is and he and his wife just celebrated their 15th wedding anniversary. An older nurse comes over to Julia and whispers to her what restaurant he'll be at tonight and what time. It just so happens that one of Julia's students' (she's an elementary school teacher) dad is a maitre'd at that restaurant (or maybe he owns the place, hell, I don't know), so she is able to pretend to be a waitress for Harrison and his wife. At first, he's not paying attention as he's looking at the menu and talking to his wife as Julia pours them water, but when she announces she'll be their waitress, he chokes on his water. She tells them one of their specials is called "the lying, stinking pig." The wife is not getting the clue and is amused by this special and asks how it's made and Julia goes into gruesome detail (and some fast thinking for being put on the spot; guess she got the training when she was a spy in the CIA, haha) about what the chef does to its scrotum and heart. The wife says she'll go with the salmon, but Harrison stutters that he's not hungry. Surely, the wife had some suspicion. Oh, well, I suppose if she did, she decided to wait until they got home before she went off on him. This scene reminded me of the one in Adventures in Baby-Sitting when Elisabeth Shue sees Bradley Whitford with some girl in a restaurant when he told her he couldn't go out because his sister was sick and when she goes in to confront him she overhears him say to the girl, "Girls like you only come around once in a lifetime" which is a line he told Chris (Elisabeth's character) and she's like, "Or twice in the same night." 

Julia thanks her student's dad and picks up some carry out she's taking to a party and tells him to charge it to her "friend over there." He says he figured and tells her he also added some extra lobster tails and cheesecake, heh.

So now Reed's (one day) fiancee has left him and Julia's boyfriend is married. Guess who gets together? They find out they were meant for each other all along! How sweet! Okay, so that wraps up their storylines (for the most part), who's next? 

Like I said, Julia is an elementary school teacher (fourth or fifth grade) and one of her students is a boy named Edison. His grandparents are Edgar (Hector Elizondo) and Estelle (Shirley McClain). This is the storyline that (sort of) reminded me of Love, Actually when Liam Neeson's son tells him he's in love with a girl in his class. Edison tells his grandfather he wants to send flowers to his Valentine and we see him trying to order a bouquet of roses at Reed's shop even though he doesn't have enough money. I think we're supposed to think he has a crush on this girl in his class, Rani, an Indian girl who's also a good friend of his and they both play soccer together. Another one of their teammates calls her his girlfriend to Edison's face, but he denies it. But when Julia (Ms. Fitzpatrick to her students) is telling her students the history of Valentine's Day, he's the only one paying attention so I knew that he had a crush on his teacher. For some reason, his flowers aren't delivered to the school (probably because he didn't have enough money!), so he has to make it his mission to make sure his Valentine gets her flowers THAT day. He finds out from Rani that she has to work at her family's restaurant that night (and keep in mind this girl is ten) because they're hosting two parties: a wedding reception and an "I Hate Valentine's Day" party that Ms. Fitzpatrick will be attending because her friend Kara is hosting. Okay, let's put a pin in this story (there's not too much left to tell, but I need to introduce some other characters before I wrap it up. This movie's kind of a pain to try to summarize!) 

In a movie about love and Valentine's Day, we at least need one anti-Valentine's Day person and that is Kara (Jessica Biel) who hosts an annual "I Hate Valentine's Day" party. She is upset because nobody has RSVPed to her party, but don't worry, she ends up having a nice gathering. Julia is the first to arrive. At first she wasn't going to attend because she had planned to be in San Francisco surprising her boyfriend, but we all know how that turned out! There's a heart-shaped piñata and Julia takes a bat and just beats the crap out of it. Before she smashes the piñata, she twirls the bat around in her hand and it's very Sydney Bristow.

Kara is a publicist for an "aging" (he's 35) football player named Sean Jackson (Eric Dane) who's thinking about retiring because he wants more out of life. He wants to call a press conference and everyone thinks he's going to announce his retirement. His agent is played by Queen Latifah and she has one amusing moment where she's getting a massage and when it turns out that Sean's big announcement is that he's gay (but he's still going to continue to play), she looks up and says, "I knew it!" 

But let's back up (again) and introduce another character. Kelvin (Jamie Foxx) is a sports journalist, but his producer, Susan (Kathy Bates), wants him to do a lifestyle piece (because it's a slow sports day, but this was before Sean Jackson announced he was holding a press conference) and ask people on the street "what does Valentine's Day mean to you?" Kelvin isn't thrilled about this because he wants to be taken seriously as a sports journalist and he's not a fan of Valentine's Day. (Guess who he ends up with?) I did laugh at his reply about Valentine's Day not even being a real holiday because they don't get the day off. I totally agree with him. If you don't get time and a half for woking on a holiday it's not a real holiday! When he hears that Sean Jackson (I have no idea why I keep calling him by his first and last name, maybe because that's how they referred to him in the movie) is announcing a press conference, he goes to Kara's office to ask is he can ask Sean one camera on question. Kara is in her office, stuffing chocolate in her mouth, a little unhinged, and asks him if she's the only person who's alone on Valentine's Day and tells him how her best friend is candy and the only relationship she has is with her Blackberry. (Haha, this movie is so dated.) Now I don't know if this is the first time these two have met, but it's super cringe and she breaks down and he's trying to comfort her. Anyway, he is able to get his question for Sean Jackson and he ends up coming to Kara's party (because he hates Valentine's Day too!). They share a kiss at the end of the movie and I guess they end up together. 

We get a storyline set on an airplane where U.S. army captain Kate (Julia Roberts) is sitting next to a well-dressed man named Holden (Bradley Cooper). They strike up a conversation and we learn that Kate is on a one-day leave. Holden tells her he thinks it's a romantic gesture what she's doing since she's taking a fourteen hour flight just to be home for one day, then turn around the next day and take another fourteen hour flight back and mentions the guy she's going to see is a lucky man. Okay, right away I knew she wasn't going home to see a husband or a boyfriend or any kind of romantic partner. I knew that Edison was her son and he was who she was going home to see. I knew this because when Edison is playing soccer we see him looking at the moms cheering on their kids and he looks really sad. I thought it was weird that she never corrected him and told him she had a son and was going home to see him. I guess it's because they wanted it to be a surprise for the audience. Well, you're not fooling me, Garry Marshall! It is a sweet moment when she comes home and hugs her son and I may or may not have had something in my eyes during that scene. We also find out that Holden is in a relationship with Sean Jackson. So I guess they were in a relationship, but it wasn't public since Sean wasn't officially out? 

Okay, let's go back to Edison for a second. For some reason, he has a baby-sitter even though he has two able-bodied grandparents who are able to take care of. Grace (Emma Roberts) is a high school senior who watches him after school. I would understand if the grandparents weren't home to watch him, but there's a scene of her at their house and she's talking to them. If the grandparents are home, why do they need a baby-sitter? Okay, this scene will come into play later so I get why it's there. 

Let's talk about Grace's (very cringey) storyline. That morning, her teacher asks her if she can help with a "test-prep group for the class" after school, but Grace tells her she has to baby-sit. When she asks if she can do it during lunch, she tells her she can't because she plans to have sex with her boyfriend for the first time and they're going to her house during lunch break because her parents will be at work. I for sure thought she was trying to get out of helping the teacher and just said that so the teacher would be uncomfortable (which she was!) and leave it alone, but no, Grace was being serious. She even offers to help her the next day with the study group. 

During lunch break, Grace's boyfriend, Alex (Carter Jenkins, the only person in the main cast I wasn't familiar with), gets to her house first (he knows where the key is hidden; under a doormat, with an obvious hiding place like that, they're probably going to get burglarized) and heads up to her room and covers her bed in rose petals and lights a bunch of candles. It's the most cliche thing ever. Also, isn't lunch break usually only half an hour? And they have to drive home, then back to school? This all just seems very rushed and not very special or romantic. Are they just doing this today because it's Valentine's Day? I guess. Alex is an inspiring musician and has brought his guitar and starts playing it and singing a cheesy song about her. He is completely naked (ready to go, I guess!) and the guitar is strategically placed around him. In a very predictable move, we see the front door open and in walks Grace's mom! I guess she had to come home form work to get something. She can hear the music upstairs and thinks Grace is home, so she opens the door to get quite the surprise. Alex also gets quite the surprise too and falls onto Grace's bed. We get a very awkward scene where he tells his girlfriend's mom the reason he is naked because he's rehearsing for "an experimental show". (Okay, but why is he "practicing" in Grace's room?) He stands up and steps on a thorn of a rose, then backs up and crashes into one of Grace's shelves, then he bumps heads with Grace's mom. You would think the mom would tell him to get dressed, close the door, then they could discuss what he was doing. Alex wraps his jacket around his wait and grabs his guitar case and runs out of the house completely naked, but he's covered up. He runs down the block and runs into Grace who is on her way home. She stops and lets him in the car and he tells her what just happened. Boy, she must have been mortified that her mom saw her boyfriend naked in her bedroom! 

So they decide to wait to have sex because reasons I don't even remember. Grace chats with Edgar and Estelle and asks them who's only been with one person and they tell her they are those people. Except lies! Because Estelle confesses to Edgar that she had an affair with his business partner many years ago. Damn, that's cold, Estelle! When he asks why she's telling him this now, she replies she wanted to tell him the truth and he tells her, "The truth makes everything else seem like a lie."

There are a couple storylines that could have been deleted from the movie. One of them is the relationship between Liz (Anne Hathaway) and Jason (Topher Grace - thank goodness I have the Wikipedia cast list up because I would not have remembered their character's names!). They recently started dating and go on a dinner date. They go to this super crowded restaurant where the tables are literally right next to each other and they're sitting shoulder to shoulder with the other patrons and are across from each other and have to talk loudly to be heard. The couple next to them are leaning across the table and making out and the other couple next to them is fighting. It doesn't seem very fun or intimate. One of the moments of dialogue I genuinely laughed at is when the waiter comes over and asks them, "Would you like the four-course Sweetheart's Menu or the eight-course Eternal Love?" and Jason replies, "Whoa slow down. Is there a one-course 'only been dating
for two weeks but it looks promising option?'" Yeah, that's pretty awkward, but I think his reply was pretty good. 

During their scenes together or when Liz is at work, she has to take calls because she makes extra money on the side as a phone sex operator. It's all very PG-13 dirty talk and she talks in accents, usually Russian or Southern. She seems to have the same two clients. During the dinner date, she has to excuse herself to take one of these calls and goes outside. Jason (he doesn't know what she does on the side) goes to find her and overhears her "talking dirty" (I say it in quotes because it's pretty tame) in a Southern accent to someone who he believes is her boyfriend. This guy is really dumb...any idiot would realize what she's doing. She admits she's a phone sex operator and when he asks why she didn't tell him she says it's because she's broke and has a $100,000 student loan and no insurance. So I guess because of shame? He's such a jerk and tells her "I'm out." But why? Because she's the a phone sex operator? Because she's broke? For some reason, after he tells her that, she asks if he's going to call her, but I guess this is so he can be snarky and reply, "I'd like to say yes, but I don't know if I can afford it." He does immediately apologize for saying that, but says this is all too much for him.

So I would say this is a storyline that could be deleted, but it does merge with the Edgar and Estelle storyline. Both couples are supposed to go to a movie night in the cemetery, but the guys end up going alone and they start chatting about their forlorn love lives. Edgar and Estelle go every year on Valentine's and this is the first time he's been there without Estelle. The movie they're showing is a 1958 movie Shirely McClaine was in called Hot Spell, so I guess Estelle is/was an actress, but I don't know if this is supposed to be Hot Spell or another movie because Shirley McClaine isn't playing herself. Anyway, Estelle comes to the screening and she and Edgar make up and kiss in front of a huge crowd of people and everyone claps. Also, Jason realizes he was being a jerk to Liz and they make up and get together. 

I would also say you could delete the Emma Robert and her boyfriend storyline, but it also connects to Edgar and Estelle. One storyline you could definitely delete and it wouldn't affect the movie is the Taylor Swift and Taylor Launter one. They play a dating high school couple and they're friends with Grace and Alex, but that's really only the connection they have with other characters in the movie. The Taylor Swift song "Today Was a Fairytale" is featured during the movie and at the end credits. I thought she specifically wrote it for the movie, but looking at Wikipedia (which I already had up!) she had already written it and offered it to be used in the movie. Taylor Swift has many, many amazing songs and this....is not one of them. It's very bland and generic, much like this movie! 

The absolute best part of this film is the very, very end when they're showing the bloopers and the last blooper we see is Julia Roberts being driven home in a car and they go past Rodeo Drive and the driver asks her if she's ever been there and she replies she has and it was a "Big mistake, huge!" 

Raising Life

Raising Helen
Director: Garry Marhsall
Cast: Kate Hudson, Joan Cusack, John Corbett, Helen Mirren, Hayden Panettiere, Abigail Breslin, Spener Breslin
Released: May 28, 2004

Life As We Know It
Director: Greg Berlanti
Cast: Katherine Heigl, Josh Duhamel, Josh Lucas
Released: October 8, 2010

I decided to review both these movies together as they have a similar plot: parents die in a car crash and leave their children to the least likely people (or person) to raise them.

In Raising Helen, Helen (Kate Hudson) and Jenny (Joan Cusack) are sisters whose older sister and brother-in-law are killed in a car accident. Or maybe their sister just moved to Wisteria Lane since she's played by Felicity Huffman and this movie came out the same year Desperate Housewives premiered. By the way, Cusack and Huffman, who are the same age, are 17 years older than Hudson. They are technically old enough to be her mother....I know the characters may not be the same age as the actors (I'm just going by the actors' ages since we don't know how old their characters), but 17 years just seems like a big gap.

In Life As We Know It, Holly (Katherine Heigl) and Messer (Josh Duhamel) are set up by a couple they're best friends with, but the date is such a disaster that there's not even a date because they piss each other off even before they drive to the restaurant. However, they keep seeing each other since their friends get married and they are the godparents of their daughter, Sophie. The parents, too, are killed in a car crash. Why is it always a car crash? I suppose that's the easiest way to kill off a couple of people. Having them murdered would be too traumatizing and a plane crash would be killing many more innocent people.

Guess who the parents left as the guardian to their children in both movies? That's right, Helen, the young party girl who is single and has a full time job as a booking agent for models is left to raise her two nieces and one nephew. Hayden Pana-whatever (I never know how to pronounce her last name, so that's what I call her in real life!) is ten years younger than Kate Hudson and even in the movie they have more of a sister relationship than an aunt/niece one, forget a mother/daughter one! Spencer and Abigail Breslin are the other two kids and Abigail is so young she looks like she was a fetus not that long ago! And Holly and Messer are left to raise one year old Sophie on their own.

In both movies, nobody knew that this was the wish of the deceased parents and if they should die, they would be raising their kids. That seems odd to me. I don't have kids so I don't know how the legal stuff works if you and your spouse die, but I would assume once you choose someone to be your guardian, THEY SHOULD KNOW and maybe even have to sign a contract prepared by your lawyer SO THEY KNOW!! Because in both movies they're all like, "WHAT? They chose me/us?" Really, movies, really?

I don't know which deceased parents were more stupid. It doesn't make sense for the parents in Life to leave their daughter with two people who aren't married and can't stand each other. Since the house mortgage is paid off, they both move into their dead friends' house together which is just weird. Not the fact that they're living in their dead friends' home...hey, if you have a free place to take care of a kid, go for it. What's weird is that they're both living there together raising a child, but yet they have separate lives. You think that would be weird for their dating lives, but they don't seem to have any problems with it. At least they explain why nobody in their immediate family would be fit parents for their daughter because Holly and Messer see if there's anything better and we meet a sister who's a stripper, another sibling who has ten kids, and a frail old father. It would have made more sense if they left Sophie to Holly (the more responsible of the two). Were they not thinking that their friends might get married (to different people!) and the situation would be awkward for everyone? Of course, they do end up together (like you didn't see that one coming) and after sleeping together, Holly says to Messer, "Do you think our friends had this all planned out so we would end up together?" Well, if that was their intention, that was pretty stupid because what if things hadn't worked out? Then they probably would have gone to court to see who would raise Sophie and everything would have been a mess. Stupid deceased parents!

And then why do the parents in Raising Helen (a title I still don't understand) have the younger sister as the sole guardian when Jenny already has two kids with one on the way and is married and knows how to deal with kids? It is established early on that Jenny is the black sheep of the family while Helen and Lynette are very close. Lynette leaves a note for her two sisters explaining why she made the choice she did and she basically chose Helen because she was more like her. Uh-huh. Not buying it, movie! By the way, I'm willing to bet that the two kids who play Cusack's children are one of the crew member's because they have no lines and are only in a couple scenes. They're just there to show us she is a Mom.

Out of the two scenarios, I think Helen is in the worst situation. She has to take care of three children by herself who are all old enough to remember their parents (and while there's the sad funeral scene, except for a few tears shed by the youngest, they seem to get over their parents pretty quickly!) while at least Holly and Messer are only dealing with one baby who will have no recollection of her parents and even calls Holly "Mama" by the end of the movie. Also, Sophie is a really cute baby (although they do have their crying baby and dirty diaper baby moments) while those three kids are super annoying. Hayden plays a very bratty teen who screams at everybody and the Breslin children are there to be the annoying kids, especially the boy. There's a scene where Helen is smoking and the boy tells her, "We don't need any more dead parents" or something to that effect. I know they were doing it for the comedy, but there is no way a child who just lost their parents days earlier would say something like that! They would not make a joke out of it!

Both movies have many wacky scenes where the new parents are taking care of their newly acquired children. There's a scene in Life where Messer has to take Sophie to work with him because Holly already had other engagement and he leaves her with the taxi driver to take care of her! And then there's a scene where Holly has just changed Sophie and has baby poo on her nose when the neighbors (one of them is played by Melissa McCarthy) come over. And in Raising Helen, there's a scene where Helen is helping with a fashion show (her boss is played by Helen Mirren who is much too good for this movie) and she brings Abigail who sees a model with a dog (played by Paris Hilton...I don't know why she just didn't play herself!) on the other side of the runway and crawls across the runway to get to it causing the models to topple over one another and thus gets Helen fired from her job. One of the most ridiculous part of the movie is that the four of them live in a tiny apartment in Queens with one bathroom. Four people and one bathroom? No, thank you! And there's a scene where Helen find out that Hayden has gone to a hotel with her boyfriend after a dance and she and Jenny go over there to confront them, but Helen chickens out and doesn't want to make Hayden mad at her, so she asks Jenny to do it. The scene was really weird because inside the room, the boy is in the bathroom and Hayden is in the room. You can tell that nothing has happened yet and when she hears someone knocking on the door, it looks like there's this flash of relief that crosses her face, but then she starts screaming at her aunt for ruining her life...maybe I just read too much into that look on her face and I'm giving this movie too much credit.

I read a review of Raising Helen that said that the funny parts weren't funny and the dramatic parts weren't dramatic which I agree with. The movie was just really boring. I didn't care about the characters and I found it annoying how Helen had this great amazing glamorous life. Not that Life As We Know It was a great movie by any means, but at least they made Holly and Messer a little more "real" and the movie kept my interest more than the other.

Actually, the more I think about it, while these two movies have similarities, Raising Helen reminds me more of Stepmom.

Here's a quick review I wrote of Raising Helen when I first saw it on DVD about ten years ago...as you can see, my opinion did not change!

Raising Helen - This movie has the stupidest, most unrealistic plotline ever. As you all probably know, Kate Hudson's sister and brother in law die in a car crash and they have 3 children and who do they ask to care for them? Cool Aunt Helen from New York who's lifestyle includes clubbing and partying and a busy career. I can just picture the writers now thinking of how they’re going to make a depressing situation into a wacky! Funny! Hilarious! one! Kate acts more like the kid's cool older sister than a mom. She doesn't give them to Joan Cusack's character who actually already has children, thus has the experience. Duhhhh. God, this movie was so friggin unrealistic. And why did Dead Mom choose cool Aunt Helen? Because she was the most like her! The whole movie reeked of bs. The oldest daughter was such a brat who needed a good bitch slappin'! Gary Marshall seems like a nice guy, but honestly, Gar? Do you really need to keep reminding me that Kate Hudson plays Helen Harris during the deleted scenes segment? Got it the first time! Thanks! 

Video review of "Burlesque"

Hogwarts, Class of '98

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1
Director: David Yates
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter, Rhys Ifans, Bill Nighy
Released: November 19, 2010
Viewed in theaters: November 19, 2010

Oscar nominations:
Best Art Direction (lost to Alice in Wonderland)
Best Visual Effects (lost to Inception)
(This movie is waaaay better than both of those!)

The final installment of the Harry Potter films, as everyone knows, was divided into two films. This was probably a smart idea because I don't think they could have crammed all the events that happen in the novel into a nearly three hour movie. They would have had to cut a lot of things. I remember there being talk of splitting Goblet of Fire into two movies as it was the first film where the book was considerably longer than the previous three. Of course, in the end, it was only one film, but a few storylines (like SPEW) were cut. They had the luxury to cut the subplots from GoF as they weren't that important in the grand scheme of things, but to cut anything from Deathly Hallows would be doing it a major disservice.

Before I get into the review of the movie, I had to share this with you. Check this out: the Alamo Drafthouse Theater in Austin is having a Harry Potter-a-thon this Thursday. Notice the running time of 860 minutes. That's 14.2 hours. I know because I converted the minutes. FOURTEEN HOURS SITTING IN A THEATER, PEOPLE! I may love Harry Potter, but that just sounds absolutely atrocious to me. They're even starting at 4:30 in the morning. It looks like when you've seen the first seven movies, then it will be midnight and time to see Deathly Hallows Part 2. Personally, I'd be so sick of watching Harry Potter and so sore from sitting for so long, that I wouldn't want to stay for that one! I imagine there's an intermission between each film, but still! No, thank you! However, if a film a day was offered at a theater for a week, then I would consider that.

This is the first time where Harry and his trusty sidekicks and most loyal friends, Ron and Hermione, don't attend Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry for what would be their seventh and final year. Instead the film turns into a bit of a road trip movie as they search for the Horcruxes that were explained to us in the previous film. (Of course they're explained in much more detail in the books!) Basically a Horcrux is bad and they gotta destroy them! They're the only way to defeat Voldemort, pretty much.

Ministry Mayhem

Things aren't looking too good in the wizarding world. (Hmm, should that be capitalized?) To make a simple analogy, Voldemort = Hitler; Death Eaters = Nazis; and Muggles and Muggle-born wizards and witches = Jews. As you may have guessed, Voldemort's goal is to extinguish all Muggles. Only Harry and his friends can stop him (well, really only Harry, but Ron and Hermione do help along the way).

There is much tension on their journey due to it being tedious finding the Horcruxes and due to Ron being worried about his family. (Hermione cast a spell on her parents so that they would forget about her - in the novel she sends them to Australia where they'll be safe, but they don't mention if they go there in the film and Harry, as Ron so nicely pointed out, doesn't have any parents because they're dead.) But don't be too hard on Ron for saying such a sh***y thing. He was wearing a locket, one of the Horcruxes, when he said this, and the Horcruxes make anyone who is in possession of them become filled with hate and rage. Nevertheless, he decides to leave, feeling that their mission is a lost cause and having become quite jealous of Harry and Hermione's relationship. But we all know who Hermione will end up with.

Awwww. (They're sad because Dobby just died).

One of my favorite scenes was when Hermione read the "Tale of the Three Brothers". I thought the animation was quite gorgeous. A scene that made me giggle when I saw it in the theater, but nobody else laughed at was when Harry was in Umbridge's office in the Ministry (disguised as an employee) and he opens a drawers and sees a book titled, "When Muggles Attack." I mean, c'mon, how can you not find that funny? It was a complete rip-off of those stupid FOX shows.

They learn the story about the Deathly Hallows, which are the following three items: a wand that gives you all the power you need, an invisibility cloak, and a stone that brings back the dead. Harry already has the invisibility cloak and Voldemort is looking for the Elder Wand

E-e-vil woman!

The climatic scene has our heroes being captured and sent to Malfoy Manor where Hermione is tortured by Bellatrix and Harry and Ron are locked in the basement along with Luna, a wandmaker, and a goblin. They managed to escape safely with the help of Dobby, but unfortunately Dobby had to sacrifice his life to safe them. Well, on second thought, no he didn't. If he didn't talk so dang much and just, you know, got the Trio out of there, then Bellatrix probably wouldn't have had time to throw her dagger at him. But I digress.

The movie ends with Voldemort finding the Elder Wand. Uh-oh! What will happen? Guess you'll have to stay tuned for Part 2. Unless, of course, you've already read the book. Then you already know what happens!

Here's to the Hair

Tangled
Directors: Nathan Greno and Bryan Howard
Voice Talent: Mandy Moore, Zachary Levi, Donna Murphy
Released: November 24, 2010

Oscar nominations:
Best Song - "I See the Light" by Alan Menken and Glenn Slater (lost to "We Belong Together" by Randy Newman from Toy Story 3)

I remember seeing a trailer for this movie the summer before it came out (probably one of the trailers I saw before Toy Story 3) and I couldn't help thinking how awful the film looked. Not the animation (that's gorgeous), but the actual movie. All the trailer showed was the main guy character getting beat up and whipped by the long, blonde hair that belongs to the main female character. I immediately thought it was going to be one of those slapstick animated comedies that only cater to kids who have a five-second attention span and thought it would fail at the box office.

Well that goes to show you should never judge a movie by its trailer because after hearing positive reviews and people recommending the movie, I decided to watch it and see it if was good as everyone was saying, and what do you know? It was actually really good and quite an enjoyable movie. In fact, that dumb extended scene they showed as a trailer was cut down in the movie.

Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi (the guy from Chuck - yeah, I don't watch that show either) voice the two leads, Rapunzel and Flynn Rider. I'm not really familiar with the fairy tale of Rapunzel. All I know is that she has really long hair and lives in a tower, so I have no idea how close this movie stayed true to the original material.

Rapunzel is a seventeen-year-old girl who has lived in a tall tower for mostly her entire life with a woman (voiced by Donna Murphy) who has raised her as her daughter, but she is not actually Rapunzel's real mother. She kidnapped Rapunzel as a baby because the girl's hair has a magical power that made the woman appear youthful. Rapunzel has never been allowed to leave the tower and no one has ever been able to get in. For her eighteenth birthday, Rapunzel begs her mother to let her out on her birthday because she wants to explore the world and so she can inspect the "stars" she sees every year on her birthday (which are really Chinese lanterns that her real parents light every year in hope that their daughter will find them and return home). Her mother refuses and Rapunzel comes up with a plan that will make her mother have to go to the village and will be gone for three days.

Meanwhile, Rapunzel meets Flynn Rider and has information that he needs. She strikes a deal with him: if he takes her to the lights, she'll give him the information he needs, so they set out on their adventure. Of course Rapunzel's mother finds out that her daughter has escaped and tries everything she can to make sure Rapunzel never makes it to her real parents and finds out the truth.

One of my favorite scenes was a montage right after Rapunzel has escaped from her home and the scenes keep alternating from her being really happy and enjoying being free to her feeling really guilty about disobeying her mother and telling Flynn that she should go back home.

The animation is beautiful, the story is a lot of fun, and the ending even made me tear up a little. Not at all a bad movie. It should have been nominated for Best Animated Picture along with Toy Story 3 and How To Train Your Dragon.

10 '10 quick movie reviews

1. The Town - This was one of my top ten movies of 2010 along with Black Swan, Toy Story 3, How To Train Your Dragon, True Grit, Scott Pilgrim v. the World, The Social Network, Buried, Harry Potter....Part 1, and The King's Speech. Ben Affleck stars and directs in this film about four bankrobbers from Charleston, the town in question, which is a part of Boston. He ends up falling for the bank manager of one of the banks he and his gang robbed (while his face was covered in a mask, of course!) and they start a relationship. The FBI is also involved and it's a very good, very intense film which I highly recommend.

2. Knight and Day - Tom Cruise and Cameron Diaz star in this action movie that's a fun watch for a Friday night. There's lot of (pretty much ridiculous, but fun) action and the movie takes you to different locations including Boston, the Azores, and Seville. The title doesn't really make any sense, though. The Knight surname isn't explained until more than halfway into the movie and nobody has the name Day. Also (slight spoiler) I don't think you can just drive from Mexico all the way down to the tip of South America. Maybe there's a road that takes you all the way down there? IDK!

3. Going the Distance - Real-life on-again/off-again couple Drew Barrymore and Justin Long star in this R-rated comedy about a couple in New York who just met, but once Drew has to go back to San Francisco to finish grad school, they must keep their relationship long distance. There were a few funny bits, but for the most part I thought this movie was trying to hard to be raunchy and edgy. Also, is it me or has Drew Barrymore played the same exact character since 2000? Skip it.

4. Grown Ups - Adam Sander, Chris Rock, David Spade, Kevin James, and Rob Schneider play childhood friends who were on a basketball team and reunite after their coach dies. They meet up at a gorgeous lake house with their families. (Salma Hayek, Maria Bello, and Maya Rudolph play the wives of Sandler, James, and Rock respectively). The movie just looks like an excuse for the five actors to hang out at a really cool location because the movie isn't that great. The funniest part is Steve Buscemi in a body cast. If you like juvenile movies, this one is for you.

5. Unstoppable - This film about a unmanned runaway train was inspired by true events, that, (according to Wikipedia) happened in Ohio in May 2001. I had never heard about the incident until the movie came out, probably because there was no damage or fatalities. But still...you'd think a runaway train would get a lot of news press! The train becomes unmanned when the conductor steps out to flip a switch or something and the switch on the train falls so it starts going faster and he can't hop back on to stop it. Enter train vet Denzel Washington and rookie Chris Pine who are conducting another train and have to connect their train to the back of the runaway train to stop it. I call BS when Chris Pine had to jump from the truck that one dude was driving onto the train which was going about 50 mph at the time. I'm sure that didn't happen in real life. The movie is entertaining, though, but maybe Denzel Washington and Tony Scott need to stop making movies about trains and subways for awhile!

6. Shutter Island - Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio team up for the fourth time to make this psychological thriller about a detective who goes to an insane asylum located on an island where it storms all the time to search for a missing patient. Now I knew what the big twist was already, so I was just curious to see how they were going to do the big reveal. Even if you've never seen the movie, the twist is VERY obvious is you think about it. I mean, it's Sixth Sense obvious. I didn't really like the movie; it was too weird for me and normally I like movies set in mental wards like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Girl, Interrupted. The moral of this story? Never marry a crazy person!

7. Eat, Pray, Love - Julia Roberts plays writer Elizabeth "Liz" Gilbert who takes a year off after she and her husband divorce to travel to Italy (where she eats), India (where she prays), and Bali (where she finds love) to "find herself". Probably only really rich divorcees in their 40s can relate to this movie. There were some beautiful shots of the different locations and while the Italian food they show did look good, it really didn't look much different then something you can find at any Spaghetti Works. This doesn't make me particularly want to read the memoir of the same name by Elizabeth Gilbert.

8. Morning Glory - Rachel McAdams gets a job as a producer at a morning talk show (think Today or Good Morning America) that has awful ratings and it's her job to get them up. Diane Keaton plays the perky Katie Couric-esque co-host to Harrison Ford's stoic, no-nonsense retired evening news anchor who was brought aboard to help boost the ratings. I assumed the name of the show was called "Morning Glory", but it's actually called "Daybreak". I think "Morning Glory" is a better name for a morning show. Cute movie, but very predictable.

9. Cyrus - This is an indie drama with a dry sense of humor. The previews make it out to be this hilarious comedy, and while there are funny scenes, it's more about dysfunctional relationships. John is played by John C. Reilly and his ex-wife invites him to a party because she's getting married and wants him to quit moping around the house and meet somebody which he does. Molly is played by Marissa Tomei and becomes smitten with John's quirkiness and honesty. They have a couple of dates before he finds out that she has a son. Twenty-one-year-old Cyrus who still lives at home is played by Jonah Hill. He's a really weird kid and he and his mom have a relationship that's a bit on the creepy side, but never crosses that line.  For instance, they always leave their bedroom doors open, even when John is sleeping over. John realizes that something is not right with Cyrus and confronts him. They get into an argument, but when Molly is about to enter, they pretend like they're getting along great. The funny thing is while Cyrus keeps coming between John and Molly, John keeps coming in between his ex-wife and her new husband because he keeps going over to their house to ask for advice. One of the funniest/strangest scenes is when Cyrus is playing this computerized music he composed for John and John goes, "It sounds like that one Steve Miller Band song!" and Cyrus goes, "No, it doesn't." I don't know why, but that made me laugh.

10. Salt - I really liked this movie probably because I loved Alias which had Jennifer Garner kicking ass and wearing cool disguises. This movie is exactly like that - only it's Angelina Jolie kicking ass and wearing cool disguises. She's Evelyn Salt and works for the CIA...or does she? A Russian man exposes her to working with the Russians and being a mole, but like Sydney Bristow in the first season of Alias, she's more of a double agent. There were a few surprises I didn't see coming, so kudos to the film for that. There was one scene where AJ was disguised as a man and I wondered if she ever went out in public like that because it looked nothing like her. I also wondered how her character had time to get such an elaborate disguise! Evelyn Salt kinda reminded me of a female Jason Bourne and I'm wondering if they're planning to do a franchise of these films because the ending just sort of...ended. If this were a TV show, it would be a cliffhanger.

Karate Kids

The Karate Kid (1984)
Director: John G. Avildsen
Cast: Ralph Macchio, Pat Mortia, Elisabeth Shue
Released: June 22, 1984

Oscar nominations:
Best Supporting Actor - Pat Mortia (lost to Haing S. Ngor for The Killing Fields)

The Karate Kid (2010)
Director: Harald Zwart
Cast: Jaden Smith, Jackie Chan, Taraji P. Henson
Released: June 11, 2010

I watched both of these films recently and thought I would do a double review since they're the same movie and all. I actually watched the remake before the original (even though I'd seen the original many, many years ago). Both movies are obviously similar, but there are a few differences.

Both films start out with the main character moving far from their home with their mother. In the '84 version, Ralph Maccio plays Danny, a high schooler who moves from New Jersey to California. In the '10 version, Jaden Smith (aka Will Smith's mini-me) plays a 12-year-old named Dre who moves from the U.S. all the way to China. Both of them experience culture shock, but Dre more so!

Both of them have a hard time fitting in and want to go back home. They both encounter bullies who make their lives difficult. In the original, the bully doesn't like him because Danny begins dating his ex-girlfriend (Elisabeth Shue). In the remake, I'm not really sure why the little Chinese kid starts picking on him. It's like he sees this American kid and decides to start harassing him. Or perhaps he's jealous that Dre becomes friends with the cute little Chinese girl at their school.

Both Danny and Dre find father figures in their apartment's handyman. Pat Mortia plays the iconic Mr. Miyagi in the '84 film. (And I had no idea that he was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar) and Jackie Chan plays Mr. Han in the 2010 film. Both are experts in karate (or in Mr. Han's case, kung fu) and teach their new proteges some moves to defend themselves against the bullies who are beating them up. However, while their students are eager to learn how to karate chop or any other cool martial art moves, their teachers start them off with what seem more like chores. In the original, Danny has to wax Mr. Miyagi's car (you may be familiar with the phrase "wax on, wax off"), paint his house and gate and sand his porch. In the remake, Mr. Han only focuses on one specific task for Dre: for him to take off his coat, drop it on the ground, pick it up and hang it up.

Both boys get really frustrated until what they're doing is teaching them karate/kung fu in its own weird way and soon they're being taught real karate/kung fu. They both enter a karate/kung fu contest (and of course the bullies are already enrolled in karate/kung fu) and I'm probably not spoiling anything by saying that they overcome their bullies and earn their respect.

The only female characters in the films are the mothers and the girlfriends. The mother is more prevalent in the remake while the girlfriend is more so in the original. (Although Danny's mother had to drive them on their dates because Danny didn't own a car. Ouch, kid, ouch.)

I have to say that I prefer the 2010 version to the original. Yes, it is much more updated, so that's probably one of the reasons why I like it better. There's a scene in the original where Danny is showing off his new car he got from Mr. Miyagi to his girlfriend and says to her, "I'll even let you drive it!" and she goes, "Really?!" and he says, "Yeah, it's the '80s!" Okay, I'm sorry, but that scene cracked me up. I wasn't around in the '70s, but from what I'm gathering, women were not allowed to drive before the '80s!  Um, okay...

Also, I was really young when the original was released, so when I first saw it, it was probably on video and it doesn't really hold any nostalgic value for me while I'm sure it does for people who were old enough to see it in the theater when it was released. Also, the remake has amazing cinematography, being filmed in China and all. But you have to give the original credit, because there were some scenes in the remake that are literally framed shot by shot as the original.

One Man Show

Buried

Director: Rodrigo Cortes

Cast: Ryan Reynolds

Released: September 24, 2010

There aren't many films I can think of where the entire movie is shot in one single location and has only one actor. Actually, I can't think of any movie like that. During the one and a half hour duration of Buried, you are with Reynold's character, Paul, an American working in Iraq as a truck driver delivering supplies who wakes to find himself in a wooden coffin buried underground. While we do get different angles and shots, the camera never leaves the coffin. I thought maybe we would be taken out of the claustrophobic location to show flashbacks of how he ended up buried in a coffin, but no, that is all explained by Paul narrating what happened to him. 

One would think that a film with only one actor in only one location would get a little boring, but that would be the last word I would use to describe this thriller. It's suspenseful, nail-biting, and suffocating. Paul only has a few items his kidnapper has supplied him with: a lighter, a cell phone, a small knife, and a glow stick. While Reynolds is physically the only actor in the movie, he does have conversations with other characters when he uses the cell, but we never see them, just hear their voices. 

And yes, I'm just as surprised as you are that he was able to communicate with people via a cell phone when he was underground. The movie does address this and one of the FBI agents who's trying to locate him mentions he must not be that far underground for the cell to be able to work, so okay, I guess we'll go with it. I don't really mind that this might be implausible because if he wasn't able to communicate with other people, the movie probably would be considered boring. I do find it pretty amazing that the cell was less than half charged and never ran out of battery power the duration he was down there. 

Since he's lost the contact emergency number he was given from his company, he frantically starts making calls to anybody who might be able to help him: 911, the FBI, his wife, his company...he even gets in contact with the terrorist who demands five million dollars for his release. (His kidnapper was kind enough to leave him his number).

Even though the space was (obviously) very confined, he surprisingly has a lot of room for being in a coffin. In the photo posted above you can clearly see he is laying on his stomach. He is easily able to take off his jacket without too much of a struggle and even is able to rotate from one end of the coffin to the other. Now it's been awhile since I've seen Kill Bill 2, but I remember when Uma Thurman was in the coffin, she could only move her arms to punch her way out (uh, hope I didn't spoil that for anyone!)

I will give the film props for keeping me guessing. I really had no idea if he was going to be rescued or not by the end. There were times when things were looking hopeful, only to be diminished by bad news and there were times when you didn't think he had a chance of getting out, but then there was a glimmer of hope. If you have not seen this film yet, I would advise you not to be spoiled before watching it because knowing if lives or dies will probably ruin the viewing experience (and the suspense!) for you.

The other Facebook movie

Catfish
Director: Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost
Released: September 17, 2010

It's difficult to discuss this documentary without giving away major plot points, so I will warn you when I'm about to start talking about spoilers just in case you haven't seen this movie/ don't know the big twists and want to keep it that way.

Ariel Shulman and Henry Joost are young directors in their mid-20s who live in Manhattan and document everything. It doesn't matter how mundane it is - they find everything fascinating to film. Ariel's brother, Nev, is a photographer and he discovers that an eight-year-old girl from Michigan named Abby has been transforming his photographs into pictures she's drawn. He thinks they're really good and she's quite talented for someone so young, so he e-mails her to compliment her and say how he really likes the drawings and sends her more of his photos for her to draw. He soon develops an online correspondence with Abby (and it's not as creepy as you might think) and becomes Facebook friends with her mom, her half-sister Megan, and a bunch of Megan's friends.

Megan is a few years younger than Nev and she's very pretty. Of course he develops a crush on her and Nev isn't bad-looking so there's an instant attraction. They start flirting with each other over Facebook and texts and he even talks to her on the phone a few times. He also talks to the mother who tells him that Abby's art has been in shows and the most one has ever sold for was $7,000.

He and the filmmakers start to get suspicious because there are a few things that just don't add up. For instance, he googles Abby's name and the town she lives in, but there's nothing about her even though she should be somewhat of a local celebrity for being so young and having art exhibitions. When they're in Vail, Colorado to do some work, they decide since they're "so close" to Michigan to drive to the family's house and see what's going on. Well, they fly to Chicago first, then drive up to the northern peninsula.

Okay, so for the rest of this review I will be giving away major key plots, so here is your  **** SPOILER WARNING *****
Do not read any further if you don't want to know the big reveal...

...which isn't really that big of a reveal because it's kind of obvious when we learn it: Megan does not exist - it was the married forty-something year old mother who was posing as this young, attractive girl and basically having an affair with Nev online. While she does have an older daughter named Megan (who sounded like they were estranged probably because this woman is bat**** crazy!), the girl she had posted photos of on Facebook was just some random model she found online. And it was pretty obvious she was a model because while there were a few candid shots, a lot of the photos of her were obviously shot by a professional.

While I could see that reveal coming a mile away, it didn't occur to me that the mother was the real artist of all those drawings. Abby does exist, but she is not the artist in the family. The mother was pretending that her young daughter was painting all those because they were better received by a young girl than by a grown woman. The paintings would have been pretty impressive by an eight-year-old, but looked juvenile by anyone over the age of 12.

While she still does try to deceive them by saying that Megan isn't home, then later texting Nev as Megan saying she's in rehab because she all of a sudden out of the blue became an alcoholic, she eventually comes clean and admits what she did. And not only did she create "Megan", but she created the fifteen friends Megan had on Facebook and was managing all of them. Clearly this woman has some mental problems and needs help!

Piece of Work

Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work

Directors: Ricki Stern and Anne Sundberg

This 2010 documentary spends one year with Joan Rivers, the 75 year old brass comedienne who can make you laugh one moment, and shake your head in disgust the next. (I think she's pretty funny as a comedian, though it is pretty shocking some of the things that come out of her mouth, but I can't stand her as a correspondent for E! on the red carpet because she really has no idea what she's doing and it doesn't help that her daughter, the much more irritating Melissa Rivers, is always commentating with her.) 

Due to the fact that she lives in a ridiculously lavish apartment suite (think Donald Trump's) and likes to maintain her high style of living, she will take any job whether it's a gig at some club off in the boondocks or a commercial (she doesn't care what product) or Celebrity Apprentice which she was on in the year the documentary followed her. Regarding the show, she even says that they won't kick her off until at least the fourth episode because she's the biggest name on it. While it may sound conceited, you have to admit she was right! (Of course we all know she ended up winning that season.)

She talks about getting her start and how she was good friends with Johnny Carson (often filling in for him on his show when he was absent) until Fox offered her her own talk show. The first person she told was Carson and he felt so betrayed that he never talked to her again. Her new show ended up tanking big time. 

While I knew her husband killed himself, what I didn't know is that Joan and Melissa played themselves in a made-for-TV movie dealing with their husband's/father's suicide. Joan admits that it was a bit hokey, but cathartic. O-kay. They showed clips from it and the acting was pretty terrible. 

Something that surprised me was that Rivers say she is first and foremost an actress. I was aware that she wrote and acted in plays, but I always think of her as a comedian first and foremost. (And a fashion correspondent for E! second.) The film documents her putting on a play in England and because it only got mixed reviews, she decides not to put it on in New York or anywhere in the U.S. because one of the first plays she wrote was shredded by the critics. (You would think someone like Joan Rivers would have a tough skin about those things.) 

At one point she's doing stand-up at some hole-in-the-wall club in some who-knows-where town and offends a man with a deaf son after she makes a joke about Helen Keller. At first I thought it was just a plant, but it became obvious he was a real audience member by how pissed Rivers became and kept berating him that it was just a joke and it didn't mean she was attacking all deaf people. If the guy is that easy to get offended, why the hell was he seeing Joan Rivers at a comedy club?! 

If you hate Joan Rivers, skip this, but if you like her or are more interested to learn more about her, I'd say give it a watch.

Oscar shindig

Time for my Oscar predictions and commentary!

Best Picture:

I have seen all ten of the films nominated for Best Picture; this is the first time in history I've seen all ten of the Best Picture nominees! For the most part, I think this year's crop of films are better than last year's. (Though I only did see six of the nominated movies last year). Here's how I would rank the films:

1. Black Swan - While this was the darkest film of the bunch, I placed it at #1 (and honestly, you could say the first three films are tied for #1) because this is the movie from the bunch that I'm going to remember the most down the line. From start to finish, I was intrigued with the story and Natalie Portman gives her best performance yet, not to mention it's beautifully artistic. You can read my review here.

2. Toy Story 3 - Two of my favorite movies of 2010 were animated: this one and How to Train Your Dragon. Out of the nominated films, Toy Story 3 was the only one that made me cry. While the film retains its cuteness and silly jokes, it gets pretty dark for a children's film. The ending is bittersweet, but satisfying. You can read my review here.

3. True Grit - I'm usually not a big fan of Westerns, but I really liked this one. All the actors were great and the language sounded authentic, the cinematography and costumes were great, and there was plenty of action and comedy mixed in with the drama to keep me entertained. I would also like to take the opportunity to say that I had predicted the film to get nominated as well as Jeff Bridges and Hailee Steinfeld. Okay, maybe not a big stretch.... you can read my review here.

4. The Social Network - Solid movie from a great director and great screenwriter. You don't need to have/use/like Facebook to enjoy the movie. You can read my review here.

5. The King's Speech - I wasn't familiar with this based on a true story film, but it made for a good film with great performances from Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush. I didn't really get why Helena Bonham Carter was nominated because she really doesn't do anything, but it was kind of a nice reprieve to see her in something other than a Harry Potter or Tim Burton film. This movie is very Oscar-baity, however, and was only made to win Oscars (which it will). It amused me greatly that I was probably the youngest person in the theaters by a good 30 years. 

6. 127 Hours - I listened to the audio book (and you can read my review of that here at my book blog) so I was familiar with the story of how Aaron Ralston's arm became pinned between a rock wall and a boulder and he had to cut it off to set himself free. I didn't care much for Boyle's stylized directing (it was a good story without all that flash), but James Franco spends the movie pretty much in one spot and he sells it quite well. (The "Gollum" scene (you know what I'm talking about if you've seen it) is especially good). The actual amputation scene wasn't that bad. Obviously, I did cringe (and I think I cringed more when he broke his arm), but I didn't even cover my eyes. Of course it helped to repeat the words fake prosthetic arm over and over in my mind, which is what I did! 

7. The Fighter - Really great performances (Christian Bale was my favorite) and I liked the boxing matches (especially the last one) and the mother and sisters were amusing, but other than that, I could take it or leave it. 

8. Winter's Bone - I was hoping I would love this movie as much as Frozen River, but I couldn't get into it. It wasn't a bad movie, just one I couldn't get invested in.

9. The Kids Are All Right - After reading all the heaps of praise this film was receiving, I was really excited to see it, thinking it was going to be the most amazing movie ever, but I just found this movie to be, well, all right. After watching the film, all I could think was, "That was it?" I think my expectation were way too high.

10. Inception - Again, I think my expectation were way too high because I was really excited to see this movie because the trailer looked so freaking cool. Okay, I think Christopher Nolan is a great director - Memento and The Dark Knight are brilliant movies, but my God I was so bored with this movie! Yes, the visual effects are amazing (and it should win all those technical Oscars), but the movie nearly put me to sleep! It felt sooooo long. It's not a good sign when you keep looking at your phone to see what time it is throughout the movie :-/

So that's how I would rank the Best Picture nominees. We know that Inception, Kids, Winter's Bone, 127 Hours, and Toy Story 3 have no chance of winning because they didn't score a Best Director nomination. As much as I would love for Black Swan or True Grit to win, let's face it, the race is between The Social Network and The King's Speech (and I will be fine with either winning).  TSN won the GG, but TKS won the SAG for best cast and the Bafta (but that's a no brainer since it's a British film). I imagine the older Academy members will go for TKS while the young ones will vote for TSN. I myself am sort of rooting for TSN between the two because it's more of a fresh movie while TKS seems like the type of movie you would see winning an Oscar from the '90s. However, I think TKS will prevail and win.

Best Director:

Darren Aronofsky, "Black Swan"
David O. Russell, "The Fighter"
Tom Hooper, "The King's Speech"
David Fincher, "The Social Network"
Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, "True Grit"

I have a feeling this will be a year where Best Picture and Best Director don't match. The King's Speech will win Best Picture, but David Fincher will win Best Director. He's already won all the other major awards and I've always liked the way he directs his films (which have always been great for the most part), so it will be a well-deserved win.

Best Actor:

Javier Bardem, "Biutiful"

Jeff Bridges, "True Grit"

Jesse Eisenberg, "The Social Network"

Colin Firth, "The King's Speech"

James Franco, "127 Hours"

I have seen all of these performances except for Bardem's. We all know Firth is winning this. Not only has he won all the precursor awards, but Bardem and Bridges already have Oscars and this is the first nomination for the still young Eisenburg and Franco. Colin Firth is one of my favorite actors and I am pleased he will be getting awarded for a fine performance.

Best Actress:

Annette Bening, "The Kids Are All Right"

Nicole Kidman, "Rabbit Hole"

Jennifer Lawrence, "Winter's Bone"

Natalie Portman, "Black Swan"

Michelle Williams, "Blue Valentine"

I've only seen Bening's, Lawrence's, and Portman's performances. I am really mystified as to why EW thinks that Annette Bening still has a fighting chance to win the Oscar. Um, no, she doesn't. True she won the GG for Best Comedic performance (which doesn't count anyway), but how is Natalie Portman NOT going to win the Oscar after winning the real GG, the SAG, and the Bafta? I know people are saying that Bening is due, but I really didn't see what the big deal was about her performance in Kids. I thought she was great in American Beauty (but thought Hilary Swank was better in Boys Don't Cry), but with this film...eh, I don't see it. At least with Portman, it's one of her best performances (her best, IMO) she's ever done. Also, she will be the second person born in the '80s (more specifically the early '80s) to win an Oscar (at least in the acting category...I don't keep track of the ages of the people who win Oscars in the other categories!) The first was Anna Paquin. Oh, and how annoyed do you bet Katie Holmes is that (the younger) Michelle Williams now has two Oscar nominations and Katie has zero? Hahaha.

Best Supporting Actor:

Christian Bale, "The Fighter"

John Hawkes, "Winter's Bone"

Jeremy Renner, "The Town"

Mark Ruffalo, "The Kids Are All Right"

Geoffrey Rush, "The King's Speech"

I have seen all of these performances except for Renner's. I thought Bale and Rush did the best job. Bale won the GG and SAG while Rush won the Bafta (even though Bale is British and Rush is Australian, but I guess British movies trump American ones at the Baftas!) While it's possible Rush could upset (and it has been awhile since he won his Oscar for Shine in 1997), I think this one will go to first-time nominee Christian Bale. I was really impressed with him in The Fighter; there were times when I couldn't believe it was Christian Bale because it didn't look like him at all. 

Best Supporting Actress:

Amy Adams, "The Fighter"

Helena Bonham Carter, "The King's Speech"

Melissa Leo, "The Fighter"

Hailee Steinfeld, "True Grit"

Jacki Weaver, "Animal Kingdom"

If there are any surprises in the major categories (which is highly doubtful because the Oscars are so annoyingly predictable and when there are surprises, they piss me off, like when Crash won Best Picture over Brokeback Mountain in 2006), I hope it's in this category. While it's true Melissa Leo is the frontrunner after winning the GG and SAG, her chances may have dwindled after those frivolous consideration ads where she's dressed in furs and they have nothing to do with her film. Plus there's always the chance she could split votes with Amy Adams. I'm hoping this happens because I'm rooting for Hailee Steinfeld. Not just because she had my favorite performance (although I have yet to see Weaver's), but I really, really want to see a kid win an Oscar. The last time a kid won an Oscar was Anna Paquin (the first person born in the '80s to win an Oscar!) way back in 1994. I didn't start watching the Oscars until '98, so I missed that telecast. I suppose it would have been more exciting to see a kid win an Oscar when I was a kid, but whatever. (Natalie Portman is my age, so it will be cool to see someone my age win). And even though Steinfeld was clearly the lead in True Grit (duh), maybe being placed in the supporting category helps her chances because she wouldn't be able to compete against Portman. Win or lose (and most likely Leo will win), I hope this leads to good roles for Steinfeld - perhaps as Katniss Everdeen? (Sorry, another shameless plug!) Hey, we know what she looks like with a braid at least! 

Best Animated Film:

Toy Story 3

How To Train Your Dragon

The Illusionist

Of course Toy Story 3 will win this; it would be kind of silly for it to be nominated as one of the Best Pictures of the year and not win Best Animated Film. I kind of wish that it and How to Train Your Dragon had come out different years because I really loved them both! Like I mentioned earlier, they will be both going on my top ten movies of 2010 list.