My Group

So the end of the semester is here, and it is now crunch time. I am starting to stress out with all the work, but I am trying not to let it overwhelm me. My group seems to be making progress in our presentations. In the beginning, I was worried about Farrah's attendance and Michelle being sick, but they have since improved. I do have to help Farrah with her paper, though. I read her paper, and it seemed clear that she had never heard of MLA format. I don't want to be mean, but structurally, her paper was a mess. It seems like I don't have enough time to fix her paper while also adding all the stuff to mine that I need. I haven't really looked at Barbara's or Michelle's. I remember proofreading Michelle's, and I know she needs to fix a few things. Barbara's also had plenty of grammatical mistakes, but those are easier to fix that Farrah's formatting ones. My main concern now is Scarlett. In the beginning, she was doing great. She attended all the meetings, and she had really shown a drive to succeed and help. Now that is not there. She isn't even there. She has missed the last few meetings and has admitted how behind she is. That's nice, but where does that leave her group members? This is a group effort and everyone has to pull their weight. Right now, I could care less if she doesn't turn in an English paper. I doubt she will since she hasn't even turned in the last assigned paper. I do, however, want her their for the Oral Communication presentation. I am really proud of what our group has been working on for our presentation, and I want everyone their to present it. Also, we are doing a narrative, and Scarlett's part is very interesting. I would hate to have to take her part out. I wonder if we could leave her narration in, have someone else say it, skip her speech, and then just move into the next portion of it? I doubt we will get approval for that though because it stops the "fluidity" of our presentation. Well, I just hope this goes over well.

Two Film Reviews

These journals are due tomorrow, and I am desperately trying to find things to write about. I have been sick and really haven't felt like writing anything. When you can't think of what to write, write what you know. In my case, that would be movies. I just saw two highly acclaimed films, and I figured I give you my thoughts on them.

"No Country for Old Men" (***)
"No Country for Old Men" is a riveting thriller directed by the Coen brothers. It really is a well-crafted film that, for the most part, I thoroughly enjoyed. The screenplay is excellent, filled with much piercing dialogue and wit. I really enjoyed the performance of Javier Bardem. He gives the best creepy performance since Anthony Hopkins in "The Silence of the Lambs." Right now he is the frontrunner to win Best Supporting Actor. I also liked Tommy Lee Jones' performance. This is probably his best performance to date as the story's moral narrator. The story, even if the viewer doesn't realize it at first, is his. I don't think his performance will be nominated though, because he will be competing against Bardem who has received much of the praise. The one thing I didn't like about the film was the ending. I thought it could have ended about ten minutes earlier. I am not totally furious at the ending however. I have since realized that some of the scenes were necessary. The car accident scene for instance, I thought served no purpose, but then after analyzing the film and reading the reviews it shows that Bardem's character could not be stopped. The tagline says, "You Can't Stop What's Coming." Ending on the Jones' dream was weird, but like I said it was Jones' story. Also, I would like to praise this film for being as gripping as it was without a musical score. I didn't even realize this at first, but it's true. The film was very suspenseful in parts, and it did this not without music. The film worked because it was such a gripping story.

"I'm Not There" (**1/2)
I really don't know what to make of Todd Haynes' ode to Bob Dylan, "I'm Not There." I am not a huge fan of Bob Dylan and don't know much about him. This may have been the reason I was completely amazed by this film. The story is told through interwoven vignettes. If one does not know much about Bob Dylan, then one can just take these segments for what they are: stories. Certain segments were definitely stronger than others, and this could be seen as one of the film's weak points. Cate Blanchett definitely has the best role of the film. Her story is the most fascinating, and apparently the most accurate depiction of Dylan. I think she gave a really good performance that will definitely be nominated come Oscar nominations. I thought she did an excellent job, and it was definitely a different performance for her. I also liked Heath Ledger's performance. His story was very interesting, and he proves that "Brokeback Mountain" was no flop. He should, in my opinion, when an Oscar one day (He should have won it for "Brokeback Mountain."). I also liked the cinematography of the film; Haynes' took a unique approach to shooting this film. "I'm Not There" is definitely an experimental film, an unconventional biopic. The film worked for me, because it was something fresh, even if it wasn't always compelling. The film may not have been all that great, but it was always interesting.

Thanksgiving Holidays

I think I just had the worst Thanksgiving break ever. I just don't see how any other Thanksgiving break can top the horribleness of this one. It is just not possible. I went home to Louisiana to see my family. Thanksgiving Day was fine. I hung out with my family and had a nice dinner. The food was good; definitely better than the dorm food I eat everyday. That night my brother and I drove to Baton Rouge because we were going to the LSU game on Friday. Before going to his apartment we stopped at the Rave to see a movie. Michael refused to see the movie I wanted to see, "No Country for Old Men," so he went to see "The Mist." This, however, is not where the trouble begins. I just figured I mention the last remaining positive highlight of my trip.

Friday morning Michael and I woke up and went to Target to see some of the Black Friday specials. I ended up buying a few DVDs: "Planet Terror," "Death Proof," "Smoking Aces," "Borat," and "Sex, Lies, and Videotape." On the way home we were stuck in ridiculous game day traffic. We seriously sat on the interstate for a good 45 minutes to get to our exit when it should have taken 5-10. When we got off the exit contraflow, rerouting traffic which apparently is supposed to help traffic, was in effect. Because of the way it was organized though, my brother and I could not get back to the apartment where the tickets were. We ended up having to park near the stadium, walk 40 minutes to his apartment to get the tickets, and then trek back to get to the game. The game was fun, but LSU lost. When the hell does that happen? It just doesn't. I swear the only times I go to the game is when LSU freaking loses. Remember when they won the National Championship a few year back and only lost one game? Well that one game was the only game I went to. I must be a curse.

LSU wasn't the only team I liked that lost that weekend. My high school football team got eliminated from the playoffs. They had made it the furthest in school history, and the previous week they even upset the number 2 team (we were 18). On Saturday, my parents, my brother, and I went out to eat. When I got back home I settled down to watch the Kansas/Missouri game. Kansas, the team I was rooting for, lost.

That wasn't even the worst part of the game. Before the game had started I was feeling sick. My brother had complained of feeling sick earlier in the day. He called me from his girlfriend's house later saying that he was on his way home because he had thrown up. That night I also started throwing up. I HATE throwing up. It's disgusting. I was blowing chunks out of my nose....I'm not going to go into anymore detail. My mom and dad brought us to the hospital on Sunday to be looked at. Apparently we both had a stomach virus that was going around. We also had to be hooked to an IV because we were dehydrated. I couldn't even drive home that day. I had to wait until Monday to get back to school and miss class.

I am still not feeling that great. I can't even eat real food. My diet over that past few days has consisted of watered down gatorade, saltines (with peanut butter if I want to be daring), and soup. Yeah, so that was my holiday. This was a lot longer than I expected, and I still have a ton of work to finish. Wow! My life sucks!

"Enchanted" (***)

I'm still trying to collect my thoughts after one of the most wonderful movie going experiences of the year. "Enchanted," in all its camp and predictability, is one of the best films of the year. It brought back memories of the old Disney classics that my generation and the ones before me grew up with.

The story is very simple. Giselle, a cartoon princess, before marrying her Prince Charming is pushed into a well by his mother so she will not have to give up her crown. The well leads Giselle to real world New York where Giselle has to cope with some new experiences and find her place in the world. All the time, she is trying to find Prince Edward, who has ventured into the real world to bring her back, so they can get married. The catch is Giselle meets a divorce attorney who teaches her how to survive in the real world. The story is very predictable, but the audience cannot help but be fully engrossed in it. It is a satire of the Disney classics that in turn pays homage to them.

The main reason the film works is because of Amy Adams. Amy Adams gives the best performance out of any actor or actress this year. I don't see how she can't be nominated for Best Actress. I'm going to go ahead and say she's going to win. I have not seen Keira Knightley in "Atonement" or Ellen Page in "Juno" yet, but I don't see how either of them can come close to Adams. She was Giselle. This movie would not have been as good as it was if it were not for Adams. She is the epitome of a Disney princess. Her performance is something that has to be experienced; the universal, glowing praise from critics doesn't even do her justice. It is hard to describe her performance in words. It's kind of like in the movie when Giselle experiences anger for the first time. Watching her on screen is like experiencing something totally new, a new feeling that I have never felt before. All I could do was smile. She is the next big thing.

On a few side notes. The music was very good. I loved Giselle's song in the park. The CGI animals were well done. The scenes with Pip the chipmunk are hilarious. Overall, "Enchanted," in all its predictability, is one of the great achievements in film this year. It could have easily sunk into camp, but instead it succeeds mainly because of Amy Adam's breathtaking performance.

So....

So I couldn't sleep. It's 1:30 in the morning, and I'm wide awake. This energy is probably going to come back and bite me in the ass later but oh well. I figure since I'm up I might as well give my comments on the Best Actor and Best Actress races.

Best Actor
Right now the actor that everyone is predicting is Daniel Day-Lewis for "There Will Be Blood." He is one of the greatest actors working today, and he is paired with one of the greatest directors working today. How can you go wrong? The early reviews have compared his character to Charles Foster Kane in "Citizen Kane," high praise indeed. Right now I see him winning this award. I don't know who else could. Also watch out for Johnny Depp in Sweeny Todd. I think this performance is going to thrive on Depp's singing ability, and I am not sure if he can deliver. We'll find out soon. George Clooney's portrayal of Michael Clayton is a performance many are predicting, but I don't see it. It was a good performance, but the real standout in that film, if any, was Tom Wilkinson. Many people are also predicting Tom Hanks for "Charlie Wilson's War" and Denzel Washington for "American Gangster." No one has really seen "Charlie Wilson's War" yet, and if I were a voter "American Gangster" would not be getting any of my votes. I can see Denzel getting in because of the film's success, but it is undeserving. I think if the Weinstein's really campaign John Cusack for "Grace is Gone" he can get in. It's a good film, and he does good work. Ryan Gosling is excellent in "Lars and the Real Girl," but I don't see the Academy going for his performance. I think the real underdog could be James McAvoy for "Atonement." He has been on the verge for a year or two. Everyone seems to love "Atonement," and I could see him upsetting Daniel Day-Lewis. Also competing for the breakthrough spot is Emile Hirsch in "Into the Wild." It's a really good performance, and I wouldn't mind seeing him nominated. Another potential dark horse could be Mathieu Amalric in "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," but I'm not so sure. The film is primarily told from his perspective, so the audience rarely sees him. The delivery of his lines is quite poetic, so I wonder if the Academy will look at that. I personally would like to see Brad Pitt nominated for "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford."

MY PREDICTIONS
1. Daniel Day-Lewis, "There Will Be Blood"
2. James McAvoy, "Atonement"
3. Johnny Depp, "Sweeny Todd"
4. Denzel Washington, "American Gangster"
5. John Cusack, "Grace is Gone"

6. George Clooney, "Michael Clayton"
7. Ryan Gosling, "Lars and the Real Girl"
8. Emile Hirsch, "Into the Wild"
9. Tom Hanks, "Charlie Wilson's War"
10. Mathieu Almaric, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"

Best Actress
The Best Actress race is more wide open than the Best Actor race. Many people are consistently predicting Marion Cotillard in "La Vie en Rose." I personally did not like the film. She was good, but the film was so bad that it undermines her performance. I think there are three actresses that could win this race. Keira Knightley has a legitimate shot for "Atonement," but I think her chances of a win dwindle everyday. Ellen Page has gained much momentum for "Juno." I thought she was phenomenal in "Hard Candy," and I hope she is as good in "Juno" as she was in "Hard Candy." Amy Adams could also pull off a surprise win for "Enchanted." She has received universal raves. I'm seeing this film tomorrow (actually today), and I should have a review of it later. Many contenders from earlier in the year seem to have decent shots at nominations. Julie Christie would be deserving of a nomination for her performance in "Away from Her." I am campaigning Angelina Jolie's performance in "A Mighty Heart." I would like to see Amber Tamblyn nominated for "Stephanie Daley," but that's impossible. It seems like I am the only one that has seen that film. I also thoroughly enjoyed Tang Wei's brave performance in "Lust, Caution," but a nomination seems unlikely. Laura Linney is also overdue for a nomination, and "The Savages" could be the film to get her that nomination. I think Helena Bonham Carter should have been kept in supporting for "Sweeny Todd," and maybe this will change.

MY PREDICTIONS
1. Amy Adams, "Enchanted"
2. Ellen Page, "Juno"
3. Marion Cotillard, "La Vie en Rose"
4. Keira Knightley, "Atonement"
5. Angelina Jolie, "A Mighty Heart"

6. Laura Linney, "The Savages"
7. Julie Christie, "Away from Her"
8. Cate Blanchett, "Elizabeth: The Golden Ege"
9. Helena Bonham Carter, "Sweeny Todd"
10. Tang Wei, "Lust, Caution"

Weekend Update.

This weekend actually felt like a productive weekend. I was able to finish my English paper as well as study for my History test (Which I just took, and it was really easy.). I also got a haircut. It sucks. I like my hair long, but my hair gets in my eyes and irritates me. The lady that cut it obviously does not know how to cut in a straight line. Anyways, I decided to reward myself and see a few films. Here are just brief reviews of what I saw.

"Sleuth" (***)
Sleuth is an intriguing cat and mouse, battle of the wits film. It is intriguing and expertly written. The film thrives on the intercourse between Michael Caine and Jude Law. The conversation between them is always captivating and makes for an interesting character study of each. Both Michael Caine and Jude Law give good performances. Jude Law did seem over-the-top at times. He was very maniacal. I think he could have gone with a more subdued performance, but what he did worked. The film dragged somewhat in the middle, but it quickly regains its footing. The cinematography and art direction were also expertly done. The beginning sequence when you see the initial encounter between Jude Law and Michael Caine was captured beautifully through the lens of the security camera; it was a great way to film that segment. Overall, "Sleuth" is a very good film, and it is a shame that its box office intake is so low. This is a film that deserves to be seen.


"Love in the Time of Cholera" (*1/2)
"Love in the Time of Cholera" is a film that had potential, but instead is one of the worst films of the year. Its a love story that follows a mans "devout" love for a woman which spans over 50 years. I have not read the novel the film is based upon, but it is considered a classic. The film, however, is anything but. The story thrives on the thread that these two characters love each other. It seemed like they barely knew each other, and the love never seemed authentic. The characters did not make us believe that they were in love. Some of the dialogue was extremely cheesy. The actors try their best with the roles given to them, but there is not much they can do. The part I found most amusing was towards the end when Javier Bardem's character confesses to his lover that he is a virgin and has waited 53 years for this moment. What is even worse is the viewer is supposed to believe that he has slept with over 600 women. If I have to compliment this film on anything, it has to be the makeup team. They did an excellent job aging the actors. It's pathetic, however, when the makeup crew is the best part of the whole film.

"August Rush" (***)
"August Rush" is a good feel good movie that could have been great. The story is about an orphan who runs away in search of his parents. He says he can hear them and is following the music. His father is in search of his mother, and his mother is in search of her son. It is about all these people in search of something. It is a predictable, cliched story that asks the audience to suspend their belief to believe the impossible and buy into the coincidences. Sometimes, it is easy for the audience to do this. The viewer gets caught up in what is going on and is fully engrossed. Other times, the viewer looks at the film and questions in disbelief what is going on. The film just wasn't consistently captivating. The scenes that were, however, were highly entertaining and were some of the moving, best scenes of the year. I just wish the whole film was like this.

My Ramblings on the Oscar Race

I have not done a post on the state of the Oscar race in awhile, and I think it is about time that I get my thoughts out. It is the middle of November, and the Oscar season is underway. This is, for me at least, the best time of the year.

BEST PICTURE
I think the only assured nomination this year is "Atonement." I had previously thought that "There Will Be Blood" was guaranteed a nomination; however, even though early reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, some consider it not the Academy's cup of tea. I'm pretty sure that "Juno" will also be nominated. This is the only real comedy in my opinion that stands a chance at a Best Picture nomination. I think this is a serious contender to win the top prize, a dark horse in the race. "No Country for Old Men" is expanding today, and the critics seem to love this film. Reviews have been great. I had previously thought that the Academy would not go for this film, but I do not see how they can ignore the deafening buzz it is garnering. "Sweeny Todd" is also a strong contender. After seeing the preview I have my doubts. From early word of mouth, Johnny Depp's singing voice is not that spectacular, but the film is supposed to be one of Tim Burton's best. Universal seems to be keeping "Charlie Wilson's War" under wraps, and I do not even know what to think of this film. "American Gangster" has received some favorable reviews and is having an amazing box office run, but I just do not think it is Best Picture material.

My predictions:
"Atonement"
"No Country for Old Men"
"Juno"
"There Will Be Blood"
"Sweeny Todd"

I hopefully want to analyze the remaining categories sometime next week, so be looking for those.

Procrastination.

I really do not feel like doing any of my homework, so I think I'll write on my blog. Right now I am working on the rough draft of my speech outline. I have to present and solve the problem that exists with assisted suicide. I pretty much know what I want to say; the hard part is just actually typing it. You see, when I get online my fingers magically type the words facebook.com in the browser or one of the many movie sites that I like to check daily. It seems like I go on one of the sites, look at it for five minutes, close it out, look at the blank document that is supposed to be one of my papers, and then I end up back on the previous site like something new is suddenly on it.

This weekend is going to be hell. I have a paper to work on in English, and luckily that goes along with my speech. Hopefully, I won't be up too late working on that. I also have my History paper that I have been working on forever (a.k.a staring at a blank sheet of paper). I also have a film paper due in the beginning of December. Now that is a paper that I am actually not worried about. FINALLY! I love movies, and I am doing pretty well in the course.

Speaking of movies......This weekend I plan on going to see "Sleuth," "the sneak preview of "August Rush," and maybe "Love in the Time of Cholera." I should have reviews of all these films soon. That is another thing I do besides my schoolwork-- go to the movies. I am always there. I may get tired of sitting in my jail cell and decide to venture out into society. Somehow I always end up at the movie theatre......strange. In my defense, Oscar season has started. I am considering being a film critic if I can't actually make movies, so the Oscar season can be very "educational" to enhancing my learning. Friday morning there is a screening of "The Mist" which I really want to see, but it interferes with school goddammit. I was thinking about missing it, but that just wouldn't be right. I guess I can wait a few days to see it when it is released. But that means I have to pay for it!

Well I think I should stop rambling on. I think I could go on forever typing in this post and make it the world's longest post. I just REALLY do not want to finish my speech outline. Ok I'm logging off before I start typing anymore.

"Beowulf" (*1/2)

I do not exactly know what to think of "Beowulf" after my initial viewing. It is a visually mesmerizing film that should be considering revolutionary in modern cinema, a step forward. On the other hand, the script is so blatantly awful that the only thing that kept me interested was the 3D effects.

"Beowulf," in the beginning, follows the classic epic pretty accurately, but as the film progresses it stretches farther and farther away from the source material. The basic story follows Beowulf, a vain hero who can defeat anything he fights. Once Beowulf defeats the monstrous Grendel, he becomes enraptured with Grendel's mother, hopelessly falling for her seduction. The book does not have anything about Grendel's mother being seductive, and the love story is no where in the text, at least not to my knowledge. I read the book my senior year and did not particularly care for it. I found Beowulf to be a vain bastard; he came off as annoying. I think that was intentional so I am not going to bash the book for that, but the book is definitely not one of my favorites. The new events expressed in the film are interesting and weaken Beowulf, makes him more human. I liked this aspect of the film, but it was totally unexpected. This infuriated me in a way because I was expecting something and got something totally different. It was an interesting idea, but it should not have played such a dominant role in the second portion of the film. It seems like since Angelina Jolie was cast as Grendel's mother, this part of the film was put in just to take advantage of her sex appeal.

The dialogue in the film is cheesy and filmed with innuendos. This was intentional, but the audience is laughing at the film, not with it. I just did not think "Beowulf" should have been as comedic as it was portrayed. The camera angles during Beowulf's fight against Grendel were also amusing, garnering plenty of laughs from the audience. It seemed like the camera was playing see how many different angles we can use to conceal Beowulf's penis.

Now, the thing that did work for the film was the visual effects. If you cannot see the film in 3D in your area do not bother going to see it. I think the 3D effects were put to the best use in this film than any other film I have seen. Past 3D films like "Monster House," "The Nightmare Before Christmas," and "Superman Returns" have all been in 3D, and while there was a difference, I did not really feel like anything was popping out at me. This is not the case with "Beowulf." The battle scenes are exhilarating and would not have been the same in the 2D format. The 3D effects were the only reason that my eyes did not start venturing over to the nearest exit sign.

The animation was interesting and looked quite authentic at times. There were other times, however, that the characters looked like wax figures. This is especially noticeable in the first song that the queen (Robin Wright Penn) sings. The technology is advancing, but it has not been perfected yet. There are still a few kinks that could be worked out, but it is still a huge step forward for future filmmaking.

Overall, "Beowulf" is a valiant effort. The visual effects are outstanding; it is just too bad they could not have been used on a film featuring a much better script.

"Lions for Lambs" (***)

The reviews for Robert Redford's new film, "Lions for Lambs," have been mixed. I understand because the movie is biased, political propaganda. The film does not necessarily preach its message, but the viewer clearly knows the director's view on the "War on Terror." I, however, agreed with what the film was trying to say.

"Lions for Lambs" follows one of the newest trends in Hollywood narrative, that of the interconnecting stories. Arian and Ernest are two college buddies who decided to fight in Afghanistan to do something important with their lives. Meanwhile, there is Dr. Malley, who taught the two soldiers, who is trying to motivate a bright but lazy student. He draws parallels between this kid and Arian and Ernest, but the difference is that this kid is naturally intuitive while Arian and Ernest really had to work for their grades. Then their is the story of Senator Jasper Irving who is giving a journalist the exclusive story on a new strategy that is going to be implemented in Iraq (as they speak), which happens to be the mission that Arian and Ernest are a part of.

The story is pretty straightforward and easy to follow. There is a lot of dialogue also, but the discussion is all very interesting. The script raises some very thought-provoking questions. What are we doing in Iraq? When is the war going to end? How are we helping Iraq? Exactly how good is the media in America? Why do soldiers fight? How free is the media? This film clearly has an opinion, which may rub some people the wrong way.

The performances in the film are good. Meryl Streep is always good; she plays the journalist who does not completely buy the senator's story. She seems like the last journalist with the last bit of integrity in her, the last one who wants to actually report an honest story. Tom Cruise is also good as the politician who will do what it takes to become president. Finally, Robert Redford gives a good, fiery performance as the no-shit-taking professor. The actors are not the important part of the film; the script is the film's greatest asset.

The major problem I had with the film is it was very by-the-books. It seemed like a director's first feature. The editing was predictable. When the mission in Afghanistan goes wrong, the commanding officer says that he wants to speak with the bastard (except this word started with an f) who said the area would be clear. It then cuts to Tom Cruise's character, who came up with the plan. This is just one of the examples of how the structure of the film is predictable. It does nothing to defy the conventions of film. This is a good film; it just could have been one of the best of the year if constructed more originally.

Weekend

Tomorrow is Friday! This weekend has seemed like an eternity, and I am glad that it is finally coming to an end. Tomorrow, I am driving to Tupelo because my sister is getting married on Saturday. I am not too big on weddings, but I do not think it will be that bad.

I feel kind of bad because I am not even staying for the reception. Saturday is also the Memphis at Southern Mississippi football game. I have a few friends that go to Southern Miss, so I am going to go. I almost went to Southern Miss myself, and the campus and people are cool. The football team will probably lose, but hopefully they will surprise me. I am glad that I get the opportunity to see my friends though. I have met a lot of cool people in Memphis, but I miss my friends from high school.

Hopefully, it won't take me too long to get there. Mapquest said that the trip from Tupelo to Hattiesburg is around four hours. I can't speed becaue I got a ticket last time I drove through Mississippi. It was my first ticket so I can take a defensive driving course in Mississippi, and the ticket will not even show up on my record. That's better than paying the ticket. I was doing 94 in a 70, and if I paid the ticket it would be $172.

Sunday, I will probably try to leave early. I feel like I have so much schoolwork. I think the learning community is good, but it is a lot of work. I also have assignments in my two classes outside of the learning community. Th work just never seems to stop. My adviser is also trying to get me to take 19 hours next semester. That sounds crazy, like too much, but I am actually thinking about doing it. It would be the same number of classes, except I would have a class and a lab, instead of having a two hour class this semester. I think I am going to try it out, and if it doesn't work just drop a class.

Well, I need to get back to catching up with the never ending supply of work that I have.

Weekend Catchup.

I have been very involved in my studies this past week, and films provide a break from reality, a chance to leave my life and escape into someone's for a brief period of time. I took time out of my busy weekend to see two critically acclaimed films: "Lust, Caution" and "American Gangster." While I do not have time to offer full critical reviews of each film, I can briefly state my take on each.

"Lust, Caution" (***1/2)
"Lust, Caution" is director Ang Lee's followup to the universally hailed "Brokeback Mountain." "Brokeback Mountain" was an astounding film that should have won Best Picture at the Academy Awards, and it remains as one of the best films of the decade. While "Lust, Caution" does not exceed Ang Lee's previous film, it does, however, establish itself as one of the best films of the year. The film is set during the Japanese occupation of Shanghai during World War II and follows the story of a group of theatre students who try to take part in the resistance. The film has a slow pace, but like "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford," it is never boring. I was fully engrossed the entire time. Tang Wei delivers an amazing and brave breakthrough performance as Wong Chia Chi, a girl who has to disguise herself in ordr to infiltrate the enemy. She later involves herself in a torrid love affair with Mr. Yee, the man she is trying to bring down. The motif of the cigarette is very important to the film. Actors have to learn to smoke, and as the film progresses Tang Wei executes this habit well. It is a symbolic reference to her deception. The film does have some graphic sex scenes. Most of the time, I hate watching unnecessary sex and nudity in films. While the number of sex scenes could have been cut, I was not bothered by them in this film. Like last year's "Babel," the nudity progressed the film. Overall, this is a well-executed film led by an amazing performance by Tang Wei that I would highly recommend.

"American Gangster" (**1/2)
I also had the opportunity to catch Ridley Scott's latest, "American Gangster." This film is by no means a bad one; it just does not live up to the hype that I have been hearing about it. I halfway expected this. The story follows the rise and fall of Frank Lucas, a black heroin kingpin in Harlem. The script is not bad, but it does drag in places. Denzel Washington delivers a good performance as Lucas, but it is nothing Oscar-worthy. Personally, I enjoyed Joaquin Phoenix's performance in "We Own the Night" more. Russell Crowe is also noteworthy as the honest police investigator who helped bring Lucas down. His performance is good, but if the Academy wants to award him with a nomination this year they are better off seeing "3:10 to Yuma." The film accurately depicts the atmosphere of Harlem, but I did not fully invest in the lives of the characters to care enough about the movie. It is a good film that could have been tightened up somewhat, but it does not compare to last year's "The Departed," and definitely does not come close to other films in its genre like "The Godfather." I have a feeling, however, that because of the explosive box office gross as well as good reviews, we could see this film's name called during the announcement of the Oscar nominations.

Tomorrow, I should be catching an advanced screening of "Lions for Lambs," so make sure to watch out for that review coming soon.

"Lars and the Real Girl" (***)

I spent my Halloween night watching "Lars and the Real Girl." This quirky comedy follows Lars, an introvert, who orders a sex doll named Bianca off the internet, and they start a relationship. Now this is definitely a hard sell, especially to mainstream audiences. Instead, a film which easily could have been filled with vulgarities, turns out to be one of the most heart-warming films of the year.

The main reason the film works is it is skillfully written by Nancy Oliver. I don' expect the Academy to embrace this film and give her a nomination, but it is a possibility. The story is very sincere, and Lars is a well-developed character that the audience can really relate to and sympathize with. It is amusing to watch this relationship between Lars and Bianca develop. Lars is weaving a narrative between himself and this sex doll, and the viewer cannot help but be intrigued. He is living in this fantasy in which he is the puppeteer.

Now, a lot of the credit also has to be given to Ryan Gosling. This is a role unlike any other for this amazing young actor, and if in any other actor's hands the film may not have worked as well as it did. Last year Ryan Gosling gave my favorite performance of the year out of any of the acting categories. He was astounding in "Half Nelson," and while he does not top that performance in this film, he still delivers an Oscar-worthy performance. For the viewer to really invest in the film, the relationship between Lars and Bianca has to feel authentic. When Lars is having conversations with Bianca, it is like he is talking to any other human being. It is interesting to watch how this character is afraid of human contact, of human emotion. I think his mother's death had a great affect on how he views the world. Losing his mother has made him afraid of becoming close to anyone. His performance is really a spectacular feat, and Ryan Gosling continues to prove that he is one of the premier actors of his generation.

It was also interesting to see the effect that inanimate objects had on people throughout the film. As kids, our toys play important roles in our lives. They become our friends, and they are not just toys to us. We see them as real friends, items of comfort. Many of the characters illustrated this inner child. Lars had Bianca who helped him overcome his fears of his own emotions. One of Lars' co-workers collects action figures. They are important to him, and when Margo, another co-worker, hides them he is upset. Margo also has a teddy bear that means a lot to her. She is devastated when a noose is placed around him. The scene is which Lars performs CPR on the bear was very heart-warming. The viewer can also see Lars' blank as an important inanimate object in his life. His mother made it from him, and it comforts him, helping him try to remember the mother he never knew.

"Lars and the Real Girl" is a real delight that everyone should see. Before I sign out I would like to point out two things. First, the film was directed by Craig Gillespie who also directed "Mr. Woodcock." After, that horrible film, I didn't think Mr. Gillespie could make a good film, but he proved me wrong. He provides an assured hand, and directs the film carefully making sure that the audience can relate to it. On a final note, I just thought it would be amusing if Bianca the sex doll received a Best Supporting Actress nomination. I know this isn't possible, but she is very much a character in the film. In a year vacant of good supporting roles for females, I thought this idead would be interesting.