The process of deciding what to watch...

It's an age old dilemma; you wanna watch a movie but you're not sure which to watch. Now compounding this is when one has a massive movie collection. It makes things, shall we say, difficult?
This is how it begins:
Step 1: Recognize the need. The need.....for movie lovin'.
Step 2: Evaluate the goals and objectives; do I want to be entertained, think, zone out, etc.
Step 3: Determine options available. Captain Corelli's Mandolin is never one.
Step 4: Apply the goals and objectives to the options available. i.e. I want to zone out, options? Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Michael Bay movies, any movie with Vin Diesel.
Step 5: Second guess whether the options are really options at all. "I mean, I wanna be entertained but The Godfather is almost too good that it borders on being a thinker and not an entertainer."
Step 6A: Repeat steps 1-4.
Step 6B: Stop being a whuss and move on.
Step 7: Determine final choices.
Step 8: Point Break is always a final choice no matter your desired goals and objectives.
Step 9: Evaluate pros and cons of final choices. This does not mean watching a PROfessional sports movie or a movie about CONmen. However, the PROfessional is considered fair game.
Step 10A: Make decision.
Step 10B: Repeat Steps 1-9 in varying orders until sleepy.
Step 10C: Get bored, play some Fallout 3.

Just what is the.....best genre?

Drama. Comedy. Crime. Action. Sci-fi. Horror. Which is better? Well, obviously there is no real answer. It depends on taste. It depends on who's hands the genre is put in. It all depends on a number of things which depend on a number of other depends, etc. and so on and so forth. Yet we can debate, can we not?
Drama would be the clear favorite. Most films have some form of drama hence making drama the genre of choice. Let's look at this a different way though. If drama is done wrong, is it not the worst genre? I mean, nothing is funnier than watching someone trying so hard and getting absolutely nothing. Think Tom Cruise in Born On The Fourth Of July. Then again, some people loved that movie.
Comedy can be the same as drama. When it's good it's very good. But when it is bad, it can be terrible. Yet one can laugh at a bad comedy cause it's just so bad it's funny. If you ever laugh at a dramatic scene, there is something very wrong.
Crime is a fan favorite. You've got some of the best films ever that are crime films: The Godfather, Goodfellas, L.A. Confidential. It can provide for great characters, great battles between good and bad, ethics, morals. It can lack great beautiful cinematography oftentimes as most take place in grimy cities.
Westerns are my person favorite. One reason is my belief that they offer everything a director could want in a film. Beautiful scenery, character potential, action, drama, dialogue, etc. One other reason, which simultaneously is a detriment towards the argument of Western supremacy, is that few have tackled the genre to it's fullest potential.
Action is another crowd pleaser. However, action at it's greatest rarely happens and oftentimes exceeds the confines of being just an action film. So therefore, action cannot be the best genre.
War, horror, thriller. All good stuff when done right. Most often horror and thrillers lack the mise-en-scene and cinematography to be great genres. War has it, and can be extremely good. However, it is a genre that can be done well most often. So in the hands of a competent director, it appears not too hard to do. Could that be an argument that is deserves to be the best genre? I think that, like most things, is debatable.
My personal favorite genre is science fiction. It does not fall into the realm of confinement. It can be anything it wants to be. Characters can be good, bad, young, extremely old, robots, etc. The scenery options are unlimited. The stories are unlimited. All of it can applied as a form of social commentary.
In conclusion, there is no best genre. You can choose any and I would not say you were wrong. However, I would attempt to convince you that I am right.

The Wrestler- A 1-2-3 for Mickey?

Growing up, as most children do, I loved wrestling. I started as a minor fan during the Hulkster and Randy Savage days and became a full-fledged fanatic when Stone Cold Steve Austin coined one of the most iconic phrases in wrestling history upon winning the King of the Ring. Let's just say I was eager to see whether Darren Aronofsky would go Oliver Stone and make as inaccurate a film as possible.
The Wrestler stars Mickey Rourke as Randy "The Ram" Robinson, a one-time wrestling superstar who has fallen on hard times. Randy used to perform to sold out arenas and now works community centers looking for the next meager pay day. Rourke shines in this role as a man broken more by his work outside the ropes than between them. Rourke helped write some of his own lines and you can tell as he appears very comfortable.
The story is told linearly, with a couple of flashbacks (which only go around 14 minutes backward in time). The look and feel of The Wrestler is very real. The way it is filmed makes the audience follow Randy more than observes him. On top of that, it's accurate. All this makes it painful to think about, but fantastic to watch. Keep your ears open for Bruce Springstein at the end, a perfect song for a tragic character.
Having now watched this, I'm disappointed it was not nominated for more awards. Especially Best Pic. That's how the game is played though. The commercially appealing stuff always gets it's place at the table, even when all it's doing is eating the bread.

Slumdog Millionaire- putting the dog, in Oscar!

Slumdog Millionaire won Best Pic at the Golden Globes. Cool. Big whup. No one really cares. However, it is a good clue as to where Academy voters minds are settling. But I am not the Academy. To which I say, "I AM GREATER!"
Alright, quick rundown. Slumdog Millionaire is told in a non-linear fashion about a young man from a slum in India who is one question away from 20 million rupee prize on India's version of "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?". He's accused of heating and interrogated. We learn about his youth and his love for a young woman. Simple enough.
Firstly, whoever the editor is? Where is he? Stand up my friend. Clap, clap, clap. Beautiful. What a job. Truly good stuff. Where's the guy who did the music? You? Clap, clap, clap. Beauty, man. Alright, that outta the way. I loved it. It's like a feel good version of City of God. Not as good, but easily one of the elite movies this year.
Danny Boyle does a good job as usual, but unlike his recent penchant for dropping the ball in the second half (28 Days Later, Sunshine), he doesn't waiver. Ok, well watch the credits and give me your opinion on that subject later. Then watch the on-foot chase sequence near the beginning and let it re-establish your faith.
All in all, I'd say this is completely deserving as Best Pic. Not my choice (See. Doubt). If it won I wouldn't complain. Much.

Oscar Noms

Ok...this year to me feels like a year where a number of former Oscar losers would DESTROY the field. I mean, geesh, could you imagine Saving Private Ryan in this year? It'd kill. Aw well, the Oscars are becoming worse and worse for me. I knew the film industry was crooked, but when Cannes premiered Oceans 13 last year....I knew there was something up.
And what is with Milk? All I've heard is how great Sean Penn is, and yet it's getting noms in numerous categories. Wha? The Dark Knight is nominated in nearly every category, and it isn't nominated for Best Pic? Wha? Every single actor with a pivotal role in Doubt is nominated.....and it DOESN'T get nominated for Best Pic? WHA?
Oh well, at least I can always rely on Best Animated Feature to be correct. Cause there are only three movies in that category every year and only one that's ever any good.

Leonardo DiCaprio- Best performance EVER.....in his career.....

Let it be known, I am not a Leo fan. Never have, probably never will. I find him to a be terribly unconvincing over-actor, with a penchant for routinely choosing the most obviously 'difficult' roles. Let me explain. What type of roles wins an Oscar I ask you? Playing mentally or physically disabled, a character with an accent, a character who is 'troubled' deeply, etc. etc. Now let us review Leo's resume. Whats Eating Gilbert Grape, check. The Aviator, check. Blood Diamond, The Departed, Gangs of New York. And check, check, check. So obviously, he tries too hard.
Revolution Road, while getting the Oscar buzz, has not garnered a ton of praise. Everyone wants to talk about The Wrestler or Slumdog Millionaire and it's leading men. Or Kate Winslet in the Reader. Yet this could be the best acting job of Leo's life. Seriously. He plays a guy who has serious marital trouble. That's it. He isn't disturbed or from some southern American state. He's just a guy who is supremely disappointed in his life. And he excels. And excels. In fact, at one point I thought, "Oh my god, I actually like him right now. No, no, no. No way. But I do."
So bottom line is if you have liked Leo up to this point in his career, you won't like this movie. I'm just being honest. Because chances are you were impressed by his 'acting' and not his character. But it's all about character. So see it. Or don't. What do I care?

Stanley Kubrick- Best Director EVER?

For those of you who have had the pleasure of watching a Stanley Kubrick movie, be aware that you have seen more than just your average film. You're a witness to greatness. You're a witness to a man who is a master of his craft. Visit imdb.com. If you scroll down the list of films he's directed, chances are you've heard of at least one. Chances are that film you recognize is also elite.
Dr. Strangelove, The Killing, Full Metal Jacket, Barry Lyndon, A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey....need I go on? Look, how silly of me, what about Paths of Glory? Lolita? Has anyone heard of The Shining? Stanley Kubrick has the most perfect track record, it scares me to think of anyone who could exceed him. Let's put it simply: if directors were a baseball players, all other players would have to bat 0.800 lifetime to break Kubrick. If all directors were painters, someone would have to paint five Mona Lisa's and four Whistler's Mother's to outdo Kubrick. If all directors were porn stars they'd have to sleep with....you get the idea?
He's the man. He has a tremendous eye for the aesthetics of a film. Kubrick could visualize and hear a film without turning on a camera. For all of you who have not tried it, just watch one of his films. I mean watch it, don't even pay that much attention to what the story is about, just watch. Listen to the connection of sound to what's on screen. Pay attention to how shots look, not who's in them. Imagine what someone would have to do to capture a certain shot, i.e. did he have to wait until the clouds in the sky were just perfect enough to frame the character?
Do yourself a favor and accept that Kubrick is just that much better than everyone else. It'll make you a better person. Fo serious.

Biggest Oscar snub?

The Oscars are known as much for it's glitz and glamor as it's snubs. Who can forget how Martin Scorsese did not win an Oscar until The Departed after his body of work suggested otherwise? Stanley Kubrick not winning one ever? Glenn Close losing out for Fatal Attraction to Moonstruck star Cher?
In the end the debate over biggest snub comes down to five categories: 1997 Best Picture, 2000 Best Actress, 1980 Best Picture, Best Director 1964 and 1972. For those who do not remember any of these, let me enlighten. In 1964, Stanley Kubrick(Dr. Strangelove) lost to Carol Reed(Oliver!) for Best Director. In 1972, Bob Fosse(Cabaret)beat out Francis Ford Coppola(The Godfather) for Best Director. In 1980, Raging Bull lost to Ordinary People for Best Picture. In 2000, Ellen Burstyn(Requiem For A Dream) lost to Julia Roberts(Erin Brockovich) for Best Actress. In 1997 L.A. Confidential lost out for the Best Picture to monster, king-of-the-world smash hit Titanic. My question: which of these is the worst oversight in the Academy's history?
The debate boils down between 1997 Best Picture and 2000 Best Actress. While Kubrick being shut out is an injustice, his loss came to excellent filmmaker. The same can be said for Francis Ford Coppola in 1972. Raging Bull losing in 1980 is a big snub, but it's loss wasn't to as inferior a movie as our 1997 loser.
In an acting category, no snub is more resounding than Ellen Burstyn losing to Julia Roberts in 2000. Julia Roberts has never been more than a charismatic actress, far from a character actor who has a broad range. Burstyn role in Requiem For A Dream is one of the most shocking, realized performances in cinematic history. She lost to Julia wearing a pushup bra. Ouch.

Yet when a little crime noire called L.A. Confidential lost Best Picture to Titanic, the greatest snub in the Academy's history went down. Yes, the Titanic that grossed one hundred gillion budabillion dollars and introduced us to love.......at 1000 leagues under the sea. Today, L.A. Confidential is considered to be one of the best films of the '90's and a classic. Titanic is still known as the movie that grossed one hundred zillion gigagigadillion dollares and introduced us to love, well you get the idea. Oh, and it confirmed to all that James Cameron was the king of the world. Well, all I know is that Jack and Rose wouldn't stand a chance versus Bud and Lynn. Mostly cause Bud is a hard boiled bad ass.

Every year the Academy prides itself on the quality of the categories. However, their occasional oversights can be as much of a story as the winners. At the end of the day, when the Academy gets one right, it's right, but when they make the wrong choice, it's embarrassing.

Frost/Nixon- Opie Cunningham's(Ron Howard) best?

Ron Howard is a polarizing figure. From film to film you never know what to expect. I mean, you can expect it to be good, if basic, film making. You can expect it to have your good guys and bad guys, with subsequent basic character development. Apollo 13, Cinderella Man, A Beautiful Mind. All quality work, but nothing more. Nothing exceptional about them. The perfect movie for your faux critic to love and praise and explain easily to the Sheep.
Frost/Nixon recounts the events following Richard Nixon's resignation as US President as British TV personality David Frost secures the right to interview the beleaguered man. Everyone has their own agenda whether it be fame, a return to glory, political survival, or moral and ethical justice.
Opie Cunningham(Ron Howard SNL reference when Eddie Murphy was funny for all the right reasons) has reached the height of his ability with Frost/Nixon. He handles the story with a deft touch. The characters are developed without the use of cop out tools like painfully obvious writing, i.e. "Nixon is a master manipulator and you are self-conscious." or narration. He does film documentary style interviews of characters with the actors rather than the real people. This was a nice touch as it avoids the self-sufficiency of narration. You know, the kind of stuff Sheep need to follow a story. "Ok, ok, so nooooow, Nixon is getting overconfident. He thinks he's so great that he doesn't need that hanker chief to dab his sweaty brow cause ya see, he isn't nervous anymore!"
This is a great movie. I recommend seeing it. Do it, do it, do it. You will be happy you did.

Gran Tarino- Overhyped?

Just saw Gran Tarino. Wanted to see Slumdog Millionaire, my company got the time wrong, decided to see Frost/Nixon at a different theater but didn't have the time, so changed course and made it to a later show of Gran Tarino.
Gran Tarino is a story about an old, racist coot living in an urban Detroit neighborhood as he watches gangs consume it. During the film he befriends the neighbors, in particular a young boy, and sets in motion a confrontation with a gang of hoodlums.
Despite all the praise it is getting, Grand Tarino is a flawed film. Flawed enough to the point of being overrated. To say this is a send off to Clint Eastwood would be a fairly accurate statement. Critics and moviegoers seem to be letting that blind them. Granted, Clint does a great job going back to his tough roots. Yet the rest of the cast is in a word: underwhelming. Ok, bad. Ok, real bad. I mean, it was bad enough that I thought to myself, "Are these actors bad? Or is Clint just terrible at providing his actors with character motivation?" Because let us be honest, directors have as much effect on the way the actors act as the actors. The acting is very much of a reach.
In addition, I could bring up flaws in the writing, the character development, the score(listen closely to a painful rendition of some song by Clint himself at the credits), and more. But this is a blog, not an essay.
Go see it, the Sheep will probably love Clint kicking ass. Can't say anyone in their right mind should though.

The Proposition- Best Western since Unforgiven?

It's become a common theme when talking about quality Westerns made these days that they be compared to Unforgiven. Directed and starring Clint Eastwood, Unforgiven provides the standard that all Westerns, but mostly ones made A.U.(After Unforgiven), be rated by. Before A.U., it was A.H.N.(After High Noon). Then came A.G.B.U.A.O.U.T.W (After the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly AND Once Upon A Time in the West). Then the umbrella time frame known as A.J.W (After John Wayne) because he was the standard all lead Western actors were rated by.
Westerns provide a tremendous canvas for all the elements a filmmaker would wish to put on film. Scenery, social commentary, period piece, drama, action, dialogue, acting opportunities, mise-en-scene. The list goes on and on. But the most important thing that Westerns provide filmmakers is their sense of history because it is the one genre which is completely and totally American. Which leads me to The Proposition.
The Proposition is one of the more unique Westerns to watch. Reason number one is that it takes place in Australia. An English law officer(Ray Winstone) is brought to early settlement Australia with the task of instilling order and 'civilizing' the land. He captures a pair of brothers(Guy Pearce, Richard Wilson) who were members of a gang with their eldest brother(Danny Huston) and provides a proposition: kill your elder brother, or he'll hang the youngest.
This film lives up to everything a Western should be: gritty, barren, and ruthless. It provides a unique take on authority amongst civilized people and uncivilized people. The law enforcement are as cruel as the outlaws. Does that ring a bell for all you Unforgiven fans?

Doubt- Undoubtedly the best of '08

Will the best picture of 2008 please stand up? No, not you Benjamin Button! Ah, yes. Doubt. you beautiful thing you. No picture is more lyrical, more dynamic, or more resounding.
You ask, what is the plot, I shall tell: Set in 1964, a nun(Meryl Streep) suspects a priest(Phillip Seymour Hoffman) of lewd conduct with a young black student. A second nun(Amy Adams) is caught in the middle as she initially brought her suspicions to the head nun. A couple of students are pulled into it as well as the boys mother, Olivia Davis in a powerful performance.
Director John Patrick Shanley hasn't made a big picture since Joe Versus The Volcano, and it's failure made him untouchable in Hollywood. He strikes gold with Doubt. Undoubtedly(I'm going to say that word in reference a lot) he will not be untouchable anymore.
Doubt is an adaptation of John Patrick Shanleys play of the same title. Thank goodness for that! The stage is vastly underrated in the public mind, but it plays host to some of the most powerful material can be adapted to screen. The film plays out similarly to a play. The acting and the dialogue are elite and much of the film takes place in areas of close proximity thus amplifying the intensity.
I recommend this to everyone. Well, not everyone. My roommate(a classic Sheep) and his gf came home and she(of equal intelligence) recommended I wait until it's on DVD. *sigh* Some people will never learn....

The Dark Knight- Best Commercial Film Ever?

I saw The Dark Knight three times in theatres. Honestly, it was never my intention as I rarely see any movies more than once unless it's brilliant. Buuuuut I promised a couple buddies I'd see it with them, and one wanted to see it earlier than the other so I went with each of them at different times.
The Dark Knight features everything your standard summer action movie does: Bad ass good guys, fun dialogue, explosions, entertaining sound, quick editing, and a convoluted story. Aside from these things it featured elements of quality cinema: good acting, smart and well written dialogue, good cinematography, good lighting, good sound, and a good story among other things. So what does that make The Dark Knight? Well, if I have to give you the answer (See: Title)...
If The Dark Knight is the best commercial film ever made, how should it rank beside the greatest films in history? The Godfather I and II, Blade Runner, City of God, Dr. Strangelove, 2001(ok, name every Kubrick movie). Quite simply, it can't. It's one-of-a-kind. It resides in a category unto itself. This isn't to bash it, far from that. However, for those Sheep who say, "Dude, The Dark Knight is the best movie ever! It's sweet!" to bad, so sad, move on, watch The Godfather and get a clue.

Top Ten

I thought it fitting to post my Top Ten Favorite Films, let the throngs of readers into my mind...

Top 10 Films

1. Blade Runner, 1982
(Directed by: Ridley Scott)(Starring: Harrison Ford, Sean Young, Rutger Hauer)

2. Glengarry/ Glen Ross, 1992
(Directed by: James Foley)(Starring: Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Kevin Spacey, Allan Arkin, Ed Harris, Alec Baldwin)

3. Fight Club, 1999
(Directed by: David Fincher)(Starring: Edward Norton, Brad Pitt, Helena Bonham Carter)

4. Se7en, 1995
(Directed by: David Fincher)(Starring: Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, Kevin Spacey, Gwyneth Paltrow)

5. L.A. Confidential, 1997
(Directed by: Curtis Hanson)(Starring: Russell Crowe, Kevin Spacey, James Cromwell, Guy Pierce, Kim Basinger)

6. Forrest Gump, 1994
(Directed by: Robert Zemeckis)(Starring: Tom Hanks, Robin Wright Penn, Gary Sinise, Kathy Fields)

7. Alien, 1979
(Directed by: Ridley Scott)(Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Harry Dean Stanton, Tom Skerritt, Ian Holm)

8. Gladiator, 2000
(Directed by: Ridley Scott)(Starring: Russell Crowe, Djimon Hansou, Joaquin Phoenix, Connie Nielson, Richard Harris)

9. Die Hard 1988
(Directed by: John McTiernan)(Starring: Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman)

10. Jaws 1975
(Directed by: Steven Spielberg)(Starring: Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw)

Inaugural Moment!

Welcome to 'Do Androids Dream of Moving Pictures?'!
This blog is dedicated to all forms of moving entertainment. Whether it be movies, television, music, sports, catfights, awkward Thanksgiving dinners, etc.
So here it is, I hope you enjoy reading as much as I enjoy writing!

Rdowb