by Dale J. Nauertz

Believe the hype, people: 2007 was a great year for movies! As usual, you have to look past all the big ticket items (especially “Transformers”, which sucked) to find greatness. But it is there, just waiting to be discovered by those willing to look. You’ve got to kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince (which reminds me: “Enchanted” is much better than you might suspect with Amy Adams giving one of the finest performances of the year) but they are out there. I’ve kissed a lot of those cinematic frogs and this is my opportunity to reveal the princes I found in 2007. That way, you can kiss less frogs…or something. I know this introduction is kinda lame, so let’s just get down to it…

(more…)

by Dale J. Nauertz

In years past, I’ve used all sorts of gimmicks (well, okay, one gimmick involving color-coordinating and Homeland Security) to denote films I’m actually interested in seeing between Labor Day and New Years. This time, I’m just going to mention the films I want to see. I’ll number the ten I’m most interested in watching and then mention a few I wouldn’t have to be dragged to. But this year I’m not going to bother listing every movie that’s coming down the pike. Screw that. Life is too short for me to tell you why you shouldn’t give a shit about “Saw IV” or “Alvin and the Chipmunks”. You should already know.

(more…)

By Dale Nauertz

I probably say this every year (though it seems true every year) but this has been a pretty shitty year in film. There have been a few gems, but definitely less than five of them (“V for Vendetta”, “Little Miss Sunshine” and “The Matador” are the only great flicks that come immediately to my mind). On the whole, my attitude toward the year’s films has been one of boredom, disappointment or both. That’s okay, though, because I’ve saved some money (which I proceeded to blow on other things) and read more books than usual. But I’m surprisingly optimistic about what the fall and winter months hold. I have a feeling that all the year’s best movies will be seen in the next three months and that some of them might be pretty spectacular. There are some great filmmakers behind some of these films, and some truly intriguing concepts and premises. They could still suck, of course, nothing is ever surefire, but when it comes to entertainment and enlightenment, these are the films that I’ve got my money on. Like last year’s list, I’m going to use the Homeland Security color scheme to indicate my level of interest in upcoming films. As with our country’s terror alerts, any of these films could escalate from one color group to a group of higher interest based on word of mouth, critical acclaim, a great trailer or a really boring weekend.

Here’s how the color schemes break down:

Green: these are films I have virtually no interest in. In fact, I would do anything in power to stay away from these films. No foreseeable force could make me go. I will not probably not even mention them.

Examples: “Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning” or “The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause” (merely hearing these titles is enough to irritate me)

Blue: I don’t really want to see these either, but if I were drugged, abducted and returned to consciousness in a theater playing one of these films, I wouldn’t be too displeased. (Though I would wonder who the hell would go through such trouble just to get me to see “Gridiron Gang” or Russell Crowe’s “A Good Year”)

Yellow: I would describe my attitude toward any films in this category as “mildly intrigued”. I doubt I’d be intrigued enough to see them in the theater but, as I already mentioned, a great trailer or a really boring day off might be enough to get my ass in a seat.

Examples: “Flushed Away”, “Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny”

Orange: I want to see these, probably even in a theater, but if they’re released the same weekend as something on the red list, they’re gonna have to wait their turn.

Examples: “Casino Royale”, “Fast Food Nation”

Red: Movies I really, really want to see. Unfortunately, it’s a pretty short list.

Now, onto:

The Red Alert List

1. The Fountain

Like “Gangs of New York” this film is making its second appearance on this list. It was supposed to come out last fall/winter, but it didn’t. I was sad. But it’s pretty much a lock that this film is finally getting released in November. Why do I care? The teaser and trailer both looked excellent. The plot, as I understand it, is highly intriguing (Hugh Jackman on a quest for eternal life and the love of that eternal life, played by Rachel Weisz, one of the few women worth searching for over the course of several centuries if you ask me). The visuals are highly arresting. And all of this is being put together by Darren Aronofsky, who hasn’t made a film since 2000’s haunting “Requiem for a Dream”…mostly because he was having so much trouble putting this film together. Brad Pitt was initially supposed to star, but he dropped out. There were the usual studio run-ins and so forth, but despite these complications it seems that this film will finally see the light of day. And I, for one, am psyched.

2. “Southland Tales”

This is the second film from Richard Kelly, the director of “Donnie Darko”. “Donnie Darko” was great and extremely messed up, and “Southland Tales” sounds like more of the same. It’s got The Rock, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Jon Lovitz, Stiffler, Justin Timberlake and John Larroquette in it. Apparently, it’s about the Apocalypse (which takes place in the summer of 2008). I’ve seen a couple clips from this film and they didn’t look amazing, but they certainly looked intriguing. At the very least, it looks just fucked up enough to be a good time. The Internet Movie Database has this film scheduled to come out in November, but they don’t have a specific date listed for it yet and no trailer has yet been released. That isn’t a good sign. The film had quite a buzz going for it earlier in the year, but that buzz evaporated due to a disastrous screening at the Cannes Film Festival. Still, I want to see it. If the French hated it, it could conceivably rock pretty hard. Of all the films on this list, this one is the most apt to end up on my list again next year. Here’s hoping it gets released before its own apocalyptic deadline.

3. “The Prestige”

I’m champing at the bit for this one. I was interested in it by its mere premise: at the turn of the 20th century, two magicians (Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale) start as friends but soon become competitors, each trying to top the other with a more spectacular stage act. David Bowie portrays electrical genius Nicola Tesla (the inventor of radio and many other fine things whose inventions were usually “liberally borrowed” by the likes of Thomas Edison and others) who apparently helps out at least one of these fictionalized Houdinis. Christopher Nolan chose this project as his follow-up to “Batman Begins” (and likely the film that will precede his involvement in its sequel “The Dark Knight”). Between this and “The Illusionist” it seems that early 20th century magic acts are going to be well represented at the box office this fall. I’ve always been intrigued by the world of early 1900’s magic (Harry Houdini and the book “Carter Beats the Devil” are two of my main reasons for this). But, of the two, this is the one that I have more interest in. “The Illusionist” looks interesting and all, but it looks like a romance between an egocentric magician (Edward Norton), a hot chick (Jessica Biel) and some count or something (Rufus Sewell). “The Prestige” looks more mysterious and gothic (judging by its amazingly cool trailer). Plus, the idea of dueling magicians is more interesting than another damn love story. And, just for those of you still on the fence, “The Prestige” has Michael Caine. I rest my case.

4. “Stranger Than Fiction”

Will Farrell stars in a film from the director of “Monster’s Ball” as a man who one day discovers that he can hear someone narrating the events of his life. When he hears that same, narrating voice coming from his TV during a talk show one day he begins to suspect his life might be the creation of a renowned writer, played by Emma Thompson. Unfortunately for Will’s character, Emma Thompson is contemplating the death of his character and he has to somehow stop her. This sounds highly intriguing, though I’m frankly amazed that the script wasn’t written by Charlie Kaufman. It sounds like the brand of absurdity that is his bread and butter. The film looks to be quirky, surreal craziness in the vein of “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” or “Adaptation”. If that’s actually the case, it should be an excellent time. Plus, this might be Will’s chance to branch out and illustrate that he can do more than the ingeniously moronic comedies he seems to specialize in.

5. “Flag of Our Fathers”

It’s another damned war movie, true. But this one is directed by Clint Eastwood, whose recent film output has been better than just about anyone else in Hollywood. Aside from that, and according to the trailer, “Flags of Our Fathers” appears to be move beyond the usual battle, bonding scene, battle template utilized by most World War Two films. The film concerns the battle of Iwo Jima, the boys who raised the flag on Iwo Jima, and the media attention and aftermath of that event, wherein the American military made the boys into celebrities in order to sell war bonds and bolster the financial position of their war machine, which might have been just as important as the strategy of the battles themselves. If it really does concern more than just a seemingly endless stream of Pacific theater battles, and if it is up to par with Clint’s recent cinematic output, then this has an excellent shot at winning “Best Picture”. And kicking the ass, once again, out of…

6. “The Departed”

…Martin Scorsese!!! This film is Marty’s third with Leonardo DiCaprio (one of those things that make you go…Hmmm). I guess Leo must be the DeNiro of his generation after all. All of us ardent DiCapriots were right after all, and all you Leo-haters were simply bothered by his looks. Matt Damon, Alec Baldwin, Martin Sheen and Jack Freakin’ Nicholson are on board as well. As far as casts go, that’s pretty impressive. The film is an Americanization of a pretty terrific Hong Kong thriller called “Infernal Affairs”. Like 98% of Hong Kong thrillers, this one is about people undercover, one a gangster undercover in the police and the other a police officer undercover in a gang. It’s about the nature of identity and good and evil and all the usual Hong Kong action movie themes. Scorsese should have a field day with that sort of material, plus it might give Nicholson the chance to do some wonderful scenery chewing (at which he excels) and Damon and DiCaprio the occasion to face off and be all angsty. This all sounds very promising. And who knows, if Scorsese just does a movie he wants to do rather than flirting with Oscar gold like he has in the past, he might just win one. Just don’t get your hopes up and act all pissy if you lose again, Marty. You’re starting to look like a crybaby.

7. Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

It’s not often that a comedy comes out as controversial as “Borat”. It hasn’t even been released yet and it’s got an entire country pissed off. The president of Kazakhstan has even scheduled a meeting with President Bush to discuss the ramifications of this film…despite the fact that its lead actor, writer and general mastermind (Sascha Baron Cohen) is actually from Britain. I don’t really care about any of that. All I know is that the character of Borat, played by Cohen on his HBO series “Da Ali G show”, is a hilarious creation. On “Da Ali G Show” Borat interacts with average Americans (all of them clueless that he’s only a character) under the guise of making an informative television show for those in his home country of Kazakhstan. These clueless Americans generally embarrass themselves, and a good time is had by all watching. The movie looks like more of the same, but that’s fine by me. Borat’s shenanigans usually leave me in stitches, and I’ve been yearning for a great comedy. “Borat” looks like the season’s (year’s?) best bet.

8. Apocalypto

Mel Gibson’s latest movie is the story of a Mayan sacrifice who rejects his destiny and wants to live. I don’t know this for certain, but I would assume this touches off a bloody revolt. As with Mel’s last film, the movie is not in English, filled with subtitles and is certain to be bloody (from what I remember of Mayan history from high school, they weren’t exactly touchy feely). Why do I want to see this? First of all, I love Mel, no matter what kind of antics he’s up to. Secondly, from the trailer, this movie looks downright, batshit insane. No matter what, it’s bound to be unique.

Orange Alert:

1. “Casino Royale”

I love James Bond movies. I’ve seen them all, even the bad ones (“The Man With the Golden Gun”, “Diamonds are Forever”) and I’m sure that I’ll see this one too. The trailer makes it look pretty good, but I’m still not sold on restarting the Bond franchise…particularly in modern day. The book on which this film is based was damned good, but I’m not sure how it will work in a modern context. Plus, I like Bond the way he is. I don’t need him to be grittier or modernized or blonde. Still, I can’t deny the drawing power of 007. I’d be lying if I told you I was even going to try.

2. “A Night at the Museum”

Ben Stiller is a guard at the New York Museum of Natural History. As it happens, the museum comes to life at night. Basically, that means Ben will have spend the majority of this film running from CGI. So it’s essentially “Jumanji” with Ben Stiller. Hell, it’s even got Robin Williams in it as Teddy Roosevelt. I liked “Jumanji”, I like Teddy Roosevelt (if I had to choose a favorite president, he might be it), and I like that Dick Van Dyke and Mickey Rooney are getting work in this film. Mark my words, this movie may not seem like much now, but it’s going to be one of the season’s surprise hits. Trust me.

3. “The Good Shepherd”

Robert DeNiro directs and Matt Damon stars in the story of the CIA and its evolution over the years. As long as its better than “Syriana”, I’ll be happy. Plus, it’s got Joe Pesci in it. Remember when Joe Pesci got work? Those were good times.

4. “Children of Men”

Alfonso Cuaron follows up “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” with this, an intriguing film about a future where humans can no longer procreate. Clive Owen plays a former activist escorting a mysteriously pregnant woman (Julianne Moore) to a lab in the ocean…or something. I don’t know the specifics, but I am interested. Very, very interested. I like futuristic movies, I like Julianne Moore, and I like Clive Owen. I see no reason not to see this.

5. “Pan’s Labyrinth”

Guillermo Del Toro (director of “Hellboy” and “Blade 2”) is one messed up dude. I am intrigued by this, his latest film, that tells the story of a young girl who enters a labyrinth and discovers that she is a princess who must complete three dangerous tasks in order to achieve her destiny. Underground settings and strange effects are a given. But will David Bowie make an appearance? Time will tell.

6. “For Your Consideration”

The gang behind “Best in Show”, “Waiting for Guffman” and “A Mighty Wind” strikes again. This time they are using their improvisational skills to tell the story of an independent film that gets award consideration come Oscar time. Should be amusing, with some gut-busting moments…just like the others.

7. “Fast Food Nation”

I love the work of director Richard Linklater. Here, he takes on the world of fast food with a little help from Greg Kinnear and Bruce Willis. Could be interesting.

8. “Man of the Year”

Robin Williams plays a Jon Stewart clone who runs for president as a joke. When he gets elected, it turns out the joke is on him. Lewis Black, Christopher Walken, and Laura Linney round out the cast for this, a comedy with a solid premise from director Barry Levinson, who’s never made a downright BAD film and usually guides Williams to some of his better work. He did direct “Good Morning Vietnam”, after all. I’ll go in the hopes that Robin Williams can be funny again.

And there you have it. A not-so-brief list of movies I’ll probably shell out money for. Some of them are bound to suck (in a perfect world, all of these films would be great) and some of them are bound to run too long or have a little too much fat in the middle or perhaps be just too weird for their own damn good, but this list is and has always been about potential. These are the films I’ve found in the upcoming schedule with the potential for goodness, perhaps even greatness.

But moviegoing is like gambling. You roll the dice and take your chances. Unfortunately, as of late, the House usually wins.

By Dale Nauertz

I can honestly say that I cared more about the Olympics curling competition than I do about the impending Academy Awards (though, to be fair, I have spent the past couple weeks mesmerized by the sport of curling, my latest discovery/addiction). Even if I wasn’t a recent curling convert, this statement would likely be true. I’ve seen four out of five of the year’s nominees for Best Picture (for me, that’s a pretty high percentage) but there is only one of them that I think deserves to be there (that would be “Munich”). Otherwise, this year’s Oscars are a fairly dull affair. The Academy isn’t trying to show that it’s hip (as it did when it nominated the “Lord of the Rings” films) and it isn’t trying to be edgy (except when nominating “Munich”). Nope, this year it’s pretty much business as usual. There are the standard crop of bio-pics (“Capote”, “Walk the Line”) and films about Themes with a capital “T” (homosexuality, terrorism, racism). A new crop of usual suspects have emerged over the past couple of years, and they’re all in their usual spots, vying for attention (Frances McDormand, Charlize Theron, Spielberg, Ang Lee). None of the films nominated are bad (none that I’ve seen) and they all try, admirably, to tackle large themes and explore the canvas of life and human nature. It’s just that few of them illustrate what makes the craft of filmmaking such a magical one. “Crash” lacks the punch and emotional resonance of a film like “Million Dollar Baby”. “Good Night and Good Luck” is fine but dry. “Capote” is a great actor’s vehicle but little more. And other, better, passionate films (“The New World”, “Match Point”, “King Kong”) have been largely ignored for bloodless films that profess to be about something Important. So, in typical, Oscar fashion, the Academy hasn’t truly selected the five best films of the year but has, instead, gone after the five most Important films of the year.

But, again, none of this really comes as a shock. The Academy screws it up about ninety percent of the time. They always have. It’s a tradition. So, instead, let’s concentrate on what I think will win. I’m not going to bother with Sound Mixing and all the awards that are, basically, filler to the audience watching at home. I haven’t seen any of the animated shorts or the live action shorts or, hell, even the documentary features, so I’m gonna skip them. (Nobody but the ones nominated really care anyway.) Before I get started, however, I think you should all know that I never do very well selecting the winners at Oscar parties on those little ballots you always get with Entertainment Weekly (though I will be using that handy, little tool to help make my choices). So if you lose a bunch of money playing my choices, don’t come bitching to me: I’ve warned you.

Best Animated Feature

“Howl’s Moving Castle”
“Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride” (that’s a mean way to talk about Helena Bonham Carter)
“Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-Rabbit”

The newest category in the show, and a great addition, I must say. Unfortunately, I’ve only seen one of the nominees in this category. But it’s the one that’s going to win. “Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit” was less entertaining than the Wallace and Gromit shorts (perhaps an hour and a half of these two is just overkill) but since Wallace and Gromit win every time they’re nominated for Best Animated Short, they’re probably a dead lock to bring home the gold here too. Besides, even without seeing the other nominees, I can honestly say that it’s probably the best of the nominated films.

Best Documentary (I know I said I wasn’t going to bother with it…I changed my mind, screw off)

“Darwin’s Nightmare”
“Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room”
“March of the Penguins”
“Murderball”
“Street Fight”

I haven’t seen any of them (and I haven’t even heard of “Street Fight”), but there are really only two nominees here to worry about: “March of the Penguins” and “Enron”. Both of these movies have been on a ton of critics’ top ten lists (and, yes, I do plan on making one of those eventually) and while “Murderball” got a fair share of press, I still remember that the promo show for it aired on MTV and was hosted by Johnny Knoxville. That’s not the sort of movie that wins an Oscar. My pick is “Enron”. We’ve been hearing about the penguin movie all year, but the documentary folks will want to fool everyone into thinking they’ve got a bit more class than that.

Note: This is the first year that I’d actually heard about most of the documentary nominees before reading their names on the ballot. That alone illustrates the renaissance that documentary films are having in our culture. I still haven’t seen them (and neither have you, more likely than not) but I’ve actually heard about most of them!

Best Visual Effects

“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”
“King Kong”
“War of the Worlds”

I still don’t understand why “Revenge of the Sith” wasn’t nominated. It at least had better effects than “War of the Worlds”. But the eight hundred pound gorilla in this category is, well, the eight hundred pound gorilla. “Kong” was simply eye-popping, whereas the others were just quite good. For creating a special effect that made you care enough to cry, “Kong” deserves the gold. (And a few other awards as well…though you may notice that it’s absent from the Best Editing category with good reason.)

Best Adapted Screenplay

“Brokeback Mountain” (Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana)
“Capote” (Dan Futterman)
“The Constant Gardener” (Jeffrey Caine)
“A History of Violence” (John Olson)
“Munich” (Tony Kushner and Eric Roth)

I haven’t seen “Brokeback” or “A History of Violence”, so I can only evaluate the other three, but that doesn’t matter because they never ask me my opinion on these things anyway. Plus, “Munich” is gonna get it. Why? Because it won’t win Best Picture and the Academy will want to give it one or two awards, so winning this award will be something of a consolation prize. If it doesn’t go to “Munich”, then I have no doubt that the award will go to “Brokeback” which is cool, because Larry McMurtry rocks!

Best Original Screenplay

“Crash” (Paul Haggis, Bobby Moresco)
“Good Night and Good Luck” (George Clooney and Grant Heslov)
“Match Point” (Woody Allen)
“The Squid and the Whale” (Noah Baumbach)
“Syriana” (Stephen Gaghan)

The best screenplay in this category is “The Squid and the Whale”, but “Good Night and Good Luck” is going to win. Why? Again, “Good Night” isn’t going to get Best Picture, so here is its consolation prize.

And now, the really big guns, the ones they won’t get to until well after everyone has stopped caring:

Best Supporting Actor

George Clooney (Syriana)
Matt Dillon (Crash)
Paul Giamatti (Cinderella Man)
Jake Gyllenhaal (Brokeback Mountain, as Gay Cowboy #1)
William Hurt (A History of Violence)

Everyone is betting on Clooney for this one, because Clooney has had a hand in two of the most prestigious movies of the year and this is the Academy’s chance to celebrate him. But since they’re going to give him the award for original screenplay, they aren’t going to give him this one. So the Oscar will go to Jake Gyllenhaal. Why? Because “Brokeback” is this year’s “Titanic”, the Academy is going to give it as many awards as it can without making this boring. (If they decide to go boring, then forget what I’m saying everywhere else: if “Brokeback” starts winning the little awards, then sneak out of the Oscar party and change your ballot, because “Brokeback” will win absolutely EVERYthing, just like “Return of the King” did on the year when I got bored senseless and really hit the bottle.)

Best Supporting Actress

Amy Adams (Junebug)
Catherine Keener (Capote)
Frances McDormand (North Country)
Rachel Weisz (The Constant Gardener)
Michelle Williams (Brokeback Mountain)

This is about the tightest race in the Oscars. It’s a dead heat between all five of these ladies, but I think the gold will go to Weisz, and it deserves to. She’s a great actress who deserves to get some recognition. She’s spent years lending class and sex appeal to popcorn flicks like “The Mummy” and “Constantine”, and with “The Constant Gardener” she finally gets to show what she can do when given a truly meaty role in a truly great movie. Simply put, she’s extraordinary. Even though she’s dead for most of the movie, she gives it a sense of energy and a sense of tragedy. She single-handedly elevates the entire movie to a higher level, despite her limited amount of screen time. She literally haunts every frame. That’s an achievement even the Academy can’t ignore.

Best Actress

Judi Dench (Mrs. Henderson Presents)
Felicity Huffman (Transamerica)
Keira Knightley (Pride and Prejudice)
Charlize Theron (North Country)
Reese Witherspoon (Walk the Line)

Judi is too old (and she already has an Oscar). Keira is too young (she’s got plenty of time to woo the Academy again). Charlize already has one. So that leaves Reese and Felicity. Tough call here. Reese is blonde (which the Academy tends to reward), she’s good even when she’s in crap (“Walk the Line” is about the best thing she’s ever done), and she’s playing a real person. All of these are brownie points. But Felicity Huffman has won just about every award they give out this year, so she might pull an upset. I think Reese is going to get it (the Academy is nothing if not dependable) but I wouldn’t be too surprised if Felicity Huffman continues her sensational winning streak. (If Felicity wins it, she will thank hubby William H. Macy in her acceptance speech, thereby causing them to pan the camera toward him, and that’s almost cool enough to make me root for her.)

Best Actor

Phillip Seymour Hoffman (Capote)
Terrence Howard (Hustle and Flow)
Heath Ledger (Brokeback Mountain, as Gay Cowboy #2)
Joaquin Phoenix (Walk the Line)
David Straithairn (Good Night and Good Luck)

I would love to see Joaquin or David win this. Both of them were amazing in their respective roles. I like Heath, and I’m sure that he’s great in “Brokeback” (hell, I loved him in “A Knight’s Tale”), and he’s my second choice to win this. But the Oscar may as well have Hoffman’s name engraved on it already. He’s playing a real guy (again, the Academy thinks this is simply amazing) and, as I’ve already mentioned, the Academy likes to give consolation Oscars to movies that aren’t going to win anything else. “Capote” is a decent movie that got elevated to “great” status simply due to Hoffman’s performance. Without his performance, this movie would have been shown on HBO. With his performance, it gets enough fanfare that it’s nominated for Best Picture. Therefore, Hoffman’s a lock. And good for him, he’s great in everything he’s ever been in (well, maybe not “Twister”). The Academy loves it when an actor perfectly emulates a dead person (see Jamie Foxx in “Ray”). I, on the other hand, think creating a person simply from fiction and making them live and breathe is an amazing achievement. But, again, I am not deciding who gets nominated. If I were, Kevin Costner’s fine performance in “The Upside of Anger” and Jet Li’s stunning work in “Unleashed” would be mentioned here (and no, I am not kidding about Jet Li…he’s that damned good in “Unleashed”).

Best Director

George Clooney (Good Night, and Good Luck)
Paul Haggis (Crash)
Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain)
Bennett Miller (Capote)
Steverino Spielberg (Munich)

The Academy can’t ignore Steve’s stunning achievement all night, and that is why he’s going to get Best Director yet again for “Munich”. Though, it’s going to be a bittersweet affair, because “Munich” isn’t going to get Best Picture. Sorry, Steve. You’ll get the consolation prize here, just like you did for “Saving Private Ryan” and you deserve every ounce of that gold. “Munich” is perhaps the best thriller ever made, skillfully done in every conceivable way and the most challenging film of the year. Steve deserves to win, the Academy knows it, and it’ll be their way of placating him for making them all so nervous with this film.

Best Picture

“Brokeback Mountain”
“Capote”
”Crash”
“Good Night, and Good Luck”
“Munich”

“Brokeback Mountain” has this award in the bag. I haven’t seen it, but anyone who even sporadically checks the internet can see the impact it has had on our entire culture. The gay community finally has its epic, the film that speaks for itself with eloquence and grace (I can tell that much simply from the trailers). It’s not just a movie; it’s a cultural phenomenon, just like “Forrest Gump”, “Titanic” and “American Beauty” before it. It’s a film that stirs up debate and (again, I haven’t seen it, but I’m assuming) puts a human face on a controversial subject. Plus, it doesn’t seem to be rubbing people the wrong way as “Munich” is doing. “Brokeback Mountain” is a film about homosexuality you can take your grandparents to and, since the Academy is primarily composed of grandparents, “Brokeback Mountain” WILL take home the Oscar.

That’s my one prediction you actually CAN bet on.

By Dale Nauertz

The sun shines a little dimmer today…because it no longer shines on Don Knotts.

Don Knotts, best known as Barney Fife on “The Andy Griffith Show” passed away on Friday night at Cedars Sinai hospital in Los Angeles. He was 81 years old. Having just read his biography, I now know that he started his career as a ventriloquist before enlisting in World War II. After the war ended, Don went to New York City to try his hand at acting. It was there that he received his big break, co-starring with a young Andy Griffith in a Broadway play entitled “No Time for Sergeants”. He reprised his role when the same play was turned into a feature film, also starring Andy Griffith. And when Andy got his own television series, well, guess who ended up co-starring in it (not to mention stealing the majority of it).

It’s sort of odd that I loved Don’s work as much as I did, considering that the man’s greatest success was found in a T.V. series I was way too young to have seen in first-run and in movies that were made before my time. But I loved him anyway. When I was a child, we only got one channel, and it was CBS. For the early years of my life, I had no idea that watching “Dallas” on Friday nights was optional. Then I found out there were four other channels one could get, if one had the right kind of antenna. I wasn’t one of those kids who envied kids who got cable. I envied kids that had the full “farmer five” (as the five channels accessible with a mere antenna in southwest Wisconsin are affectionately known). Finally, in third grade, my parents bought the right kind of antenna and a whole new world of entertainment was opened before my disbelieving eyes.

And the king of that entertainment to this particular eight year old was Don Knotts.

Channel 47 became a FOX station eventually, which means that it now shows about three shows worth watching. But there has never, ever been a finer television station than the mid-eighties incarnation of Channel 47 (WMSN TV). They showed a different old movie every night of the week (thus I soon became a fan of guys like Clint Eastwood) and the rest of their programming schedule was old, syndicated shows that were no longer on the air. This can’t be correct, but it seems to me that they showed “The Andy Griffith Show” about four times a day (it was probably only two, maybe three) and during the summer I watched every episode they chose to play. I didn’t just watch them. I absorbed them. (I also absorbed pretty much everything else that was on, “Gunsmoke”, “Rawhide”, “Mork and Mindy”, “The Monkees”, “Leave it to Beaver”, “Kate and Allie”…I guess I never have gotten out much.) I liked Andy and Gomer and Opie and the other characters on that show, but none of them could compete with the sheer comedic bliss of watching Don Knotts do his thing. To my young mind, Don Knotts was like a god. He cracked me up, no matter what. Soon, 47 (and the PBS station, 21) showed old Disney movies that the man had done, and I loved him even more. I devoured every airing of “The Apple Dumpling Gang” and “The Apple Dumpling Gang Rides Again”. The best Herbie movies were the ones featuring Don as a bug-eyed mechanic (according to his filmography, he was only in one Herbie film: “Herbie Goes to Monte Carlo” but it seems to me he was in at least three, that’s how good he was). I even watched “Gus: The Field Goal Kicking Mule” wherein he and Ed Asner coached a football team that was brought to glory once they employed a field-goal kicking mule (whose name was…you guessed it). And, when 47 began showing “Three’s Company” every evening at 9:30, I watched fervently to see the high jinks of yet another Knotts creation: landlord Ralph Furley. Hell, once he became a semi-regular on “Matlock”, I even became an avid viewer of “Matlock”.

There was something magical about Don Knotts’s tightly wound, manic screen creations, with his constant nervous energy ready to explode like a neutron bomb and his eyes nearly popping from his skull as though he were a cartoon character that had been made human. No one has ever captured that same energy. No one has ever managed to replicate the gold standard he set down. I was happy to see him make an appearance, well within the twilight of his career, in “Pleasantville” as an old cable technician who literally opens a world of wonder to Tobey Maguire’s character: a young man who watches way too much classic television. Don had the same affect on me, not quite so literally. Perhaps this was the reason I identified so readily with Tobey’s character in “Pleasantville”, perhaps it was the reason the fantasy of that movie held an element of truth. Don Knotts was more than just a great comedic actor, he was one of the reasons I became interested in filmed entertainment, both television and motion picture. He opened this Pandora ’s Box of delights to me…or, at least, he certainly helped. And I think he even had a hand in shaping my personality. After the hours and hours of footage I once watched featuring the man, I don’t think it could be helped.

Though, for my money, one of his best roles was one of his most overlooked. He made a great Western comedy in 1968 called “The Shakiest Gun in the West”. In this movie he was a frantic, bumbling dentist (thanks to movies I grew up on, I assumed for the longest time that there was no other kind) who makes his way West and is, somehow, mistaken for a famous gunslinger. The premise is absurd, but Don makes something magical and hilarious out of it. I haven’t seen this movie in years, and perhaps it hasn’t aged all that well…but when until the age of eleven, that was one of the greatest films I had ever seen. (And if you don’t laugh when Don goes undercover as an Indian maiden, you may not have a pulse.)

So, in short, I must thank you, Don. You made an impression on me at an early age and helped shape me into the man I am today (in however small a fashion). Your particular genius will never be equaled. Your legacy will live on and inspire kids like myself for decades to come. And, above all, your work will always put a smile on my face and have a special, goofy little place in my heart.

By Dale Nauertz

Well, my online friends and neighbors, ‘tis that time of year yet again: the stores are crowded, the shelves of said stores are getting bare, the forecast calls for snow, Christmas carols are now stealthily slipping their way into radio programming and you’re wondering how the hell you’re going to pay for presents, knowing that the old “You don’t have to get me anything” line is never going to work. Yes, it’s the retail season…er, I mean the Christmas season. This can be an overwhelming time of year, and because I don’t want you to get too frustrated with everything, I think you should just sit down and watch a few movies. But because it’s a busy time of year, I realize that you can’t just sit on your ass watching movies all day long (though that sounds wonderful, doesn’t it?) so I’ve winnowed it down to a manageable level. How about one movie per day, huh? It’s not too hard. You can do it. So your Uncle Dale has compiled a list of twelve movies (and some TV specials to throw in there) to make your Christmas a little bit more magical. See? I’m always looking out for you. Accept these suggestions in lieu of actual presents.

Day 12: “Love Actually”

See, we’re counting down from twelve to number one. Number Twelve is twelve days before Christmas, let us say, and Number One would be Christmas Day itself. “Love Actually” will be a good one to kick things off. It’s an epic, British romantic comedy, so it’s really a good choice for any time of the year. But the film does have a decided Christmas theme to it. It takes place on and around Christmas and concerns itself with people falling in love, conveniently and inconveniently. It’s got just enough sentiment to warm your heart without making you gag on a bunch of sugar. Plus, it’s got great performances by an excellent cast and it’s pretty darn cool, so cool you won’t even mind that it’s a chick flick. Yet, if you like chick flicks, this is a good one to wallow in.

Day 11: “Lethal Weapon”

Yes, that’s right: “Lethal Weapon”. Sure, it isn’t a movie about the wonder of Christmas or a movie that will inspire you to change your life. But it’s a great action movie with great camaraderie between Mel Gibson (who has never been better) and Danny Glover (who’s his usual, dependable self). They’re fighting drug dealers and blowing shit up, and Mel is taking insane chances because he’s suicidal and just doesn’t give a shit (which is an inspired premise, if you ask me). And all this takes place around Christmas. There’s caroling, explosions, Christmas lights, gunfights, a man attempting suicide while watching the Bugs Bunny Christmas special and even a drug deal that takes place in a Christmas tree lot. If that doesn’t put you in the holiday spirit, I don’t know what will. Besides, you can’t handle a moral lesson every day, even in this season. Sometimes, you just need to see things explode, with some tinsel here and there.

Day 10: “Scrooged”

This movie will help you deal with all that Christmas programming that gets crammed down your throat every time you turn on your television. You see, aside from being the best version of the whole Scrooge story that I’ve ever seen (Bill Murray is perfect as a modern day Scrooge with a lump of coal where his heart should be) it’s also a scathing indictment of network television. It’s a wicked, little Christmas flick that’ll have you laughing uproariously, and it will also sneak its way into your heart with a rather touching human message.

Day 9: “ELF”

Finally out on video and DVD, “ELF” is a goofy little yarn with Will Farrell as a human orphan raised by elves who leaves Santa’s workshop to connect with his father, played by a great, gruff James Caan. The movie has a warm heart and a lot of laughs and, even though it’s not the funniest Will Farrell movie (that would, for me, be “Anchorman”) and though it’s not the best Christmas comedy, it’s a charming, sweet, funny little movie that’ll have a smile affixed to your face for an hour and thirty minutes. Plus, it’s got Ed Asner as Santa Claus. That’s right: THE Ed Asner! (And, incidentally, why isn’t Zooey Deschanel, the love interest of this film, a bigger star? She’s so sweet and beautiful and she’s got a remarkable singing voice. There, I’ve gotten that out of my system.)

Day 8: “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”

Jones, Ben and I have a tradition we like to call “Shitty Movie Night” where you rent the crappiest piece of crap you can find and you mock the thing relentlessly (with or without alcohol involved). Well, go rent the Jim Carrey version of “The Grinch”, get some egg nog, spike the hell out of it, and play your own version of “Mystery Science Theater” in the privacy of your own living room. (For this one, I cannot recommend alcohol too highly; it’s just too bad to deal with sober.) How can you not mock the ugly set design, the flat jokes, and the crass commercialism that permeates every frame of enormous lump of coal? For this one, however, you’re going to need some close friends. Suffering alone isn’t very fun. The more people you can torment with one of these shitty films, the better it is for you. Trust me. It’s one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen (perhaps even THE worst) and a perfect candidate for a holiday edition of “Shitty Movie Night”. (But it’s absolutely terrible; don’t say I didn’t warn you.)

P.S.- If “The Grinch” is rented out, or you wanna double your misery with two crappy flicks, go with “Jingle All the Way”. It’s not quite as terrible (few things are) but it’s still pretty shitty, and it’s got a Christmas theme.

Day 7: “Die Hard 2”

If you want a Christmas-themed action movie, you can’t do much better than this one (well, you can do a little better, but we’ll get to that in a few days). You’ve got snow, explosions, Dennis Franz, and more terrorists than you can shake a stick at. The heartwarming moments of this yuletide classic include a snowmobile chase, a plane full of Christmas travelers crashing to their death, and a man getting stabbed in the eye with an ice sickle. It’s the perfect film to watch in order to vent your frustrations after a day of dealing with morons in the mall.

Day 6: “Bad Santa”

Finally, a movie where Santa drinks, pisses himself, is rude to children, has a surly elf, robs department stores, bangs groupies and is just generally pissed off. Billy Bob Thornton is great here as a true piece of shit in a Santa outfit. It’s a bizarre, surreal and utterly vulgar yuletide comedy, with a sneaky sort of moral and a strange bit of compassion snuck into it. Again, a perfect antidote to searching high and low for Christmas presents at every store within a ten mile radius. Plus, it’s absolutely hilarious (if you can handle its sheer, gleeful offensiveness).

Day 5: “Gremlins”

This, my friends, is a true holiday classic, as well as a cautionary tale about not buying a pet for a Christmas present. Sure, Gizmo the Mogwai looks sweet and harmless enough: he looks pretty darned cute with that little Santa hat, he drives a little car, he speaks better English than the average New York cabbie, and he can play a mean keyboard. But if you get him wet, you’ll have to feed a lot more like him, and don’t even think about feeding them after midnight. A little old lady goes rocketing out a window, there’s a bar scene with more rowdy drunks than you find on State Street during Halloween weekend, and Santa gets savagely attacked by a horde of little, green monsters. I’ve always loved this movie, and I’m sure I’m not alone. Christmas is the perfect excuse to revisit this delightful slab of utter carnage.

Day 4: “National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation”

Remember when Chevy Chase was actually funny? Well, this was about the last time. Chevy is great as the well-meaning but accident prone Clark W. Griswald. Clark is determined to give his family the greatest Christmas they’ve ever had and, if you know Clark from the other “Vacation” films, you know just what a recipe for disaster that is. Clark takes Christmas decorating to absurd levels, hits on a girl at the mall, goes sledding (with disastrous results) and the whole holiday ends with a visit from the SWAT team and a barbecued cat. Odd relatives abound, financial woes are prevalent, and egg nog is spiked. It’s sure to remind you of your own holidays than most of the yuletide flicks you’re likely to see. (It does me, anyway.)

Day 3: “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”, “Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown”, “A Garfield Christmas”, “Frosty the Snowman” and the original, accept-no-bloated substitutes “How the Grinch Stole Christmas”

Rent or, better yet, go out and own all of these yuletide classics. Pop up some popcorn, turn down the lights, and pretend that you’re six years old all over again. I’ve seen most of these in recent years and, trust me; they’re still great. They’re a passport back to your childhood, heck, they’re the reasons that you care about this holiday in the first place, am I right? I remember when CBS (the only station we had at our house until I was in fourth grade) would show all of these on one night, about a week before Christmas. Well, thanks to DVD, you can relive that night all by yourself or with as many friends as you want, and you can control the order! Burl Ives as a claymation snowman, Boris Karloff narrating a story about Who’s, Garfield receiving a present from Odie, the gut-wrenching fate of “Frosty the Snowman”, and the lesson we all learned from Charlie Brown’s selection of a Christmas tree. All of these memories can be relived, all these years later and, really, aren’t these the essence of what Christmas is all about? They are to me.

Day 2: Christmas Eve: “Die Hard” followed by “It’s a Wonderful Life”

It’s Christmas Eve, you can treat yourself to two movies! “Die Hard” is the greatest Christmas action film ever made (a small genre of film, but an important one nonetheless). Watching this film on Christmas Eve is a surreal experience, at least it’s always been one for me. It’s like watching a news report on a terrorist situation unfolding in California. Get your last, pre-Christmas dosage of explosions and shootouts, and get a surprising amount of character development in the bargain. After all, John McClane learns what’s really important in life while he’s fighting for it against some nasty, Eurotrash terrorists.

And after you’ve watched Bruce destroy the entire first floor of a building and kill the last of the bad guys, watch Jimmy Stewart slog his way through a pretty crummy life to learn that even a crummy life is worth living in the excellent “It’s a Wonderful Life”. Sure, this movie has become something of a cliché over the years, but it deserves to be watched inevitably every Christmas Eve. It’s a film that makes you appreciate life and the act of living it, a film that will make you realize that, even though Christmas has become grossly commercialized and gets a little less special every year, there is a nugget of something inside the act of celebrating Christmas, a bit of magic left in this season yet, despite every major retailer’s best efforts to destroy that magic. Watching this film is the best thing about Christmas, if you ask me. So watch it, savor it, and wear any tears you manage to cry proudly.

Christmas Day: “A Christmas Story”

I remember a time before this movie was played eighty-seven times on TBS, a time when the film was still special and hilarious, before it had been quoted more times than “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”, before every major network ran it into the ground. It’s a cult classic, really, (kind of like the yuletide equivalent of “Office Space”) about childhood, and about that one toy you want for Christmas (the one toy that, if you’re anything like me, you never actually got). It’s about Christmas a time of intense want, and then it deepens into something more. It’s probably not the best movie on this list, heck, I KNOW it isn’t. But it’s the perfect movie to watch on Christmas morning, mainly because the best scenes of this film take place ON Christmas morning. Most movies, hell, most of our culture treats Christmas Day itself as an afterthought. The Day After Thanksgiving is more of an event in our culture than Christmas Day is. By Christmas morning, Christmas is pretty much over. Well, not in this movie. That’s why you should get up, open your presents and watch “A Christmas Story” before you eat Christmas Dinner and start planning where you’re going to go to return all the presents you didn’t want.

There you have it, a bunch of films (and a few TV shows) to remind you what this holiday is all about…and to keep you entertained after a long day of shopping or ringing bells for the Salvation Army or cooking or whatever it is you choose to do in preparation for Christmas. On behalf of myself and everyone affiliated with this website, I urge you to enjoy yourself, be safe, and watch a few movies. Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, Happy Kwanzaa, and, to all of you who work retail, hang in there, January will be here before you know it!

By Ben Heckendorn

Yo yo Ben H here! A little known fact is that when I’m making building videogame crap or drinking MGD I am a soothsayer! That is, I can predict the future! Amazing, I know. So anyway, since this is a movie site I figured to use my powers to predict “The Top and Bottom Holiday Films of 2005!”

Being an uber-capitalist I don’t mean the best or worst. Nope, just which ones make the big bucks and which STEALTHFULLY flop away into the bargain bin. Why do this, you ask? Why not! When all’s said and done we can look back on this and laugh. Overall I think this holiday season will be pretty big, much better than summer. Of course pundits will attribute this to the now-lower gas prices but it’s the MOVIES themselves that make the difference. (I can see the headlines now: “People brave deadly BIRD FLU to see Harry Potter” What BS) Anyway, let’s get started, going in sort-of chronological order.

November 4th
CHICKEN LITTLE
AKA “Let’s throw away all our 2D animation stuff and do it all on computer now!” Disney Feature Animation Studios, Directed by the guy who did “Emperor’s New Groove” and starring the usual cast of TV and independent film actors.

WILL MAKE: $175 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

“Chicken Little” comes out this Friday and it’ll probably do pretty well. Not on its merits, mind you - it’s got to be the ugliest looking CGI film ever, and that’s a big feat considering I think most CGI films are already ugly. And not from the huge advertising budget either.

Nope, “Chicken Little” will be this year’s “JUMANJI”. (The funnest word to say in all history) See, I worked in a theatre when “JUMANJI” came out and it didn’t make money cause people wanted to see it. It made money because “Toy Story” was always sold out and people went to the next family-friendly poster they saw - “JUMANJI” - the “overflow film”.

Of course there’s no “Toy Story” this year, instead we have the TRUE 800-lb gorilla of the season “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” That movie will sell out faster than a lifeboat store on the “Titanic”. Everyone who arrives too late and gets turned away will go see “Chicken Little”. Guaranteed. Eisner probably knows this, but will say the film is a success because the studio “went 3D, and that’s what the people wanted”.

November 9th
Get Rich or Die Tryin’
AKA “Hey that 8-Mile movie made a bunch of money!”
Starring: Some rapper whose name involves money, ice or the letter T. (shrug)

WILL MAKE: $30-$50 million US
Rating: Bleh

Naturally they’re going for the “8 Mile” ripoff with this one, but I don’t think anyone will really care. I’m not a hip-hop expert but I’m pretty sure M&M (screw his real name, or how to spell the fake one) is, and was, a LOT more popular than this 50 cent piece dude. But of course they probably got this sucka in the can for 20 mill (or 20,000 G’s) so they’re pretty much assured of not going broke. Or dyin’ tryin’.

November 11th
Zathura
AKA “JUMANJI 2 – Electric Boogaloo”
Starring: Some kids, outer space, robots. Released by Sony “We’re reverting to the kind of shit we released in the early 90’s” Pictures (Columbia)

WILL MAKE: $35-$50 million US
Rating: BOMB (based off expense of film)

Who gives a fuck about this movie? It’s been 10 years since JUMANJI, and they’re trying to say this is part of the (bleh) “franchise” I hate movie franchises. Or the term at least. Movies are supposed to be about art. Franchises are about selling shitty hamburgers.

Anyway, same plot as Jumanji but the “spillovers” from Harry Potter and the Cash Cow of Doom will go to “Chicken Little” instead since its ad budget appears to be 100 times that of Zathura. Plus it’s easier for kids to say “Chick N Lit Tul” than this phonetic abortion.

Who the hell calls a movie “Zathura”? It’s hard to say, isn’t fun to say, and sounds like a character from Olivia Newton John’s “Xanadu” or “Legend”. “JUMANJI”, while a bullshit word, was at least easy to remember and of course, really fun to say. Try yelling out “JUMANJI!” at the top of your lungs some time, you’ll have a blast.

The title IS important, Hollywood. You’d be surprised how many people pick which movie they’ll see by just going to the theatre and looking at the posters. Do some research on that once, and you’ll realize people probably think the following when they see some titles:

“The Constant Gardener” – a Martha Stewart movie?
“Jarhead” – somebody who cans a lot of fruit?
“Aeon Flux” – a paste that helps you solder?

November 18th
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
AKA “All your money are belong to us”
Starring: The Harry Potter gang. Released by Warner Brothers.

WILL MAKE: $350-$400 million US
Rating: UBER-SMASH HIT of 2005

Harry Potter 4 is going to make so much money it’s not even funny. Utter shit-loads. Titanic-loads. Something to think about is “Goblet of Fire” was the book released in 2000, when the Potter phenomenon really took off, so it’s the one everyone remembers. (And supposedly the best, but I wouldn’t know, shucks, I don’t do much book readin’).

I don’t know what else to really say. It’ll be the biggest hit of the year, trouncing Star Wars, and probably one of the biggest hits of all time. The kids will all flock to it, and the adult readers, who would flock to it anyway, will flock even faster since it’s rated PG-13. Oh I know what to say while I’m hear. I am quite sick of would-be pedophiles who go on and on about how hot Emma Waston will someday be. Ug! I guess with the Olsen Skanks turning 18 somebody had to be the “next big thing” Just watch, 5 years from now we’ll see Emma Waston in “Aeon Flux 2” or “20 Things I Hate About You” Then her career will promptly vanish and she’ll be reduced to Sci-Fi channel original pictures or an extra on Stargate: Atlantis SVU.

November 18th
Walk The Line
AKA “That Ray movie was well-received, let’s find another dead singer to exploit”
Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon and some other people. Released by 20th Century Fox

WILL MAKE: $40-$60 million cash US
Rating: Eh.

Actresses have it easy – when they want an Oscar all they have to die is take off their shirt. Actors on the other hand must always play dead famous people, preferably ones with mental defects. Thus Joaquin Phoenix pines for an Oscar with “Walk The Line”, a movie about the life of Johnny Cash.

I dunno – I’m not to hot on obvious Oscar-grab movies. I like Cash and all but I don’t give a rat’s ass about this movie. Now a “How Cameron Met Paxton” movie – THAT I’d see.

November 23rd
Rent
AKA “Hey we’re only 3 years behind Chicago!”
Starring: A bunch of people who sing I guess. Directed by… Chris Columbus? Released by Sony “Bombs R Us” Pictures

WILL MAKE: $20-$40 million cash US
Rating: Cheap bomb (dirty bomb?)

I actually like musicals a lot but I don’t care about this thing. My feeling is nobody else will too, or they’ll go see “The Producers” instead. There’s no star power as with “Chicago” and I have a feeling it just won’t be as good, so no word of mouth. Damn sell your Sony stock NOW!

December 2nd
Aeon Flux
AKA Zit on the ass of Cameron’s upcoming Battle Angel Alita
Starring: Charlize Theron. Directed by… oh probably some music video director. Released by (please don’t be Sony…) THANK GOD! Paramount Pictures.

WILL MAKE: $10-$20 million cash US
Rating: NUCLEAR BOMB

I’ll be upfront you with – I am going to this movie. Jones and I have already decided this will be the first official “in theatre” Shitty Movie Night. Plus he’s a Charlize fan and apparently has actually SEEN the old Aeon Flux show on MTV. But on to why they made this…

How much crack do these execs smoke? I mean really? “Let’s make an expensive sci-fi movie based off a 10 year old MTV show that ran for 1 season” Oh fucking BRILLIANT. Even the uber-popular “Beavis and Butthead” show didn’t translate into big box office bucks, and they actually released the film close enough to the show to be relevant.

Of course what do I know? Maybe it’s policy to make X number of bombs per year to wipe out the profits from successful films. I mean, as long as everyone gets paid on a film who cares if it makes money? Too bad real life isn’t like that. “I will spend 100 grand on a house and sell it for 35 grand, and that’s FINE!” Sheesh.

Final thing – Charlize Theron. OK she won her Oscar using the OTHER method for actresses (extreme weight change) but still. Why does every actress immediately make SHIT after winning an Oscar? Oh right, the money. A short list to make you cry:

Mira Sorvino – “Mighty Aphrodite”, then “Replacement Killers” and “MIMIC”
Angelina Jolie – “Girl, Interrupted”, then “TOMB RAIDER”
Halle Berry – “Monster’s Ball”, then, ug, “CATWOMAN”.
Nicole Kidman – “The Hours”, then THE STEPFORD FUCKING WIVES

And I’m sure Hillary Swank is reading the script for “Pong: The Movie” as we speak.

December 9th
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
(Longest title since “Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl”)
Starring: A bunch of kids, a lion, a witch and get this – a wardrobe!. Directed by Andrew Adamson. Released by Disney.

WILL MAKE: $150-$200 million US (possibly even more)
Rating: HIT

I think I actually read this book like a zillion years ago. I can’t remember what happened, but it seems like it was a fairly popular tale. Kind of for kids I think. Anyway this is Disney’s knee-jerk slap themselves in the face reaction for passing on “Lord of the Rings” and I think they’ll do OK with it. By the time it comes out everyone will have already seen “Harry Potter” 16 times so it’ll have room to breathe.

Supposedly this movie has a Christian undercurrent to it – I can’t recall. That won’t hurt the box office, if anything it’ll help. I mean, “Passion of the Christ” anyone? I think people are possibly getting a little sick of the agnostic or evolutionist approach in most films, or the fact if God is used at all it’s just in passing or from the “religious nut” character. I mean, I actually think a “Ten Commandments” remake would be a huge, huge hit. Maybe I’m wrong. But I bet “Chronicles” proves me right. To paraphrase Wesley Snipes: “Always bet on God!”

December 14th
King Kong
Starring: Naomi “I was in Tank Girl” Watts, Jack Black and a big CGI ape. Directed by Peter Jackson. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $150-$200 million US (tops)
Rating: DISAPPOINTMENT

Mark my words now – this will be the sure-fire “big disappointment” of the season. Sure it’ll make money, but with a cost of over $200 million, not counting advertising, it’ll fall short of what they want. I’m sure it’ll be interesting, have good effects, blah blah blah, but I just don’t think people will care. Really all it has going for it is “from the director of Lord of the Rings”.

In 1933 King Kong was something filmgoers had never seen before. The 1976 remake was pretty cheesy but it did OK, despite the flood of “disaster” films it was released during. Now we have Kong 2005.

The problem here is we’ve all seen “Jurassic Park”, which set the standard for all the “run away from the monster” movies that have come since. And these movies are always the same: A monster is on the loose/attacks. People are not directly killed by it, or it is shown off-camera. Lots of cars are thrown around. The monster attacks or is seen near well-known landmarks. Most of the action involves people “jumping out of the way” of things. (falling cars, girders, electrical lines) Again nobody thinks to, oh I don’t know, SHOOT the bad creatures.

This same kind of conflict-less bland crap is evident in the Kong 2005 trailer. Actually, half that trailer is about them finding Naomi Watts and her walking onto a ship, so we may be in more trouble than we think (or the effects weren’t ready, a more likely scenario) The “people making a movie within a movie” thing never works, it always comes off as phony and pretentious. (Plus making movies is actually extremely boring and monotonous) It only really worked in “Ed Wood” since that’s what the movie was about rather than just a scene or two.

Maybe I’ll be wrong and this film will rock. But I’m not a Peter Jackson fanboy so I won’t believe it til I see it. I just have this feeling this movie is just going to be seen as another “monster on the loose” flick by most people. I mean, in 1998, even with the amazing duo of Bill Paxton and Charlize Theron “Mighty Joe Young” didn’t do squat. (Paxton: “Oh shit! A giant monkey! Game over man!”) We’ll see if people go ape-shit for this or not.

December 14th
Diary of a Japanese Hooker
Starring: A bunch of people. Directed by Rob Marshall. Released by Dreamworks.

WILL MAKE: $100-$150 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

I didn’t read this book of course. Seems like Spielberg was gonna do this flick for the longest time (just like Indy 4) but now Rob “Chicago” Marshall is taking a whack at it. He’ll probably whack it out of the park.

I think it’ll make money because 1) it was a book 2) it’ll have that “Dances with Wolves” meets “Bridges of Madison County” meets “The Last Samurai” thing going 3) it seems like an “important” film that people will check out. The older crowd will see it, and they’re the SECRET WEAPON of smash hits (cough cough “Titanic”).

December 16th
The Producers
Starring: Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, the Kill Bill chick. Directed by… beats me… Not Mel Brooks, I know that. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $50-$100 million US
Rating: Eh.

I haven’t seen the original movie or the new stage play. But it’s cool Mel Brooks is still kicking out stuff. Anyway, what to say about this… It won’t be a “Chicago” sized hit, but maybe close. Will knock out Rent with the electric bill to spare. Again the “play within a play within a movie” thing is always kind of confusing. Sure it works on Broadway but that’s Broadway, we’re talking about a theatrical release here. It’ll do alright, but it’s certainly not the next “Sound of Music”.

December 23rd
Munich
Starring: Eric Bana and the New Bond. Directed by Steven “The Kids Can Never Die!” Spielberg. Released by Universal.

WILL MAKE: $100-$150 million US
Rating: SUCCESS

Here’s the controversial movie of the year! (or so they say) Apparently this is about some assassins and the 1972 Olympics. I don’t know much more than that, but it involves 1) terrorism 2) past events 3) Steven Spielberg so it’s guaranteed to be a hit. People will go just to see it as it’ll likely raise a lot of questions and debate. Let’s just hope it has more balls than “War of the Worlds” and its “resurrected from the dead” Tom Cruise’s son.

Well there you have it. My (sort of) complete list of box office hits and misses. This list is surely so accurate you can buy or sell stock of studios right now! Your profit margins will be amazing! Have fun and see you at the movies!

By Dale Nauertz

Hello friends and neighbors. It’s that time of year again. The time when I enlighten all of you as to the few films yet to arrive in the remaining months of the year that I actually care to see. Last year, you may remember (and if not, you can look last year’s installment up in the Essays section of the site) there wasn’t anything that I was really frothing at the mouth to check out (“The Life Aquatic” was the top of that list by default) but I managed to scare up ten movies all the same. This year is more of the same. Though, I must admit, I am chomping at the bit to see a couple of these. I’m not willing to lose a finger or take time off from work for any of them, but I have a heavy interest. In fact, to illustrate my level of interest, I have devised a color coded system reminiscent of the one our Department of Homeland Security uses to tell you how close to shitting your pants with fear you should be over the latest, vague terrorist threats the CIA has discovered (Go here in case you have no idea what I’m talking about). Therefore, I shall compile several lists; each list organized by the level of interest I have and each level of interest represented by a corresponding color.

Green: signifies films I have no interest in, but which still exist for some reason. I won’t be mentioning them on this list because, really, what’s the point? I don’t care about them, and you shouldn’t either. They were a waste of the filmmaker’s time (from the looks of things) and they shouldn’t bother you either.

Example: “The Man” with Eugene Levy and Samuel L. Jackson.

Blue: I probably won’t mention many of these either. These are films I would not actively flee from if I found myself trapped in a theater where they were playing, but films that I would not, ideally, put myself in a position to see. Unlike the green list, however, I would not be tempted to gnaw my arm off to escape.

Example: “Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo”. It looks terrible, but I’ll probably end up seeing it someday because I enjoyed the first one. Still, my money could be spent on better things.

Yellow: movies I want to see, sort of. They’re not high priority, but I’m not ruling them out. I may even see them in the theater, if I have absolutely nothing better to do with my time.

Example: “V for Vendetta” with Natalie Portman and some guy in a weird mask overthrowing a fascist government…probably by using “bullet time”.

Orange: these are movies I want to see, and have a great deal of interest in, but if they come out the same weekend as anything on the “Red” list, they’ll have to wait their turn.

Example: “The Legend of Zorro”. Yeah, it’s an unnecessary sequel, but it looks like it could be fun.

Red: Movies I really, really want to see. These are films that I cannot wait for.

Example: “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”.

Now, let the games begin!

RED ALERT FILMS:

1. “Elizabethtown”

Cameron Crowe is one of my personal gods of filmmaking. I’ve never seen a bad film with him at the helm, and I’ve only seen one that was less than amazing (“Singles”). He wrote and directed this story about a man (Orlando Bloom, here’s hoping he can act without carrying a sword…hell, here’s hoping he can ACT) going to a Southern town he’s never been to (the city of the title) to bury his father there. Along the way, he encounters relatives he’s never met and a plucky, charming flight attendant (Kirsten Dunst) who changes his life…or something. It sounds a bit like “Garden State”, but that’s all right. I’d take a warmed-over version of “Garden State” over most things I’ve watched at the theater this year. And with Crowe in charge, I’m sure there will be some unexpected delights that will take this movie to wonderful places you never thought it would or could go. In short, it looks to be a well-written, uplifting movie, the sort that Crowe could probably make with his eyes closed.

2. “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”

I blame Stephen King. Seriously. I’d heard about the Harry Potter books, but I’d never really paid them much mind. I thought they were only for kids. I had known adults who had read them, but not many of them, and they were usually adults with kids anyway. But then I read a book by King called “On Writing”. In the back of that book, he mentioned recent books he thought were well done. The Harry Potter tomes were on that list. For me, you see, King is a gateway writer, the literary equivalent of pot. He’s a great writer, and he’s been my favorite forever. So whenever he recommends a book or a writer, I give them a shot. He’s the reason I had devoured the Potter books (the ones that were out, anyway) within a couple of months. (He’s also the reason I gave a book called “Fargo Rock City” a chance, thanks to a blurb by him on its cover. Now I’m a huge Chuck Klosterman fan. I have a lot of things to thank Steve for.) Needless to say, I’ve seen all the Potter films so far, and I like all of them. The third one has the most artistry, but I admire the slavish adaptations of the first two as well because they are literally (no pun intended) like the books I fell in love with in the first place. Of all the books, “Goblet of Fire” is my favorite thus far. It’s a riveting, action-packed read that develops the characters nicely, has the best set pieces of the series, and is darker than all the rest. It’s like “Harry Potter and the Temple of Doom”, at least in the last couple chapters. The prospect of this phenomenal book being turned into a film has me excited, especially since it’ll be rated PG-13, hopefully preserving the unsettling darkness of the final chapters. Trust me, if it’s even close to the book, it’ll be a great time.

3. “Serenity”

After “Sith” hit theaters, I realized that my main source of sci-fi goodness had come to an end. I therefore ventured out to find new science fiction arenas that would hopefully thrill me half as much, worlds that had leapt from the writers’ imagination with that same spark George Lucas had brought to his films. For some reason, “Star Trek” has never really done this for me. “Farscape” is good, I like it a lot, but there are still a few things about it that just don’t sit well with me (an overdose of quirkiness, perhaps). “Firefly”, however, was just right. I got it for free from Amazon.com when I opened a Visa card account with them, and I blew through the DVD set, saddened when I had watched the last of the fourteen, all too short episodes. I wanted more. Thank God those magnificent idiots at Universal decided to give Joss Whedon (creator of “Firefly” as well as “Angel” and “Buffy”…neither of which are half as compelling as “Firefly”) fifty million bucks to bring these characters and this universe to the big screen. Thank God, as well, that Whedon used the same actors as he did on the show. Thank God he didn’t replace Nate Fillion’s unique brand of bad-ass cool, for example, with that of some schmoe like Josh Hartnett or Mel Gibson. I loved this show, and I love the trailers for this movie. It hits theaters on September 30th. That gives you all plenty of time to rent “Firefly” off Netflix and find out just how great it is. I’ve already converted my brother-in-law. Trust me, it’s great stuff.

4. “Lord of War”

Nicolas Cage movies end up on this list almost every year, I think. Maybe it’s because, when he’s at the top of his game, there are few people in movies that I would rather watch. When a director knows how to make use of him, few actors are better. He essays a sense of quirkiness and fun, but never at the expense of character or of the overall film. Like Johnny Depp, he’s a great cinematic oddball…most of the time. In the wrong director’s hands, however, he can be a giant sleeping pill (“Windtalkers” and “Captain Corelli’s Mandolin” spring to mind). The trailer for this movie looks fantastic, with Cage playing a supercool international arms dealer. This movie looks to do for gun merchants what “Blow” did for coke dealers. This is to make them damned entertaining, as well as thought provoking, subjects. Hell, it looks so good that even the presence of Ethan Hawke doesn’t irk me.

5. “Munich”

Steven Spielberg is now filming this tale about a Mossad agent (Eric Bana) tracking a group of Palestinian terrorists responsible for killing a group of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics, but it will allegedly be ready by Christmas. This sounds like one of Spielberg’s ballsiest projects yet, and he’s been doing some ballsy stuff lately, like turning the alien invasion genre on its head with “War of the Worlds”. “War of the Worlds” was basically about terrorists from another planet, after all. If Spielberg gives us the hard-hitting, gritty drama that I think he will, this should be a shoe-in for Best Picture consideration. Considering his recent track record, however, it’ll probably be an excellent movie that fumbles somehow in the last twenty minutes. But the closest thing he’s done to perfection lately was “Catch Me If You Can”, another movie based on real events, so I’ve got some real hope for this one. If nothing else, it should be interesting to watch.

6. “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang”

Before Quentin Tarantino emerged, Shane Black was the “It” writer of the Hollywood scene. It’s hard to fathom in retrospect, but “The Long Kiss Goodnight” was actually the highest selling screenplay of its time. In fact, with his concoctions of well conceived action, colorful dialogue, rampant profanity, dirty jokes and guy talk, he may even have been the forerunner of a guy like Tarantino. After “Long Kiss”, however, Shane disappeared from Hollywood without a trace. Now he’s back, having written and directed this film which stars Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. That seems like an odd combination (well, actually, it seems like an uninsurable combination) but those are sort of Black’s specialty. Look at Damon Wayans and Bruce Willis in “The Last Boy Scout” or Danny Glover and Mel “Riggs” Gibson in the first two “Lethal Weapon” flicks, all written by Black. Those are great teams. If Black knows what he’s doing (and I, for one, believe that he does) then perhaps he has crafted another winning team with this tale of a thief posing as an actor playing a detective (tutored by gay detective Val Kilmer). It’s a great concept, and it’s got a fun trailer. Plus, I’m personally happy to see one of my favorite screenwriters working again. This man is the M. Night Shyamalan of action cinema (and his worst movie is arguably better than “The Village”).

7. “The Producers”

I can’t afford to go to the Broadway show, so this will have to do: a movie version of the musical based on the ‘60’s Mel Brooks film about a Broadway producer and a neurotic accountant intentionally making a Broadway flop. Matthew Broderick and Nathan Lane are reprising the roles they made their own and Uma Thurman and Will Ferrell are on hand for support. I own the soundtrack to the Broadway show, and it is hilarious. I can’t wait to see the actions that go along with it. It should be a rollicking good time.

And those are the only ones I have a burning desire to see. Now we move on to…

ORANGE ALERT FILMS:

1. “Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-rabbit”

The big-toothed inventor with a penchant for cheese and his intelligent dog sidekick has always been a big source of amusement for me, and now they have their own movie. Hooray!

Wallace and Gromit in the Curse of the Were-rabbit Trailer

2. “Waiting…”

I love Ryan Reynolds, even when the movie he’s in is less than stellar. He always gives his best, and I appreciate it. Plus, with his sardonic air and hipster quality, he sort of reminds me of a modern Chevy Chase…back when Chevy was still regularly funny. He’s in this movie which, from the trailer, looks ready to do for waiters what “Office Space” did for office workers. Justin Long, Anna Farris, hilarious stand-up comic Dane Cook and Luis Guzman co-star.

3. “The New World”

I didn’t like “The Thin Red Line”. I thought it was, to quote Mel Gibson’s opinion of his own “Million Dollar Hotel”: “as boring as a dead dog’s ass”. That was directed by Terrence Malick, who also did “Badlands” and “Days of Heaven”, neither of which sucked. In fact, they were gorgeous. And I hated “Alexander” which starred Colin Farrell and Christopher Plummer. They are both in this film. And yet, somehow, I have a good feeling about this one. Mostly because it tells the story of the explorers who “discovered” America (well, after Columbus) and I find that to be an interesting and largely unfilmed portion of history. So I will check out this movie. But if it had less people who had made movies I disliked involved, it might have made it to the Red Alert status.

4. “Shopgirl”

I want to see this because, deep in my heart, I still hope that Steve Martin can be funny. He’s had a dry spell with everything he’s done since “Bowfinger”, but I still have my fingers crossed for this movie where he apparently falls in love with a retail clerk played by Claire Danes. It’s based on a book he wrote. Please, Steve, don’t screw this up.

5. “The Fountain”

I had almost completely forgotten about this film until an afternoon I spent leafing through magazines at Barnes and Noble (one of my favorite, cheap pastimes) and discovered via Premiere magazine that it’s actually slated to come out this year. It’s a story from director Darren Aronofsky (the possible lunatic who made “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream”) about a man traveling through time to save the woman he loves…or something. Hugh Jackman (sans claws) is the time traveler and Rachel Weisz is the woman in question. Apparently, this film spans from the conquistador days of the 16th century to a spaceship in the year 2500. Wow. The film was originally set to have Brad Pitt as its lead, but he skipped out to have sex with Angelina Jolie or something. Oh well, I like Hugh Jackman and with Aronofsky in charge, this film is bound to have at least a couple of screws loose. It sounds lighter than his usual fare…but then again, maybe it isn’t. Only time will tell.

6. “The Legend of Zorro”

Seven years after the fact, we get a sequel to “The Mask of Zorro”. Now, “The Mask of Zorro” was a diverting bit of entertainment (and it did introduce most American males to the natural resource that is Catherine Zeta Jones) but I doubt anyone was clamoring for a sequel to it. Hell, most people have probably forgotten the original film even exists. I know I pretty much forget about it until I recognize it lurking in my DVD collection…and even then I am rarely prompted to pop it in. Whenever I DO happen to pop it in, however, I realize it’s a fun, entertaining and action-packed film filled with beautiful women, luscious cinematography and cool swordplay and horse stunts. Here’s hoping that this sequel will have more of the same…though, sadly, without Anthony Hopkins and with a less attractive incarnation of Catherine Zeta Jones. (Truthfully, I’m not sure if Catherine is really any less attractive…I think it’s just that I’ve gotten tired of seeing her over the past decade. It’s like the Grand Canyon: if you saw it on the cover of a magazine every day, you’d stop caring after while.)

7. “The Transporter 2”

I love Jason Statham. I think he’s set to become the leading action hero of his generation. And I loved “The Transporter” despite the fact that there wasn’t a brain in its head. It’s just a good time, nothing more. So I hope this will be a good time too…though I have my doubts.

8. “Ice Harvest”

John Cusack hasn’t done anything that I’ve found intriguing for a while, but hopefully this allegedly dark thriller set around Christmas-time, co-starring Billy Bob Thornton, and directed by Harold Ramis will change that trend. That’s about all I know about this movie, but it’s enough to pique my interest.

And that’s about all for the movies on my Orange Alert list.

YELLOW ALERT FILMS: 

“Proof” 

Probably an Oscar bait movie: it has Gwyneth Paltrow, Hope Davis, and Anthony Hopkins in it. It’s about a dying math genius and his daughters, I think.

“The Libertine”

A dark, period drama starring J