Jubal (1956)

Jubal's the new guy on the ranch but he's no slouch. In no time, he's got everyone's attention: the boss (Ernest Borgnine) wants to make him the foreman, the boss's wife wants to make him her boy-toy, and the former big man in the bunkhouse (Rod Steiger) wants to make him dead because Jubal's been offered the two jobs he's been eyeing for himself.

Most scenes play out nicely -- lots of bubbling tension I was never quite sure would break the wished-for way. Even Steiger comes off alright, despite the weird choice to deliver many of his lines more like a revival meeting preacher than a ranch hand.

B

The Wrong Box (1966)

As I was watching the opening credits, Gary comes through and says "what's this?" I said, "a British comedy from the '60s that has Michael Caine and Peter Sellers in it." He goes, "that could go either way."

Pity it didn't go my way.

D+

The Savages (2007)

From what we're told, dad was an asshole when he was raising his son and daughter by himself and pretty much disappeared completely from their lives once they were old enough to get out on their own. So, while I can understand why they both would feel a responsibility to get him squared away in a facility when his girlfriend dies and he's suffering from dementia, what I didn't understand was why the daughter would feel it necessary to throw in seemingly manufactured displays of affection along with the undeserved care.

Can you tell this kind of hits close to home for me? I mean, even though I can relate to the adult children in this film (they neither like nor spend time with their toxic parents), I still found myself wondering why this story needed to be told. And, if so, is this representation the most common way for this situation to play out?

Everyone does a fantastic job filling out the roles -- but I just didn't really like Laura Linney's self-centered "it affected me!" character, and she's obviously the one for whom we're supposed to root.

B-

The Illusionist (2006)

I liked the moody feel -- but not the almost cartoonish portrayal of the crown prince/villain. He was so predictably ridiculous in his superiority that it was almost too easy to see that the illusions were created for his benefit.

I also did not much care for the fact that there is still magic unexplained. The delight of the superior movie "The Prestige" is that the puzzling bits are revealed at the end and it all makes sense. In this one, the police chief (impossibly) figures out what was done but the HOW -- the giant HOW -- is dismissed, something I'm assuming his inquisitive nature wouldn't allow.

So, it's got a nice vibe but a disappointing ending, and that costs it a letter grade.

C+

The Human Stain (2003)

Anthony Hopkins is a literature professor accused of racism for uttering these words in reference to two students who've never, in five weeks, set foot in his class: "do they exist? Or are they spooks?" Well, hell -- the unseen kids turn out to be black and lodge a complaint. What an idiotic premise. "Do they exist? Or are they negroes?" would be nonsensical...so it's pretty plain that's not what he was attempting to say.

That's just the first five minutes or so of what becomes a mumbly message movie about fleeing the past and being true to yourself. It's pretty bleak and, unfortunately, rather pretentious & boring.

C-

Surf's Up (2007)

Animated mockumentary covering the competitive world of penguin (and chicken) surfing. And it's about 80 times more entertaining than that little description can convey.

My husband, younger son, and I watched this and Ratatouille within a couple hours of each other and we all judged this the more entertaining movie.

B

Scream of Fear (1961)

Fantastically atmospheric movie that involves a wheelchair-bound girl, a dead dad who keeps popping up, and a mysterious stepmother.

It's a short one, just 81 minutes, but I think it really hits its peak at about the one-hour mark. Though there are still a couple surprises in the last 20 minutes, nothing satisfies in the same way the first ending (or what I THOUGHT was the ending at the time) did.

Good performances in this crisp, very-little-nonsense thriller.

B+

Ratatouille (2007)

Remy is a rat with an unusual talent: he can tell, by smell, which flavors will work beautifully together and which should remain apart. Remy's family doesn't appreciate this refinement because they're, you know, rats. So, Remy kind of catches a "live your dreams!" break when he becomes accidentally separated from his clan, winds up in Paris, and joins forces with a gangly kitchen boy credited with preparing a soup that was actually Remy's work.

But then things just get bland and predictable. There's a villain, a love interest, grand success, out-of-control pride, betrayal, failure, and reunion -- and I could see it all coming several beats before it hit the screen. I also didn't think Patton Oswald worked as the voice of Remy. He already looked like a rat...did he have to sound like one too?

I do want to mention that this movie would be a "C+" if it weren't for a stunning scene near the end when a feared restaurant critic first tastes the dish made for him. It was so marvelous that tears came to my eyes immediately --I was surprised and truly embarrassed that it made me so emotional.

B-

Charlie Wilson's War (2007)

Charlie Wilson's a Dean Martin version of a Senator: booze and women flow freely and he seems rather unconcerned with much else. But then he catches a television report on Afghanistan and their impossible fight against the Soviets and decides to use his power to throw too little cash at the problem...which puts him on the radar of those who have a REAL interest in the fight.

The best part of this movie is the way in which it was told: namely that it included, rather than excised, everyday humor. It didn't feel as though the comedy was punched-up artificially, but that it was allowed to just stay where it belonged. Everyone laughs at odd times and looks silly at others and sometimes focuses on pleasure when there are pressing issues at hand -- removing those truths from a narrative is unrealistic and I'm glad they didn't do so here.

I'm to the point where I find Julia Roberts' presence in a film more of a distraction than a help. She doesn't ever fill a role so beautifully that I can't imagine a dozen actresses doing at least as well and she usually seems so dang pleased with herself. However -- a supporting role as a socialite who is so dang pleased with herself is a pretty good fit.

B+

Tom, Dick and Harry (1941)

Flighty cutie finds herself engaged to three men and has to make up her mind which she'll pick. I'm not sure why any of these guys fell for her in the first place as she's one of those annoying baby-talking types who -- let's face it -- has a wandering eye.

There are several bizarre dream sequences in which she imagines married life with each of the guys (and, in one case, ALL of the men at once). Most of these dreams involve children who are simply scaled-down adults, a more disturbing image than you'd think.

Burgess Meredith as one of the suitors has charm to spare, but that's not enough to make up for the lack of charm in everyone else OR the dearth of humor.

C-

I'm Not There (2007)

I often avoid a movie based on my perception of its pretension level and this one was at the top of my "stay away" list. So, when Cate Blanchett was nominated for it and I had to reverse my anti-watch decision, I wasn't too happy. Still, it sometimes happens that I'm surprised by a film I was sure I'd hate (Capote springs to mind) -- but, crap, this wasn't one of those.

So. Six different people play six versions of Bob Dylan (though none are called "Bob Dylan") and the narrative bounces between these story lines that seem as though they could never be about the same person...which is probably the point. I'm sure I missed some references that were strictly for Dylan devotees. Heck, from my seat, it seemed as though ALL of the movie must be for Dylan devotees because it sure didn't make any sense to me.

I found it tedious and stuffed with self-congratulation. The only salve to my seething irritation was Cate Blanchett's portion of the film. She made her scenes come to life and was thoroughly entertaining every time she opened her mouth. I wouldn't be upset in the least if she won the statue -- and that's pretty high praise from someone who was not impressed by the whole containing the part.

D+

La Vie en Rose (2007)

Well, the make-up is amazing. They took this girl:
and turned her into this:
But, in the end, it's one of those "I have talent, so I'll be a selfish diva around whom the world revolves" stories. I don't much care for those.

I also didn't care much for the fact that almost every scene was out of order. We'd go from 1959 to 1916 to 1963 to 1940 and back again to wherever with no real reason that I could see other than it probably seemed edgy to do so. All it actually did was keep me a little confused about where we were in the story.

C

Juno (2007)

No doubt about it, the dialogue is clever. Maybe too clever. Maybe so clever that I kept thinking "I don't know anyone who can come up with so many clever quips in quick succession...let alone several people in one room doing it." But then I got kind of acclimated to the style and was able to enjoy myself rather than continuing to point out how unbelievable it was.

I'm glad I got to that point pretty quickly because it really is a gem of a movie. For me, however, it belonged to Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman -- I mean, wow. Really, the entire supporting cast is amazing, but those two are standouts. I'll whoop if they (especially Bateman) get noms.

Oh - one other thing - even though I finally got used to the conversational riffs, I never could get on board with the soundtrack. I might actually want to buy it, but its use in the film demanded attention...like I had to listen to every word rather than letting it be ambience for the visuals.

A-

The War of the Worlds (1953)

Oh my word -- what a mess.

Sure, I understand that these special effects were good enough to win the Oscar more than 50 years ago despite the fact that they made me giggle in a "Plan 9 from Outer Space gets flak while this gets praised?!" way. But, even if the aliens didn't look like silly rubber finger puppets you can get in a plastic bubble out of a candy machine and the spaceships weren't obviously bobbing along on strings, there's still no forgiving the "acting" or the lack of tension in the script (which must have read something like "aliens land and shoot; repeat enough times to fill 80 minutes; aliens break").

Between this and the 2005 version, I'd recommend that one.

D

Margot at the Wedding (2007)

First thing: I'm pretty sure I'm not a fan of Noah Baumbach's screenplays -- the three I've seen (The Life Aquatic, The Squid and the Whale, and this one) deal with such over-the-top situations as to be either dismissable or completely unrelateable for the average person. The level of dysfunctionality in the families he creates is almost oppressive. Sure, I believe that some people are like this, but I feel like I'm having to take it rather than enjoy what's up on screen.

I do have to say that he has quite a way with children; they were all terrific. And, actually, all the actors did a tremendous job with uncomfortable scenes. I do think the film is interesting and perhaps I'll revisit this later on when I'm done digesting it -- but, for now, I'll just say it's well-done but unrelenting.

C+

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

This is a smart update of the 1957 western of the same name. The core remains the same, but everything's a little less mannered -- a little more believably mean.

Just as in the original, a rancher who's in serious need of cash agrees to help transport an infamous gang leader to the train that will take him to prison. The changes that both men undergo make perfect sense and seem earned rather than scripted.

I will say that Ben Foster should get himself a nice romantic comedy -- he's really starting to skeeve me out.

B+

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

I liked the first one a lot, was irritated no end by the second one's camera work, and rather enjoyed myself this time around. So what was the difference between the two I liked and the one I didn't? I believe it's the fact that installments 1 & 3 were viewed in my living room while #2 was seen in the theater, where the camera insanity was physically experienced in the same way that I felt every stomach lurching movement in that IMAX roller coaster movie I used to love when I was a girl visiting Circus World.

Soon after this movie started, I said "when there's a break, I'm gonna get myself a snack." Fifteen minutes later, I was still hungry -- that's how fast-paced the action was. I still think that the camera work hurt rather than enhanced some of the scenes, though. There was a particular hand-to-hand fight scene that was so inventive that I wished the camera would just pull back a bit and let me SEE it.

B+

Atonement (2007)

Here's what I know for sure: this movie is a work of art -- beautiful acting, visuals, story, and score. Gary and I were still talking about it several hours later.

But, without giving anything away, I've still got some confusion over what actually happened. The story is so complex that I'm still not solid on the particulars -- and I know that sounds like it's a Syriana-type "so much is happening that it'd be amazing if anyone DID get it all" type of thing, but it's not. It's organic and the confusion is more about perceptions and intentions than about there being too much story for the space of a movie.

I'm more crazy than ever about James McAvoy -- and a little less annoyed by Keira Knightley now.

A

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)

We saw this at the Moolah Theater & Lounge in St. Louis -- very nifty auditorium with leather couches on the floor, though sometimes when the background was dark and either bright text or subject matter was in the fore, lights would shine through (or reflect off?) the screen, and that was a little distracting.

OK -- on to the movie. Basically, the entire plot is summed up in the trailers: barber slices his patrons throats and his downstairs bake shop "partner" gets rid of the evidence by grinding them into meat pies. That's pretty much it -- over and over again. It is a big ol' musical, though -- with probably 50% of the dialogue being sung. My reaction to Johnny Depp's voice was the same as I had to Ewan MacGregor's in Moulin Rouge: it was sweet and earnest and I just loved the unpolished feel of it. I don't know that the performance was more than a few notes, but the emotive singing certainly was.

B

Joshua (2007)

While I was watching this, my thoughts were focused on "but why??" I mean, I've seen movies where kids were creepy and/or evil because they were aliens or Satan's spawn -- but just evil for the sake of evil is nonsensical. I mean, why would a smart kid willfully destroy his family? Isn't he worried about foster care? Doesn't threatening his own security go rather against his best interests?

The movie does manage to save itself in the last three minutes or so -- in that space my big questions were answered and things made a bit more sense. Still, it doesn't make up for the fact that I was annoyed for 95% of the film.

Anyway, I would've wanted to be far away from those people and that sterile-looking apartment too.

C+

Light Sleeper (1992)

I know I've seen this at least twice before, but I never can remember it. Having just viewed it, I can kind of see why it never stuck in my mind before: it's so low-key as to be almost hiding in the shadows, whispering plot into my ear.

It's not bad. Willem Dafoe's a mid-level drug dealer facing a life change as his boss is leaving the business. An ex shows up back in town, throwing him for an emotional loop, and there's a plainclothes cop following him around, making him nervous.

Alright, but really not worth watching three times.

C+

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

My expectations were pretty low and this still managed to disappoint me.

I smiled a couple of times, but mostly I just stared in amazement that dozens of people working together let so much crap make it onto the screen. A "rock and a hard place" sight gag? Really?

D