Ranking the Die Hard Films

Since the fifth Die Hard film was released today, I thought it would be fitting to examine the series, which has been around for 25 years.

Die Hard (John McTiernan, 1988)

On a Christmas Eve visit from New York, Officer John McClane (Bruce Willis) plays cat and mouse in a locked-down L.A. skyscraper with a group of terrorists (led by Alan Rickman). Bruce Willis is iconic in one of the best action films ever made. Period.

Die Hard 2 (Renny Harlin, 1990)

McClane fights a unit of rogue military officers (led by William Sadler) who have taken over an airport in Washington, D.C. so that they can extract a foreign drug lord from the U.S. It's a step down from the original, but a worthy follow-up to a genre classic.

Die Hard with a Vengeance (John McTiernan, 1995)

McClane and a man from the neighborhood (Samuel L. Jackson) go head to head with a terrorist (Jeremy Irons) who stages some bombings throughout New York City and robs Wall Street. This is solid entertainment with great chemistry between Willis and Jackson.

Live Free or Die Hard (Len Wiseman, 2007)

With the help of a young computer hacker (Justin Long), McClane must rescue his daughter (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and stop a cyber terrorist (Timothy Olymphant) from accessing important FBI information in the process. It's not on par with the first three, but it's fun seeing an older McClane do what he does best.

A Good Day to Die Hard (John Moore, 2013)

McClane heads to Moscow to find his trouble-making son (Jai Courtney) and becomes entangled in a nuclear weapons conflict, which leads to Chernobyl itself. Despite Willis' lovable on-screen persona, the aging McClane formula seems to have run its course, and the plot is arguably too rushed for its own good.

Ranking & Ratings:

1. Die Hard - ****
2. Die Hard with a Vengeance - ***1/2
3. Die Hard 2 - ***1/2
4. Live Free or Die Hard - ***
5. A Good Day to Die Hard - **

327. Wind Chill

327. (24 Dec) Wind Chill (2007, Gregory Jacobs) 51



Since it's essentially a two-character drama, this would have fared so much better strictly as survival horror. Ashton Holmes and Emily Blunt have an excellent dynamic opposite one another, but they can't overcome the clumsy, albeit minimal supernatural elements. The tenderness in Blunt warming Holmes's frostbitten hands easily outdoes anything involving time travel or ghosts. That's a testament to both how well-crafted these characters are and how competent the acting is. However, there are times where Emily Blunt's labored American accent made me think she might pull a muscle.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2007

2007

So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Ellen Page in Juno
 I don't really know what to make out of Ellen Page's extremely weak performance. Although the character is incredibly annoying and as fake as possible, I really think that it's more due to Diablo Cody's  incompetent screenplay and Jason Reitman's forced direction. Ellen Page's only fault is that she's just not talented enough to make this character realistic and human. So after all, for me this work is nothing more than a failed effort.

4. Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Cate Blanchett's second Elizabeth is a real disappointment, but I'm much more forgiving about it than others. Cate is always such a force on screen that it makes up for the flaws of the character a little bit. Although there's no depth or real development in Elizabeth, Cate is able to prevent the movie from being a total disaster and she kept me from turning off the tv set. A flawed performance for sure, but not a real failure.
 

3. Laura Linney in The Savages
Laura Linney gives an extremely relatable, wonderful performance as a person who doesn't seem to be likeable at all at first sight and yet we get close to her and sympathise with her character. She never goes for cheap tricks to portray the neurotic personality of Wendy. She excellently mixes comedy with drama, creating the ideal dramedy performance while seeming effortless all the time (something that one of her fellow nominees didn't really succeed in). 
 

2. Julie Christie in Away from Her
 As Fiona Anderson, Julie Christie gives an amazing, heartbreaking performance that stays with you long after you finished watching the film. She portrays Fiona's pain and suffering with an incredible amount of grace and dignity and that's what makes this movie even more effective and heartwrenching. Although Julie's acting might be too subtle and seem too effortless for some, for me this is a true masterclass in acting, which is easily among the greatest achievements of this fantastic actress.

1. Marion Cotillard in La Vie en Rose
In what's one of my easiest decisions ever, Marion easily walks away with this year. She is nothing short of amazing in every possible way an actress can be. Her performance has the effect of an earthquake: it makes you go through Édith's journey along with her and get to understand why this woman was such a brilliant artist. It's very unusual, extraordinary and unbelievable work from a truly great actress who gives probably the most  brilliant portrayal of a real life person.

So I can proudly announce

that the winner is...

Marion Cotillard

in 

La vie en rose

Easy win.

Final thoughts: What an unexcting year! Everything went the way I expected and things went pretty predictably. Marion simply killed her competition, Julie was shining, Laura was fine and then there were the two other ladies, far behind. With hindsight, I can't see how Marion could have lost this, she's so damn good here. Congrats to Andre Lepaun, Louis and Nues20 on your predictions! :) You can pick a year, that I'm gonna do some time, hopefully. :)

Omissions: 

• Anamaria Marinca in 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days

About the next year: I really needed to go back to my favorite decade and my most special actress for some refreshment. :) I think this is enough clue. :) 


What do you think? Any thoughts on your mind?

Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth: The Golden Age

Cate Blanchett received her fifth Oscar nomination for reprising her role as Queen Elizabeth I in Elizabeth: The Golden Age. At the time, people were stunned and pissed that Cate stole the spot of Angelina Jolie whose performance was hailed by critics and audiences all over the world. However, Cate managed to pull off the double nomination. Obviously, she had absolutely no chance of winning Best Actress and I don't think she wanted to win that badly (just remember her genuinely thrilled face when Marion won). Nevertheless, she remained to be one of the least liked nominees this category has ever known (though I feel that the bad memory's gradually gonna fade in people's memory). 

While Elizabeth: The Golden Age is an entertaining movie, I felt it was a completely useless effort. First of all, to me, the first Elizabeth is a real classic and it's the main reason I fell for the genre. It had everything: great drama, flawless acting, battle, intrigue, blood and sex plus above all, a fantastic, plus the brilliant-brilliant performance of Cate Blanchett (yes, I'm seriously considering making her my 1998 winner after all). The Golden Age was bound to fail in comparision with the first part and unfortunately it wasn't a pleasant surprise. It was surprisingly unbalanced and shallowly written and the battle wasn't as epic as I remembered. I just don't like it when historical movies turn out to be soap operas, simple as that.

However, I DO love Cate Blanchett and she always makes up for the mistakes of her movies. There's just a special aura of greatness around her, which makes you shake in your boots. What I mostly admire about her is her incredible range: it doesn't matter if she has to play a fallen teacher in Notes on a Scandal, Kate Hepburn in The Aviator or Queen Elizabeth for that matter. Being trained in the theatre is surely a great push for any actress and in that way she's just like Great Glenn: she brings her confidence and energy from the stage to her movie, which lead to wonderfully vital and balanced performances.

And yet, not even Cate is able to resurrect the legend in Elizabeth: The Golden Age. She's a brilliant actress but not a miracle worker. Actually, I feel it's easier to stand out in a bad movie with a showy character (just see the 65% of Meryl Streep's movies) than being in a so-so movie with an incomplete, one-dimensional character. Queen Elizabeth is a character that's so often portrayed that it's very difficult to add layers to her character and it takes a less-known story of her life to find out  something new and interesting about her. The story with Mary Stuart is a very interesting one and so is the one with the Spanish armada, but I felt the movie wanted a bit too much with showing both of them. As a result, we don't get a real insight into Elizabeth's life, we just get to se small, rushed chapters.

My main problem was that Cate seemed to give in way too early and turned out to be Joan Collins earlier than she could have. A bitchy soap diva might be amusing to see, but hardly Oscar-worthy. What makes Cate better than that is simply that previously mentioned energy of hers. Although some might argue that it would have better for her to go all the way with being campy, I think it was better to keep some sense of nobility and dignity around Queen Elizabeth. I think it's one of the biggest misconception of people that Elizabeth was a drama queen and that's what made the first Elizabeth so special: Elizabeth was portrayed as a powerful woman, full of passion and doubts about herself. I understand that power and being a queen changed Elizabeth as a person, I just refuse to believe that it could transform such a strong character in such a dramatic way. I don't think she became a whiny schoolgirl after all those years.

That being said, this Elizabeth doesn't develop more than characters from Melrose Place, you can just see patterns in her: she's bitchy, than she shouts and she calms down eventually. With such shallow writing, I don't think Cate could have done wonders with the part. She's given neither the time nor the opportunities the make up for all the flaws in the writing (she could have pulled it off if the movie had been just twenty minutes longer). Whenever something interesting is about to happen, there's a useless scene of an assasination or torturing, which is in Cate's way. As a result, none of the relationships seems realistic or complex enough.

And we got to another sore subject: the (lack of) chemistry between Cate Blanchett and Clive Owen. There were two good-looking, exceptionally talented actors and yet there's no fire and music around them: the five minutes that they spend together just doesn't convince me that this relationship caused such a crisis in Elizabeth's life. We supposed to believe something that is seemingly missing from the movie and all this just weakens Cate's efforts.

The same applies for the execution of Mary Stuart: instead of suggesting real moral dilemma, the movie decides to show a whiny Elizabeth who easily gives in to her advisors. This storyline is probably one of the most wasted ones ever in the history of film. And in spite of all these things, Cate was still able to draw my attention. And why is that? Because she's an f-ing brilliant actress and it's always a joy to see a performer at the top of her career, even if the role doesn't live up to her wonderful talent. Despite all the obstacles, Cate simply cannot lose her charm and powerful presence and that's what she has and Ellen Page doesn't: Cate is capable of showing her greatness even with the shittiest material (even if it's for a short period of time). And a great actress always remains one.

To sum up, Cate Blanchett's second Elizabeth is a real disappointment, but I'm much more forgiving about it than others. Cate is always such a force on screen that it makes up for the flaws of the character a little bit. Although there's no depth or real development in Elizabeth, Cate is able to prevent the movie from being a total disaster and she kept me from turning off the tv set. A flawed performance for sure, but not a real failure.

What do you think? (The very predictable conclusion comes today as well so that I can finally move on from this bland, uninteresting year to something REALLY excting.)

Ellen Page in Juno

Ellen Page received her only Oscar nomination so far for playing Juno MacGuff, a really weird pregnant teenager who's giving up her baby for adoption in the Best Picture nominee, Juno. Until the Globes, Ellen Page seemed to be the real dark horse of the race who even had a chance of upsetting Julie Christie on Oscar. However, the Globes turned out to be in favor of the earth-shattering Marion Cotillard and this undoubtedly boosted her chances and jeopardized Ellen's. With hindsight, things turned out much better this way as Page didn't really go on to give better than average performances after her breakthrough in Juno (of course, not everybody has the luck and star power of Jennifer Lawrence, but look how wonderfully Carey Mulligan develops, for instance). 

Ellen Page's nomination can most easily be explained by the insane hype around Juno, which also helped the movie itself receive a really undeserved Best Picture nomination (beating out masterpieces like 4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days or Gone Baby Gone etc.). With hindsight, all the four nominations seem ridiculous to me. Jason Reitman's direction is nothing to write home about and just don't even get me started on Diablo Cody's  quite simply, terrible screenplay. She has absolutely no idea on how human beings work in real life and what could have been a socially relevant AND extremely humourous movie, turned out to be forced and schmaltzy. Even a high school drama student writes smarter dialogues. Still, I don't blame the Academy for rewarding her with the Oscar. First of all, they must have been taken by the hype (like I was) and they really had no other alternative thanks to the genious "I'm an ex-stripper who wants to make it big in Hollywood" 

campaign. 

However, I must also remember that this review is about the achievements of Ellen Page who plays the title role of Juno. In my humble opinion, Ellen Page is a weak, extremely one-dimensional actress (from what I've seen of course) who always tries to stick to playing her usual weird, but attractive young girl. And no matter how hard she tried, she cannot pull off being a believable femme fatale (like in the otherwise entertaining To Rome with Love) and her lack of true talent becomes painfully obvious when she's among true A-listers (like in Inception). 

Since this very pale actress worked from the incompetent screenplay of Diablo Cody, I expected nothing better than average. However, the result didn't even reach the level of mediocrity and I actually feel like writing a whole list of all the aspects of Ellen's performance that I disliked. She portrays Juno as a real weird girl with a weird family and even weirder observations. There's a scene when Juno talks about her classmates at school and how the cool guys actually go for girls like Juno and somehow the movie Monster came to my mind, when Aileen tells Selby what the guys at the skating rink must go for. From an experienced, 30 + prostitute, it felt authentic, but not from a 16-year-old, not so much. And strangely, these things could have worked if a more talented and humorous actress delivered these with real irony instead of faked and artificial sarcasm. And yes, this actually seemed charming and smart back in 2007 with all the hype around the movie, but with hindsight, I'm amazed that this movie got so far.

In the end, it really is the delivery of Ellen that pisses me off the most (that Mogan Freeman sentence is one of the most annoying ones in movie history). There wasn't a word coming out of her mouth that seemed to come out naturally and genuinely and she says them all in the same way, with the same face and the same tones in her voice. It really gets annoyingly repetitive after a while. And this is where (I think), Jason Reitman came into picture. Obviously, this was a very much directed performance and in my humble opion, Reitman wanted his movie to seem as hip and smart as possible so he forced his actors to talk like nobody in real life does, which wouldn't be a problem if the movie didn't try to also be realistic. This smart ass attitude certainly did wonders with Young Adult, but again, the two stories and main characters are completely different.

These desperate attempts from the filmmakers to make the movie cooler result in the complete lack of development in the characters. I think portraying Juno's attitudes towards pregnancy and motherhood were pivotal to the success of the film and Ellen's performance and yet it almost felt secondary that she was actually pregnant. The terrible, haunting desperation of the girls 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is not what I missed from this movie, it's just some dilemma. Just think about the scene at the abrotion clinic: it was full of great opportunities and yet they were all sacrificed in order to let Ellen Page deliver some cheesy, unbelievable lines. I never actually felt for Juno or cared about her because the movie showed none of her pain or dilemma (she's a PREGNANT TEENAGER, for crying out loud). And since Jennifer Garner was able to pull off the only decent performance of the movie (a really great one, actually), the lack of greatness from Ellen becomes even more apparent and annoying. One honest moment comes finally, when Juno cries in the car, which might seem out of place, but I think it's only because it really stands out of the movie.

The scenes of the childbirth are also surprisingly better than the rest of the film. While I don't know if it was just the emotionality of the situation or something beyond that, I started to feel for the characters (only to instantly leave it behind this when the cheesy ending with the singing came). Even the horrible Michael Cera - Ellen Page couple seemed to be working for a couple of minutes (despite the fact that they annoyed the hell out of me in the rest of the film).

All in all, I don't really know what to make out of Ellen Page's extremely weak performance. Although the character is incredibly annoying and as fake as possible, I really think that it's more due to Diablo Cody's  incompetent screenplay and Jason Reitman's forced direction. Ellen Page's only fault is that she's just not talented enough to make this character realistic and human. So after all, for me this work is nothing more than a failed effort.

What do you think? I'm BACK!!!! :)))) Did you miss me? 

Marion Cotillard in La vie en rose

Biopic performances have always been right up the Academy's alley, especially in the last few years when we can't seem to have an Oscar year without such an Oscar winning performance. Still, when a relatively unknown French actress named Marion Cotillard took home an Academy Award for playing Édith Piaf, the legendary French singer over the legendary Julie Christie, viewers were nothing short of shocked. Marion Cotillard's Oscar win shows how the Academy can (and should always) work: Marion Cotillard won an Oscar simply on the merits of her work, which lots of Hollywood actors praised for its bravery. You might say that Marion campaigned for that Oscar, but after all, she got all the attention for her performance and in the end, it was always about her performance. Every once in a while, the Academy really gives the Oscar to what they consider the best performance of the year (I loved 2007 because all the important awards went to the right place, except for Original Screenplay).

Also, it really amazes me that people seem to dislike La vie en rose, which is, in my opinion, one of the three best films of 2007. It achieves everything that The Iron Lady was aiming to and does so effortlessly. Basically, it's about Édith Piaf remembering her life on her deathbed and that explains its odd structure. I feel that the movie should have taken home all the Oscar for the costumes and the win for the make-up was well-deserved. Actually, I would have nominated the film, the director and Emmanuelle Seigner who breaks your heart in her brief time on the scene as Titine, the prostitute who takes care of the five-year-old Edith.

Although Marion Cotillard was no stranger to American audiences after her parts in Big Fish and A Good Year, it was La vie en rose that brought her the recognition that lead to lots of other roles in the US (she's actually even become a sort-of-muse to Christopher Nolan). Some were hoping for an F. Murray Abraham type of post-Oscar career and instead she's become a prolific and popular actress in Hollywood with lots of new fans and the possiblity of another Oscar nomination for her critically acclaimed performance in Rust and Bone (fingers crossed).

Olivier Dahan told reporters that he chose Marion for the part of the French chanteuse because she's the actress who's not afraid of portraying tragedy on the big screen and tragedy is what best describes the life of Édith Piaf: blindness, alcoholism, morphine addiction, being an abandoned child, loss of the true love. It seems that whenever Édith was having a good time or feeling good about herself, there was something coming towards her that would take all the pleasure from her. Even Judy Garland's life story seems to be a cakewalk compared to Édith's. Although each of those above mentioned elements scream Oscar (especially in a biopic), I'm still saying that Marion's performance is a very unusual one to win the Oscar since it ignores so many rules and is so different from everything we've seen before. No wonder her work's become somewhat controversial: first of all, the subject of the movie is really European, it's passionate, the emotions are really overwhelming and I don't think many people got it. Also, some might refuse to read subtitles and think that great performance come only in English. I suppose Julie Christie might have been a more defendable pick for the Best Actress and we all know the Academy likes to play safe. I think it takes a very special performance to overcome all these boundaries and boy, is Marion special in every way!

Even if we ignore every merit of Marion's performance beside the technical part, it still remains a riveting and haunting performance, which rivals Meryl Streep's astonishing work as Margaret Thatcher. Marion transforms into this woman and embodies her so well that you refuse to believe that you're not looking at Édith Piaf. Even if this all sounds cheesy, you have to see to believe it. Marion Cotillard indeed completely disappear and instead we see a woman in different ages and conditions.  The beautiful, young and tall Marion Cotillard becomes a broken-down, dying woman who looks 70 at the age of 47. Marion heartbreakingly shows the effects of Édith's self-destructive lifestyle on her body: her voice becomes scratchier, her body deforms and so on. I don't think I've seen self-destruction portrayed in such a harrowing, brutal way. But the fact is, that Marion disappears even in the scenes without the tons of make-up. Yes, the terrific make-up helped Marion a lot, but she uses it as a tool instead of letting it do the work for her.

And yes, if we're here, let me just adress all the comments about her lip-syncing as it's probably the most annoying thing what I hear about her. First of all, whether an actress sings herself or not is the choice of the director. We all know from Nine (and other movies) that Marion is a terrific singer who could have sung all the chansons of Piaf perfectly, but the aim of the movie was to draw an intimate portrait of Édith Piaf and not  providing a showcase for Marion Cotillard and Piaf's voice was essential to that portrait. Marion's task was to make this voice her own by using her body and main task was to recreate the wonder of Édith Piaf who was much more compley than a great singing voice. During her performances (and in real life) she had a very special aura that made her such an enourmous, radiant presence, which is really indescribable. In a scene, Marion has to recreate this miracle on screen without Édith's voice and she (SURPRISE!) succeeds in every possible way because above all, she embodied the soul of Édith Piaf, which was indeed the key to her personality.

And here we come to the most important thing about her: the most brilliant thing about this performance is neither the technical part nor the emotions, it's really the way these two combine. First, Marion inhabited Édith's soul and spirit, which helped her recreate the phsyical aspects of the character and this is how she developed Édith's. And she did so with the movie standing in her way: since it ignored the chronological order of the events, Marion couldn't develop Édith gradually so she had to find some connections in the story and the events.

On this journey, we get to know many faces of Édith and actually, very few of them is likeable. However, Marion was somehow able to make us look up to Édith even when she's the bitchiest or the nastiest to everyone, because we are able to understand why and how her personality changed throughout the years. As a result, every part of her life is somehow different and the tragedies become heartbreaking for different reasons. As a young woman, the two most heartbreaking moments come right after each other: her menthor dies and her best friend is taken away from her as well. Her drunken meltdown over this (for me) is equal to the choice of Sophie.

My favorite moments in this film come when we get to see the romance between Édith and Marcel Cerdan (and you just cannot ignore the scene between Édith and Marlene Dietrich, which is indeed magical). Life is unusually balanced for Édith here and Marion excels also as a happy woman. For me, the real feat is that she was able to make the happiness of Édith just as haunting as her suffering and that's why the end of this story is one of the most painful scenes in movie history.

However, it's the end that most people will probably remember the most about this performance as it's quite simply cathartic. The moments of the interview on the beach, Édith crying on her deathbed or her final performance are nothing short of amazing. In about 15 minutes, Marion does what others couldn't do in 150 minutes. She shows the essence of Piaf's character without seeming preachy or cheesy. All the pieces of the puzzle fall into place and its effect is just cannot be described with words. Her "advice" for every person becomes so true and so effective, even in its simplicity. And Marion's delivery of that single word is just... :)

In the end, there isn't much to say about Marion Cotillard as Édith Piaf. Cotillard is nothing short of amazing in every possible way an actress can be. Her performance has the effect of an earthquake: it makes you go through Édith's journey along with her and get to understand why this woman was such a brilliant artist. It's very unusual, extraordinary and unbelievable work from a truly great actress who gives probably the most  brilliant portrayal of a real life person.

What do you think? 

Laura Linney in The Savages

Laura Linney received her third Oscar nomination for playing Wendy Savage, a neurotic, insecure woman who has to deal with a dying father in The Savages. Laura Linney was the surprise nominee of 2007 but that doesn't mean that she had no chance of winning the Oscar. In my opinion, she had a firm fanbase in the Academy and might have even received enough votes to be third. The screenplay nomination proves that they liked the movie and Laura Linney had already lost twice. I suppose, in the end, it was Marion's Oscar and nobody could do anything about it. 

The Savages is such a really great and memorable film, with lots of dark moments and real drama that has a great effect because of the performances of the two leads. Interesting enough, Philip Seymour Hoffman's work received more recognition than Laura's and yet Laura received the nomination. Hoffman had to make do with a supporting nomination for Charlie Wilson's War. Fortunately, however, the screenplay did receive a nomination even though I'm not saying Tamara Jenkins should have taken home the Oscar instead of Diablo Cody (Ratatouille was the best in the category for me).

It's also easy to see why Laura's performance was singled out for a nomination: she's a respected actress, a previous nominee and characters like Wendy are indeed Laura's specality. Some say Laura plays the same character over and over, but I have to disagree with that. The fact is that nobody else plays neurotic women with problems the way Linney does: she adds lots of humor and humanity to these character and this combination makes her performances such treats. She makes it so easy to sympathise with the women she plays: there's always a moment when you say 'Oh, I'm just like that.' Laura reveals the flaws of her character and yet those make them more likeable.

And in that way, this performance is a standard Laura Linney performance with a standard Linney character. However, even a standard Linney performance is something truly wonderful and memorable. Wendy Savage is a person who seems to be quite unlikeable at first sight, but as the movie progresses, she gets to become the most likeable and warm presence in the movie. Just like with every other character she plays, Laura reveals Wendy's humanity and flaws in a very unique way and as a result it's very easy to relate to Wendy. Personally, I got much closer to knowing this person than Philip Seymour Hoffman's character.

However, I must say that the two actors work excellently together. One can rarely witness the relationship between siblings portrayed in such a realistic and believable way. I could feel the connection between them and how they are the total opposites of each other. There's an odd mix of love and rivalry between them. The scene with the argument over Wendy's scholarship is just extraordinary: all the tension over the years between these two people come to surface in their petty argument, the jealousy, envy of Jon and the feeling of being ignored and underestimated of Wendy. Laura wonderfully underlines the insecurities in Wendy, as if she herself couldn't believe of herself that she'd be worthy of a scholarship (which she doesn't have anyway). One can feel the embarassment of Wendy when she's confronted with the truth by her brother. And Laura is just so darn human in those scenes. This relationship forms throughout the movie and I'm not saying that they get much closer or find complete peace with each other, it's just that they get closer to each other.

The thing I was missing from the screenplay is truly revealing the backstory of the relationship of the siblings with their father, Leonard. We get clues about Jon, but Wendy's story with Lenny is not completely told and I felt sorry for that as I believe it would have been explained a lot about Wendy's personality. Instead, Laura has to provide with some kind of an explanation and she offers some suggestions, from which the viewer has to choose. Wendy feels enourmously guilty about putting his father into a nursing home (unlike her brother) and in my opinion, she was the one who was more concerned about Lenny of the two. That's why the scene on the plane feels almost cathartic. A woman ignored by her father doesn't let him down in the end and I also felt some kind of a redemption in that scene.

This is probably why the way Linney tackles Wendy's relationship with men (in general) is one of the most intresting aspects of this performance. Is that older boyfriend of Wendy a kind of a daddy thing for her? That's why her scenes with the Nigerian nurse are so intriguing and important. Although Wendy experiences rejection once again, there was someone who really appreciated her for what she is and gave her some positive feedback about herself. And this sort of dependancy on men that Laura shows is not because of a sexist screenplay (a woman wrote it after all, though it could be a problem even then) but could indeed reveal something about the lack of love from her father, which Wendy desperately wants to create.

My only problem could be that there's no big scene for Laura. Although I loved her throughout the film and I was constantly pleased by her presence, I would have wanted to see her being more emotional. Unfortunately, I didn't feel like her performance had an emotional highlight. As a result, I felt her work was slightly lacking as Laura didn't get to display everything she had in her and basically show everything she knows about her character and actually, it's the movie that standing in her way. Sometimes the direction was desperate to impress and that prevented the actors (who actually carry the movie on their shoulders) from really shining. And in the end, I found that her performance didn't become as interesting as it could have been, which is proven by the fact that you really have to think what to write about her as her work didn't become that rich in the end because the screenplay actually cheated Laura out of many opportunities that she could (and should) have had.

Still, Laura Linney gives an extremely relatable, wonderful performance as a person who doesn't seem to be likeable at all at first sight and yet we get close to her and sympathise with her character. She never goes for cheap tricks to portray the neurotic personality of Wendy. She excellently mixes comedy with drama, creating the ideal dramedy performance while seeming effortless all the time (something that one of her fellow nominees didn't really succeed in). 

What do you think?(Sorry for making you all wait, but I was really invested in the Olympic Games and I couldn't really write. The next review {Marion} comes on Sunday or Monday)

2007: The Ultimate Year for Film?

No Country for Old Men

Back in May, I posted that My Movie Year would be 1954. Specifically, my all-time slate of five Best Picture nominees would be that year's lineup (Dial M for Murder, On the Waterfront, Rear Window, Sabrina, and Seven Samurai). But, in terms of the overall release catalog, 2007 stands out as, arguably, the best year for film ever. While many would name a year like 1939 or 1976 as film's pinnacle year, I have not seen enough films from those years to properly classify one of them as such. (For example, I've seen 17 films from 1939 and 159 films from 2007.)

Check out some of 2007's great films after the cut.

30 Notable Films:

**** Films:

American Gangster

Washington and Crowe play cat and mouse in this modern gangster classic. 

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

A beautiful portrait of the outlaw and his relationship with his killer.

Atonement

This tragic love story has it all - iconic images, a haunting score, and great performances. 
 

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead

A great little crime drama with a fantastic cast.

The Bourne Ultimatum

Greengrass and Damon don't disappoint in this slam-bang finish.

The Darjeeling Limited

A quirky, albeit forgotten, film that allows Anderson to do his thing almost perfectly.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

This is art-house cinema at its most colorful and its most moving.

Eastern Promises

Another modern gangster gem with a terrific ensemble.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days

A heartbreaking abortion tale with a brave leading performance by Marinca.
 

Gone Baby Gone

A surprisingly mature directorial debut that poses some difficult questions.
 

Michael Clayton

Clooney leads a strong cast in this throwback legal thriller.
 

No Country for Old Men

A contemporary western with loads of suspense and great dialogue.
 

Once

This low-budget musical drama remains one of the best films in recent memory.
 

Ratatouille

Pixar does it again with its second best film (behind Nemo).

Rescue Dawn

Bale, Zahn, et al. give stellar performances in this survival story.
 

Stardust

A light fantasy that never ceases to entertain.
 

There Will Be Blood

A masterful epic of greed with one of the most memorable endings ever shot.
 

3:10 to Yuma

This western remake pits Crowe against Bale in what is a pairing for the ages.
 

We Own the Night

An overlooked crime film with style and some brilliant performances. 

***1/2 Films:

Across the Universe

A musical based on songs by The Beatles. Need I say more?
 

Disturbia

This loose remake of Rear Window is smart, tense, and, actually, good.
 

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Wonderfully crafted with an ensemble cast to die for.
 

In the Valley of Elah 

A quietly effective film with subtle performances.
 

Interview

A showcase for the year's Best Actress runner-up: the fabulous Sienna Miller.
 

Into the Wild

Though overpraised, it is a beautiful tale of a man's struggle with nature and with himself.
 

Lars and the Real Girl

One of the year's best dramedies with a great ensemble.

Paris, Je T'aime

A collection of 18 shorts about relationships in the City of Light.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Depp and Burton return with a bloody brilliant musical.

Waitress

Russell gives a great performance in Shelly's unsung charmer.
 

Zodiac

Fincher's suspenseful serial killer film based on true events. 

Other Notable Films:

Death at a Funeral, Enchanted, Hot Fuzz, I Am Legend, I'm Not There, Juno, Knocked Up, The Lookout, Planet Terror, Quiet City, Red Road, The Savages, Superbad, 2 Days in Paris

Notable Films I Haven't Seen Yet:

Bug, Control, Death Proof, Lust, Caution, Paranoid Park, Persepolis, Sunshine, This is England, 28 Weeks Later

While I still have more films to see from 2007, it seems that anyone could compile a great top 10 list from the 30 notable films I listed above, or with the additional ones I listed. There's something for everybody. A solid pick like There Will Be Blood here. A surprising pick like Disturbia there. And that's just from the films I've mentioned, as there are probably other great ones that I've forgotten to include.

Sample lists: (Random possibilities)

1. No Country for Old Men
2. There Will Be Blood
3. Red Road
4. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
5. Zodiac
6. The Savages
7. Michael Clayton
8. Enchanted
9. Before the Devil Knows You're Dead
10. 3:10 to Yuma

1. Atonement
2. The Darjeeling Limited
3. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
4. There Will Be Blood
5. Once
6. American Gangster
7. Ratatouille
8. Waitress
9. Lars and the Real Girl
10. The Bourne Ultimatum

As a reminder, my current list:

1. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
2. Atonement
3. Once
4. American Gangster
5. There Will Be Blood
6. We Own the Night
7. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
8. Rescue Dawn
9. Gone Baby Gone
10. The Bourne Ultimatum

Some yearly top ten lists may feature a few great films, but can they boast such a broad catalog of fine work? (Yes, that includes Disturbia.) Though it's impossible to answer that question definitively, it seems like this is a tough year to top, even for years like 1939. Thoughts?