The Kindergarten Teacher

Director: Sara Colangelo
Starring: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Parker Sevak, Michael Chernus, Gael García Bernal, Anna Baryshnikov, Ajay Naidu, Rosa Salazar, Sam Jules, Daisy Tahan, Samrat Chakrabarti
Running Time: 97 minutes
Rating: R

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

If the goal of a teacher at all education levels is to help their students reach their fullest potential, just a nudge or push in the right direction can often let them know they're capable of more than they suspected. With the proper guidance, they can get there, and when it happens, this achievement accompanies a realization that the ability was actually in them along, and just needed some nurturing to reveal itself. In Netflix's disturbing and thought-provoking The Kindergarten Teacher, the title character lives and breathes to provide such inspiration for her students.

Under usual circumstances, this kind of devotion is admirable. What's not are the lines she's willing to cross to provide it, calling into question the very definition of the word "teacher," specifically when their involvement in students' lives starts to become about something other than the kids. Most would agree if there's a clear line, she jumps right over it, resulting in disastrous if not potentially dangerous consequences for those directly involved. It also has a lot to say about the pressures adults put on themselves and how easily they're capable of projecting them onto those least equipped to handle it.

Entrusted with a job requiring almost complete selflessness, she instead disappears into her own mind and insecurities, attempting to rectify her failures through an impressionable child. Using him to fill a seemingly unsatiable void in her life, it plays out like a horror movie with a situation that starts innocently, until escalating enough to where the tension reaches a boiling point.

While it becomes frighteningly apparent just how far this woman can go, we're still not quite sure the distance writer/director Sara Colangelo's script will, or how it can possibly resolve itself without manipulation. And yet it somehow does, in equally observant ways. Nothing that occurs couldn't happen, and it probably has, which only makes it that much more uncomfortable to watch. At its center is a revelatory lead performance from an accomplished but long underrated actress that's a subtle tightrope walk of emotions.

With two decades as an educator already behind her, New York-based kindergarten teacher Lisa Spinelli (Maggie Gylenhaal) is merely going through the motions at home with husband, Grant (Michael Chernus), while barely trying to mask her dissapointment in unambitious teen children Lainie (Daisy Tahan) and Josh (Sam Jules). Determined to become a published poet, she takes night classes, only to find her work routinely picked apart and dismissed by both her peers and their instructor, Simon (Gael García Bernal). Creative salvation soon comes from one of her students, 5 year-old Jimmy Roy (Parker Sevak), a child prodigy who's capable of unexpectedly blurting out beautiful poems at will.

Looking to harness and mold Jimmy's untapped potential, Lisa makes him her personal project, rushing for a pen and paper whenever inspiration strikes and even going so far as to actually present his work as her own. The more she smothers him with attention the clearer it becomes that it isn't even really about him anymore. And in trying to "rescue" Jimmy from a passionless world she views as incapable of faciliatating his unique talent, her obsessive mentoring soon crosses into territory from which there's no turning back for either.

Open-hearted, quirky and achingly sincere, Lisa can't seem to comprehend how a child with so much to offer the world isn't being encouraged or intellectually stimulated in any way. But what Colangelo's script (which she based upon the 2014 Israeli film) is good at emphasizing is Lisa's slow-building inability to grasp the reality that this is still a five-year-old we're talking about. He's somewhat shy and withdrawn, but at the end of the day, he just wants to hang out with his friends and and play like all kids his age. It's when she becomes aggressively involved in his home life, making judgments about his frequently absent father (Samrat Chakrabarti) and even the babysitter (Rosa Salazar), that this may be about something else entirely.

Giving her best performance since Secretary, Gyllenhaal plays Lisa as disarmingly normal and competent when we first meet her. Her head may be a bit in the clouds, but we never doubt she's a good teacher, or at least was. It's only when the layers get peeled back with the introduction of this student that she slowly unravels, using him as a vessel to fix what she believes is her own failure of a life. In a memorable scene at home, her daughter even says as much right to her face.

More impressively, Gyllenhaal and young Parker Sevak's scenes manage to find that realistic sweet spot in an extremely disconcerting dynamic that will give all parents another reason to worry about sending their kids off to kindergarten. As Lisa's teacher, Gael García Bernal may not seem to have much of a role, but his character is important in that he's also being manipulated. That he only starts to take both a professional and personal interest in her when she assumes this new persona is further ammunition for Lisa to hate herself more, and double down on the deception. But he's no victim, guilty himself of abusing his position, proving to be in this for more than just the sake of art.      

It takes the characters in the script longer to figure out what's going on than we do, but in this case, that makes sense because it takes a while for Lisa to unravel. Only when Colangelo takes the premise and milks every last minute of queasy suspense from it, do Lisa's intentions and actions arrive at a destination that only in hindsight seems to be the most logical of resolutions. Trapped and with seeimgly no way out, she must come face-to-face with her actions, receiving punishment from the person most affected by them. That even in her lowest, most desperate point, this woman still can't help but teach might be the The Kindergarten Teacher's most powerful and pitifully sad moment. As the true magnitude of her actions settle in, it's a lesson learned too late, but perhaps just in time for those affected by what she's done.

Crazy Heart

Director: Scott Cooper
Starring: Jeff Bridges, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall
Running Time: 112 min.
Rating: R

★★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

It's become a long-running joke that country music can sometimes really pile it on. Drinking. Women trouble. Pick-up trucks. More drinking. You couldn't be blamed for assuming that all those stereotypes have been adapted to the screen in Crazy Heart, in which Jeff Bridges plays a washed-up 57 year-old alcoholic country singer named Bad Blake. But what's so unusual is how the film tells an overly familiar story in such an effortless, laid back style that it seems fresh and invested with new meaning. The performances are too honest and the setting and circumstances too believable that you end up losing yourself in a story that in lesser hands could have easily come off as a poor man's version of The Wrestler, but with a country star.

There's relief in discovering the movie never feels like it's trying too hard, casually letting this world the protagonist inhabits wash over you. The music and performances are what I'll come away remembering most, but it's surprising how much respect rookie writer/director Scott Cooper shows the audience by not playing any games and just delivering it as is. And that was more than enough considering it's Bridges who carries much of the load in the role that justifiably won him an Oscar.

When we first meet Bad (Bridges) he's exiting his '78 Chevy Suburban and dumping a bottle of his own urine in the parking lot after arriving for a gig. It's a steep fall for a performer who years earlier was filling arenas and respected as one of the biggest country stars of his era, kind of a combination of Waylon Jennings and Kris Kristofferson. Now with a serious drinking problem and an adult son who wants nothing to do with him, Bad is relegated to staying at cheap motels and doing one shot gigs at local town bars and bowling alleys in the southwest.

"I used to be somebody, but now I'm somebody else" is a famous lyric from one of his biggest hits and an accurate reflection of his current situation, living in the past and singing the same songs to the same crowds who also have yet to find a way to move on. Bad was somebody, but now he's a nobody, vomiting between sets and waking up the next morning with aging groupies in his motel bed. That's until he meets Jean Craddock (Maggie Gyllenhaal), a divorced young journalist doing a piece on him, and while Bad's developing relationship with her, as well as her four-year-old son, Buddy (Jack Nation), could be his last chance at personal redemption. Meanwhile the possibility of a professional comeback rests on his recently renewed connection to Tommy Sweet (Colin Farrell), a current country star he mentored urging him to get back in the songwriting game.

It would be easy to classify the Bridges' Best Actor victory as a "make-up" for being slighted in the past or a career achievement award and that's true to an extent. We could all probably name about four or five performances he's given that already deserved recognition but in his defense this does rank up there with his strongest work and I'd only be able to name two (I'll let you guess which ones) that I thought were better. Why he tends to be overlooked and so often taken for granted when his peers collect the accolades could be because he makes everything look so effortless that it doesn't seem like he's doing anything. He disappears into roles to such an extent that it's understandable to forget he was the actor who played them. He's been doing it his whole career but the character of Bad really plays on that strength because he's a laid back, cool guy battling demons but unwilling to show anyone the pain he's in or even acknowledge it to himself. Few but Bridges, the master of understatement, could have fit it better and surprises us even more with a vocal and performing ability no one knew he possessed. This part was tailor made for him and seemed to be just waiting for him to reach the point in his career where he could finally play it.

What's funny is that Bridges doesn't possess what you'd necessarily consider the greatest voice by music industry standards but it's perfect for this character and the original songs and music composed T. Bone Burnett (including the Oscar winning original song,"The Weary Kind" co-written by Ryan Bingham) sound better than most of the country music I've come across on the radio. The musical performances from him and Farrell are easily the most believable on screen since 2005's Walk The Line. I'm not a country music fan at all but still loved the music in this, so that's saying a lot. The film takes a familiar story arc but throws in some small touches that set it apart, like how Blake's relationship with Jean just seems to come out of nowhere with little explanation, as something like that would.

How a young, pretty reporter would fall for this old train wreck of a man is never a question because Gyllenhaal doesn't let it become one. Those who only know what she's capable of from her essentially thankless role in The Dark Knight are going to be blown way by how much depth she brings to this single mom. She's Bridges' equal in every way. Certain expectations accompany the hot shot character of Tommy Sweet, especially when he's played by someone like Colin Farrell, but Cooper's script wisely ignores those, choosing to go in a more realistic direction and refusing to present Tommy as the arrogant rival we expect he has to be. Robert Duvall has a cameo role as an old friend of Bad's but if you blink you'll miss it.

As many have already pointed out, the similarities between Bad Blake and Mickey Rourke's Randy The Ram from The Wrestler are too numerous to ignore, but that's not necessarily such a bad thing since he was a fascinating character and so is this one and the setting is vastly different. You didn't have to be a wrestling fan to appreciate that film just as you don't need to be a country music listener to enjoy this. For both, the viewer hopes the protagonist can make a comeback but know the chances are slim because they seem so thoroughly consumed by their own demons and unwilling to let go.Credit Cooper for crafting a biographical drama that makes an emotional connection while remaining mostly free of any false crisis or manipulative shenanigans that would make us feel like we're watching a movie written by someone who's trying to write an a comeback tale to pull at the heartstrings. Crazy Heart is real and raw, but Bridges makes sure it's never depressing.

Random Ridiculous IMDB Thread Topics On The Dark Knight (With My Reactions)

Like a lot of people, I’m still trying to adjust to a movie landscape in which we’ve all finally seen The Dark Knight. It’s over and in the books, despite the fact certain scenes may be replaying over and over again in our heads. It currently holds the record for the highest grossing opening weekend in history and is currently ranked as the #1 film of all-time on the Internet Movie Database. The latter I wrote off as just a bunch of fanboys voting 10’s over and over again but it turns out you do have to have some kind of a voting history for your scores to count in the ranking. The Godfather has held that top spot for the past 10 years so this actually is somewhat of an accomplishment (although I’d still expect that ranking to level off considerably in the next couple of weeks and months).

Usually after I’ve finished watching and reviewing a film I’m ready to move on but I’ve found it isn’t so easy doing that with this one. A lot of people have been asking me whether I plan to watch it again and my answer to that is “No, not right now.” I just can’t risk having another nightmarish theater experience with it so I’ll wait for DVD. Already I’m suspecting I may have come down too hard on it because of my expectations but I’d need a re-watch before making that call. Looking back at some films I’ve given four stars to this does seem better than many of them, but that could just be because it’s so much more ambitious. It’s worth noting that I don’t think you can swing for the fences like this did without having some flaws.

I was also completely shocked at many of the decisions that were made, specifically in the third act. I never in a million years expected things to be left like that. With all the clips that were leaked to the media, they did do a good job covering up the surprises. And I definitely didn’t expect that we’d be talking about two supporting performances in addition to Ledger’s that deserve Oscar consideration. Of course speculation has already begun on a sequel, which right now looks like it’s happening and I may be posting my thoughts on potential casting possibilities with that soon.

In the midst of all this, I noticed the usual ridiculousness and stupidity over at the IMDB has reached even higher levels. Everyone knows how insane the postings can be over there, but I noticed they’ve really topped themselves this past week. Below (in bold) are real titles of IMDB message board postings on The Dark Knight and if these are just the thread topics you could probably imagine what’s contained in the actual post and the debate it’s caused. Now I know why I stick with MySpace. Some of these are pretty funny though. In parenthesis is my reaction.
Ledger’s Death Completely Overshadowed Eckhart’s Great Performance
(I hope not. Eckhart was amazing. This is also the first Batman film to handle multiple villains well)

BALE WORST BATMAN EVER!
(I’m sure George Clooney would be thrilled someone has that opinion)

Bale needs to work on the voice he sounds like the cookie monster
(Sorry, that one’s kind of true)

Unfair giving an Oscar to someone just because they died
(I agree. And that’s an irrelevant point here)

Why Does Everyone Like Bale So Much?
(Probably because he’s a great actor, but of the major players I do think he gave the weakest performance in the film

Katie Was easier on the eyes
(Maybe, but Maggie was easier on the brain)

Anyone here hate people who talk during movies
(Yes! You should have been in my theater)

Catwoman In Nolan’s Bat Universe is like putting Aliens in Indiana Jones
(I disagree. I think everyone wants to see Nolan’s take on Catwoman. Any casting ideas? I've got a few)

Good movie…but get it off of the #1 slot of Top 250
(It is too high, but I can’t view it as a negative that this film has struck such a chord with so many people)


NOLAN”S PENGUIN!
(From what I heard Nolan isn’t interested in exploring this character, but I am slightly curious to see what he could do with it)

So how do movie theaters make money?
(Um…by charging too much?)

I Have An Above Average IQ (125) and trust me, TDK sucks!
(Do I really have to respond to this?)
Ledger’s Joker Made Nicholson’s Look Like A Court Jester
(Agreed)

Forget Comparing Jokers, who was the better Two-Face?
(Give me a break)

This just in: Dark Knight is OVERRATED!!!
(Of course it is. So is just about every other movie. Your point?)

Why is Scarecrow in this?
(I don’t know but I don’t feel his presence helped or hurt the film at all. It was such a non-issue I didn’t even bother mentioning it in my review)

MAGGIE G. IS UGLY!
(watch Secretary, then get back to me)

I want to see Robin in the next Batman movie
(I don’t)

Remember when you were all upset about Heath Ledger as the Joker?
(Yep. I was one of those morons.)

The hardest PG-13 film I've ever witnessed.
(Me too)

Sequel? Let it die with dignity
(I can really see this point)

Rachel Turned Into An Old Ugly Woman in One Year
(No, she actually turned into a believable attorney)

I wonder what Tim Burton Thinks
(Probably that he just got his ass handed to him)

Kevin Spacey Is THE RIDDLER
(There are worse choices, but no thanks. I had enough of him in the dreadful Superman Returns)

Will Bale’s “assault” allegations harm this film?
(No, if anything, it’ll increase interest in it)

So, Our economy is doing OK?
(I thought the same thing when the box office numbers started coming in)

Sorry guys, but this film won’t be nominated for Best Picture
(Sadly, I think that's true)

The Dark Knight

Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman
Running Time: 152 min.
Rating: PG-13

*** 1/2 (out of ****)

So, finally, here we are. The years of ongoing speculation. The restless anticipation. The viral marketing. The endless hype. The off screen tragedy. And I’m actually a little shocked. The Dark Knight is a great, wildly ambitious film, easily one of 2008's best and by far the best film in the series but I don't think it's a masterpiece and it did fall short of my expectations, which is almost understandable when they're this high. Unlike many, I had some minor issues with it. This is probably going to be the most negative review you read for the film and that I'm still highly praising it should give you an idea just how good it is, as if you didn't know already.

Going in I’ve heard his film compared to such epic crime dramas as The Godfather Part II and Heat and that's a revealing point. At times writer/director Christopher Nolan really does seem to believe he's re-making those films rather than giving us a summer action popcorn movie and I found myself I wondering if such a treatment was almost too much for this kind of material. In crafting a Batman drenched in gritty realism, he's made a film so deep, textured and intelligent that it's almost intimidating. It's so ambitious and he jams so much in that I actually worried the movie would slip away from him and co-writers Jonathan Nolan and David Goyer in the third act. It didn't, but that doesn't mean it couldn't have used a trim. However, if that's is the only price I have to pay to get a cinematic superhero rendering of this quality, so be it.

If we hit the low point in goofy camp with Joel Schumacher’s Batman and Robin we've now gone as far as possible in the other direction and Nolan’s pitch-black vision has been pushed to the limit. I don't even know where we can go from here. Even if we could argue all day whether the film is overhyped, there's one aspect of this film that surely isn't as an actor leaves us with the ultimate gift. Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker is not only as great as you've heard, it's better, and just about the most frighteningly display off villainy you'll ever witness on screen. But there's actually another supporting performance that's hasn't garnered as much attention that almost equals it in emotional complexity.

No need to worry about spoilers here. The film’s plot is so multi-layered I’m not sure I could give it away if I tried and you could have filled the entire Batman series with the plots and sub-plots contained within it. And Shakespearean tragedies don't have this much going on emotionally. The sequel picks up where Batman Begins left off with mob crime in Gotham City escalating even further under Lieutenant Jim Gordon’s (Gary Oldman) watch, except a new criminal mastermind by the name of The Joker (Ledger) is cutting in and creatively robbing the mob of its earnings. His first appearance, an electrifyingly bank robbery unlike any you could hope to see on film, provides a strong, unforgettable introduction to the psychotic villain.

There's also a “White Knight” whose stormed into Gotham City, district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), a fair and honest legal crusader who wants to rid the streets of low-lives so there’s no longer a need for Batman (Christian Bale). He’s also dating and working alongside Bruce Wayne’s longtime love Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal, taking over for Katie Holmes). Rachel wrestles with her feelings for the new D.A. while still obviously carrying a torch for Bruce. She’ll have a choice to make. Meanwhile, Bruce struggles with his identity as Batman like never before, wondering whether his presence is actually helping the city, or burying it deeper in crime.
The film creates an awesome parallel between Joker and Batman, much more alike than different. “You Complete Me!” he tells the Caped Crusader. And he’s right. He does. Gotham City truly isn’t big enough for these two and you’d figure this could only end one way. Nolan has other, bigger plans though. Most of the first hour plays like a mob movie and a lot of time (maybe too much) is devoted to build-up. But the real satisfaction comes from Ledger’s Joker bubbling just below Gotham’s underbelly waiting to explode.

Played as a sick hybrid of Clockwork Orange’s Alex and Sid Vicious of The Sex Pistols, Joker bares no resemblance to any villain previously committed to film. It's truly the definitive portrayal of this iconic character, with Ledger making Cesar Romero and even Jack Nicholson look like clowns hired for a children's birthday party. Every moment he's on screen is pure terror and Nolan is smart enough to know the right dose of screen time to give him. Not too much, not too little. Just the perfect amount. There really aren't words to describe what he does and to say it's the greatest performance contained in a superhero movie is an insult because this is no superhero movie, nor does it feel like a "performance." Heath Ledger becomes The Joker. He inhabits him. Nothing could have possibly prepared me for what he does in this role and if I didn't know who was playing the part beforehand I would have never guessed it was him. He's physically unrecognizable. What surprised me most was how funny he was. Not haha funny, but scary-funny. Like a serial killer he storms into Gotham without reason or warning and no backstory is required or wanted because Ledger provides everything. It stays with you. A posthumous Oscar nomination isn't just a possibility, it's guaranteed. I'm skeptical whether the Academy would have considered nominating him unless he died, but that speaks for my lack of faith in them and their bias against the genre, not Ledger's work, which deserves to win. Who knew he had this in him?

When I first heard Ledger was cast in the role I wasn’t thrilled, mainly because of my unfamiliarity with his previous work, but he’s proven me, and any other doubters, completely wrong here. When the final credits rolled I felt immense sadness wondering about all the future great performances we’d be missing out on. But had he not tragically passed away and just retired on this role, his legacy would still be secure. That's how spellbinding this is.

Aside from Ledger’s Joker, Nolan does a good job spreading the wealth among the various supporting characters, but I wouldn’t expect anything less considering the film’s gargantuan running length. Michael Caine’s Alfred and Morgan Freeman’s Lucius Fox, who both had little more than cameo roles in Batman Begins, get much more screen time and are fleshed out with greater importance. Both contribute in big ways to the story and it’s a welcome change. Even more welcome is the contribution of Gary Oldman as Lieutenant Gordon this time around as he’s given a superb story arc that deepens and complicates his relationship with Batman as well as the citizens of Gotham. Oldman slides into the role effortlessly and I couldn't believe how important the part was. It's essentially treated as being on the same level as Batman. No one could ever accuse Nolan of skimping on character development.

Bale’s performance as Batman, truthfully, I found to be just okay. I thought his solid work in the previous film was slightly overpraised and don't even get me started on that silly voice Nolan has Bale use when he's behind the mask. I was always amazed that no one has a problem with that. Bruce Wayne for the first time in the series’ history really comes off as arrogant and I think that's intentional because the movie is working in shades of gray. The two morally compromised characters in the film are actually more likable than he is. It's easily the darkest rendering of the character yet, but it does serve the many themes of the story well.

Part of why Bruce Wayne is so hard to root for may be because he isn’t the real hero of the film. Harvey Dent is. Its no wonder he is since Aaron Eckhart gives a performance that’s only a few notches below Ledger’s, suggesting a depth and complexity to Gotham’s righteous district attorney that couldn’t have been on the page. I wasn’t only rooting for this guy, but felt deep sympathy for him as he tries to do the right thing only to unintentionally dig himself deeper by the second.
I know it’s a staple in the comics and I’ll be ripped apart for saying this, but the two-sided coin came off as a little cheesy to me. In a film so grounded in gritty realism it seemed cartoonish having this D.A. go around flipping a giant coin to make a decision every second. I know fans would have been enraged but if it were excised I wouldn't complain. Nolan did such a good job depicting the theme of chance within the story that seeing it seems almost unnecessary.

The visual treatment of Two-Face is spectacular and a giant step up from Tommy Lee Jones’ embarrassing makeup job in Batman Forever. This version looks like he was ripped directly from the comics and that was definitely the right way to go. I fully expected Eckhart to blow Jones' cackling cartoon Two-Face out of the water but Harvey Dent is a big, big deal in this movie and the journey Nolan takes him on is fascinating. He’s a victim of circumstance and Eckhart acts his heart out to sell the transformation even if the script overreaches a little with him toward the end. Still, of all the characters in the film, I probably cared about him the most.

Not surprisingly, Maggie Gyllenhaal does a solid job as Rachel and brings more nuance to the role than Katie Holmes did in the previous film. She's an actress that brings something interesting to every role she plays and for the most part this is no exception, but something did seem to be just a little off. For instance, take the scene you’ve seen in the trailers with The Joker crashing the dinner party and threatening Rachel. It’s supposed to be frightening and intense but because Maggie plays the character as a fiercely independent and feisty woman who can't be intimidated I wasn’t exactly afraid for her. As much as it pains me to admit this, something Katie Holmes was always good at was conveying innocence and Rachel could have used a little more of that here. Since the rest of the movie is drenched in gloom and doom that juxtaposition may have been intriguing. But Gyllenhaal brings other attributes to the role that Holmes could only dream of. For one, she's actually likable. She's also much more believable as a hardened attorney and has excellent chemistry with Eckhart. Her chemistry with Bale is iffier but I think that has more to do with Bale's darker, aloof rendering of Bruce Wayne than Gyllenhaal's performance. I didn't get exactly what I was hoping with Rachel Dawes and despite the strides made here it's still Nolan's least developed and most poorly written character. No actress would be winning awards for this role.

Despite everything Nolan’s trying to do here the field doesn’t start to get too crowded until the last 45 minutes or so. There was a point the film could have ended but Nolan just keeps going and takes Two-Face’s story further than it should have gone without completing the Joker’s. As I loved Eckhart’s work it there’s no need to jam that much in when another film is going to be made that could easily cover that territory. Eckhart's performance as Harvey Dent was so compelling I almost didn't want to see him turn into Two-Face and part of me wondered the direction the story could take if he didn't because let's face it: His transformation is a big stretch. This film deals with some heady issues like the possibility of evil and corruption, national security, the burden of personal responsibility and the need for heroes, or rather if they really even exist. The final twist of the knife is not only surprising, but thought provoking and will leave you in a state of deep contemplation. How many times could you say that about a superhero film?  A major story thread is left dangling in the most literal sense and there's no way it could ever possibly be resolved. Perhaps fittingly.


The film runs 2 and a half hours but I can't say I thought it flew by like everyone else did. This is more a crime drama than an action movie and it requires your complete attention. There were a few points during the film where I was even getting restless and wondered why certain scenes (specifically in the first and last hours) weren’t left on the cutting room floor. The actions sequences were exciting and thankfully didn't rely on an overabundance of CGI, or at least didn't look like they did.

Mostly due to the viewing conditions (poor air conditioning and screaming kids) this was a grueling experience, rather than a thrilling one and I didn't come rushing out of the theater in a state of cosmic euphoria and excitement. In fact, it took me some time to completely gather my thoughts on the film and I had even written a review before this one that I had scrapped. Even now my thoughts on the movie are still very raw and it still probably needs a lot of time to settle. I was also unprepared for just how much the excessive hype would effect me going in. It really took a toll. "Let's get it over with" isn't the most desirable attitude to approach a film with but unfortunately the media put me in that position. I can tell myself all of these factors don't make a difference, but who am I kidding? It'll be interesting to see when I re-watch it on DVD whether the minor problems I had with it iron out or get worse.
I just recently ranked the Batman films and I wouldn't even dare place this because I don’t consider it a Batman film. Going in I didn't expect something more akin to Zodiac or There Will Be Blood than any superhero movie and I'm curious to see how this does in the coming weeks because this doesn't fit the textbook definition of mainstream, crowd-pleasing summer entertainment. I can't help but think something may have been slightly lost in taking this approach, as if the superhero movie was robbed of its virginity...at knife point. But I'll bite the bullet because it's too cinematically challenging to do otherwise. I don't know if it's a masterpiece as a whole, but many parts of it (specifically the work of Ledger and Eckhart) could qualify as such.

The friend I saw it with agreed with the general consensus that it was a masterpiece and the greatest superhero film ever made. Then I asked him if he had fun. He danced around the question, talking about the performances and the visuals until he finally told me it didn’t have to be fun, just faithful to Bob Kane’s original vision of the character. It became clear right then and there that the rules have changed. That we finally got what we've been waiting for and found out what would happen if all our previously held expectations of these kinds of movies were just thrown away. Only the bat suit and clown make-up remain. It's Batman, envisioned by Christopher Nolan. The Dark Knight changed the landscape and, for better or worse, we won't be able to view superhero movies the same way again.

Stranger Than Fiction

Director: Marc Forster
Starring: Will Ferrell, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Emma Thompson, Dustin Hoffman, Queen Latifah, Tom Hulce, Linda Hunt Rating: PG-13
Running Time: 113 min.

**** (out of ****)

Over the past couple of weeks I've had the opportunity to watch some Oscar nominated films and review them. Two of which I even gave four stars to. They deserved four stars, but it was based primarily on technical achievement. When they were finished, I admired and respected the work that went in to to them even if they didn't reach me on a personal level. They kind of get what could be considered a "golf clap" from me. They earned four stars no doubt about it, but I'll be honest and say I'll probably never watch either of them again.

So, what does Stranger Than Fiction have in common with this year's Best Picture Oscar nominees? Absolutely nothing, because it's better than all of them. When I watch a movie I want to laugh. I want to cry. When it's finished I want to eject a disc out of my DVD player knowing I experienced a film that tells us something about ourselves and makes us think. Stranger Than Fiction is a tragedy, a comedy, a romance and a coming of age tale all rolled up into one

Harold Crick (Will Ferrell) is an I.R.S. agent stuck in what could be called a routine. He wakes up every morning to the alarm on his perfectly synchronized Timex watch, counts the exact number of brushstrokes as he cleans his teeth, catches his bus at the exact same time every morning, counts his steps on his way into the office and takes a perfectly timed thirty second coffee and forty five minute lunch break every day. It's time efficient. In actuality, he leads a painfully boring existence, but that doesn't really occur to him. It wouldn't since those immersed in their routine rarely stop to consider if they're bored or not, or more importantly if they're even remotely satisfied or happy. 

Things change for Harold one morning when he's brushing his teeth and hears the voice of a woman with a British accent narrating everything he's doing. What he doesn't realize yet is he's the main character of the comeback novel of author Kay Eiffel (Emma Thompson), a chain-smoking, suicidal recluse with a bad case of writer's block. She can't seem to find a way to kill Harold Crick and her publisher has hired her an assistant (Queen Latifah) to get her out of her funk.

Meanwhile Harold seeks help from a psychiatrist (Linda Hunt) who tells him he has schizophrenia and renowned literary professor Jules Hilbert (Dustin Hoffman) who tries to get to the bottom of whether he's in a tragedy or comedy. On top of this he finds he must audit the tax return of Ana Pascal (Maggie Gyllenhaal), a free-spirited, tattooed bakery owner who hates Harold because...well, he's an I.R.S. agent. You're supposed to hate I.R.S. agents. A funny thing happens. He starts having feelings for her and bumbles his way through many of their encounters, consistently embarrassing himself. That doesn't matter though. What matters is that for the first time Harold is actually feeling something and must come to terms with it in the face of his "iminent death" at the hands of Eiffel's story.

How he handles the news he's about to expire is surprising and touching, taking the story in new directions and affecting everyone around him, especially the author. It's a movie about an awakening, not just for Harold but for everyone in his story. Kay Eiffel's book within the movie forces Harold to take action and be become, for the first time, driving force of his own destiny. It forces the other characters in his life to examine how he's affected him and delivers a message (without pounding us over the head with it) that everyone is important and every moment matters. This is especially true of the ending, which is pitch perfect. Some may complain it's a cop out, but how can it be? It ends the only way it can because the characters who are part of this story choose for it to. It's earned.

Zach Helm's script joins Charlie Kaufman's Adaptation and Being John Malkovich as the most original, intelligent screenplays to come along in a while. I always thought what separates a good movie writing from a great movie writing is the care taken with the supporting characters. It's tough giving each of them a life of their own but Helm does it, and Forster (aided by perfect casting) directs each of them to magnificent performances that fill every frame of this motion picture with humor and uncontainable energy. All the decisions made in the film make sense and are based on what these people would do, not dialogue a writer has written for them.

We believe Harold would take the advice of this looney English professor Hilbert because he's smart and his advice is surprisingly good. He might be crazy, but he's right. And what a joy it is to see Dustin Hoffman, for the first time in what seems like forever, in a great role that fits him. He works so little and is given so few opportunities to show what he has that we often forget he's still one of our most treasured actors. I loved how the care was taken to make the narration of Harold's life interesting and funny, giving us the impression that if this was a real book it would likely be a bestseller. Those only familiar with Emma Thompson as a dramatic actress will find themselves surprised at her dry wit and comic timing as Kay Eiffel, especially the way she plays off Queen Latifah's character. No one in the story is as deeply affected by Harold Crick as she is. In a way, he's part of her.

For me, one of the biggest surprises of the film was how well it succeeds not only as a morality tale, but as love story. On paper Gyllenhaal and Farrell seem like the weirdest pairing imaginable, but every scene they share together in this movie is a joy to watch. Her part's relatively small, yet she really brings a realistic quirkiness to it while still conveying an intelligence that lets you know she always knows what's going on. If Harold wants her, he has to earn it and she's not making it easy for him, nor should she. If anyone needs to be challenged, it's this guy. Their relationship develops organically and isn't forced on us by strange coincidences or plot contrivances. The chemistry between the two are electric, especially in a memorable scene where he plays guitar on her couch.

If you're going into this film looking for traces of Ron Burgundy or Ricky Bobby, you won't find any of it in Will Ferrell's performance. He's shy, reserved, restrained and introspective. Everything you wouldn't expect from him. In many ways he's perfect for the part because upon first glance he's amazingly ordinary in terms of looks and appearance. He's an everyman you'd believe wakes up every morning to a stagnant, boring existence. Yet, when the story and Harold's life kicks into high gear Ferrell turns it up to just the right level. Lately many comedians have tried to stretch their acting muscles in more dramatic fare. This should rank as the most successful attempt and if the Academy ever stepped outside the box every once in a while I think they'd notice Ferrell's work was nomination-worthy. However his own skit on the Oscar telecast jokingly acknowledged his chances of a comedian ever being nominated for anything. Now that might really be a tragedy.

I'm actually very amazed, but relieved that a movie like this could be released by a major studio. I'm also surprised a movie could take a premise as promising as this and not squander it somehow. It's such a high concept, the film was almost destined not to live up to it. But director Forster knew the premise he had and was determined to have it cross the finish line in one piece. The film's been compared endlessly to 1998's The Truman Show about a man (Jim Carrey) unwittingly starring in a t.v. show about his life. That was an incredible movie, but it rarely touched on as many issues as this. With all the sequels and remakes being vomited out by Hollywood these days I sometimes wonder if there are no more new ideas and every story has been told. A movie like Stranger Than Fiction proves that isn't the case and reaffirms our faith that the well of creativity hasn't run dry yet.