Thank God Meryl Streep can act

It’s 1964, St. Nicholas in the Bronx. A vibrant, charismatic priest, Father Flynn (Academy Award® winner Philip Seymour Hoffman), is trying to upend the schools’ strict customs, which have long been fiercely guarded by Sister Aloysius Beauvier (Academy Award® winner Meryl Streep), the iron-gloved Principal who believes in the power of fear and discipline. The winds of political change are sweeping through the community, and indeed, the school has just accepted its first black student, Donald Miller. But when Sister James (Academy Award® nominee Amy Adams), a hopeful innocent, shares with Sister Aloysius her guilt-inducing suspicion that Father Flynn is paying too much personal attention to Donald, Sister Aloysius sets off on a personal crusade to unearth the truth and to expunge Flynn from the school. Now, without a shard of proof besides her moral certainty, Sister Aloysius locks into a battle of wills with Father Flynn which threatens to tear apart the community with irrevocable consequence.

The general consensus about Doubt: John Patrick Shanley should stick to the stage and Meryl Streep is a huge badass, even as a nun. Don't get me wrong, Shanley didn't ruin anything, the film, overall, is a success. It was the overabundance of exaggerated camera angles and the focus on less than inconspicuous symbols that bothered me. Call me whatever you'd like, but I prefer a film to translate thematic symbolism with a little more subtlety, not for the director to mercilessly bang it over my head like a bad Love Actually remake. The fim survives upon the shoulders of Streep and an excellent performance by Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

Honestly, you don't even need a watchful eye to understand what I'm getting at with Shanley. It may take a few scenes, but I have a feeling that after you see Streep and Amy Adams stand in the same place for eight hours at a time and exchange dialogue, it won't come as a shock that this thing was first a little old play. And there is nothing wrong with that. Obviously, there have been hundreds upon hundreds of plays adapted for the big screen and have had little problem doing so. Unfortunately, Doubt doesn't take advantage of technology and the many other wonders the film industry has to offer. Not only that, but the actors are staged in a way during the film where you could take them off the set and onto the stage and it would be showtime (witty, I know). But perhaps that's part of the film's draw...? I'm not sure. The simple nature of the whole thing is rather effective: no booming orchestrations, a short list of locations, camera work that compliments acting versus drowning it; the performances and the screenplay itself are highlighted in the film, not unncessary embroidery that might have otherwise distracted from the text. Again, I don't know. I could have used a bit more movie and less play, since that's what I payed for, and, of course, since watching a play would mean I'd need to change out of my sweatpants and stop chomping on my popcorn like a wildebeast.

But like I said, Doubt has a lot it should be praised for as the well-made piece of art that it is. Effortlessly, it makes you despise the venomous Sister Aloyisus (Streep) for her stolid, cold nature, but then causes you, not a minute later, to question Father Flynn's (Hoffman) innocence and consequently appreciate that someone was keeping a watchful eye on things. Another nice thing about the film is that it's rather short and sweet (and by sweet, I mean rather serious and pretty deep). There are only a few good moments to get up and use the bathroom or refill your popcorn, and even getting up during those means you run the risk of missing Viola Davs' two second long, oscar-nominated performance. The woman is amazing and shows that it doesn't take loads of screentime to be recognized. With the film being only 100 minutes long, I could even bring my favorite movie-hating friends along and they would probably survive.

All in all, Doubt was more than likely made for the purpose of winning Oscars. Throw a bunch of good performances in there that involve a lot of yelling and stage theatrics and there you have it. But I can't say the movie isn't powerful or effective in the telling of a well-written psychological thriller, because it is. The film leaves you wondering about more than a man's innocence, and that's what makes it far more than your average Saturday afternoon yawn at the cinema.

Anne Hathaway finally stars in a real movie, Anne Hathaway finally delievers a good performance

After an extended stint in rehab following a major family catastrophe, Kym (Hathaway) returns to her picture-perfect Connecticut hometown to attend the elaborate wedding of her older sister Rachel (played with considerable spark by Rosemarie DeWitt). Kym's arrival causes long-festering hurts to resurface, and the Buchmans' family unity is soon hanging by a thread. Issues of trust and reconciliation flow through the film, leading to discord between parents and their children, as well as among siblings and family friends, even as they all struggle to maintain a ceasefire during Rachel's nuptials. While Kym is offended by her sister's seeming ability to live a faultless existence, the rest of their family and friends resent Kym's penchant for self-serving theatrics and darkly comic one-liners.

Rachel Getting Married is hardly the best film of the year, but with a deeply invested and involved performance from the female lead and her supporting cast, it turns into something that's definitely worth watching. Jonathon Demme has strayed pretty far from his impeccable style seen in The Silence of the Lambs and Philadelphia, but what he's come up with isn't awful, just a big odd.

I expected to watch an intensely dramatic film about a dysfunctional family with a troubled past, and that's exactly what I got. A bit of an emotional undertaking, but that's something I appreciate about (good) movies. You want to feel what the characters feel and understand them when they are misunderstood. You can do all of that with this film; however, what may cause you to look at your watch and sigh are the obnoxious and purposelessly long scenes shot in documentary style that trail on even after the third or fourth time you're sure they're finished. Demme has been meddling in documentaries as of late, so I suppose we can forgive him for his indulgence this time. But never again will I sit patiently through ten minutes of random musicians playing at a wedding reception while random and unimportant people dance, and dance, then some more, a little longer, now let's throw some elephants in there (!?), add some weird name chanting, maybe have Tamyra Grey from American Idol sing a bit (I'm not kidding)... Please cut that crap to about thirty seconds next time or I'm getting up and getting out.

Demme could have done pretty much all he wanted with this film, and all eyes would still be on Hathaway and DeWitt, who nurture a love/hate relationship that started after Hathaway's character accidentally killed their younger brother in a car accident. The scenes where the two battle are undeniably what make the film raw and full of grit. At her sister's rehearsal dinner, Hathway delivers her shining moment in the dark film: a toast to her sister, the bride to be. But instead of your normal, reminiscent speech, Kym manages to make all uncomfortable by highlighting what they already know: she's a recovering addict who feels the need to apologize to everyone she's wronged in the past, even at a time when everyone has come to celebrate her sister and her future husband's marriage. But you suddenly find yourself unsure whether to be irritated with Kym or sympathize with her efforts to gain back some solid footing. The film brilliantly and with great honesty, contrasts the biggest event of a woman's life with another woman's battle for forgiveness and her desire to finally leave the past behind her.

It's great that Anne Hathaway landed this role and has demonstrated her acting ability. I enjoyed her princess tirades just as much as the next not-so-closet Disney fan, but now she'll be able to expand quite a bit. This will definitely be her go to film for credibility after making me want to gauge my eyes out in Bride Wars this winter. Bring on more dark stuff for Anne! This was a great movie and a wonderful start to what looks like a promising future for her.

Slumdog Millionaire is pretty much the best movie of 2008, somewhere Clint Eastwood is crying

Slumdog Millionaire is the story of Jamal Malik (Patel), an 18 year-old orphan from the slums of Mumbai, who is about to experience the biggest day of his life. With the whole nation watching, he is just one question away from winning a staggering 20 million rupees on India¹s "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?"

But when the show breaks for the night, police arrest him on suspicion of cheating; how could a street kid know so much? Desperate to prove his innocence, Jamal tells the story of his life in the slum where he and his brother grew up, of their adventures together on the road, of vicious encounters with local gangs, and of Latika (Pinto), the girl he loved and lost. Each chapter of his story reveals the key to the answer to one of the game show¹s questions.

Each chapter of Jamal¹s increasingly layered story reveals where he learned the answers to the show¹s seemingly impossible quizzes. But one question remains a mystery: what is this young man with no apparent desire for riches really doing on the game show?

When the new day dawns and Jamal returns to answer the final question, the Inspector and sixty million viewers are about to find out.

Danny Boyle is kind of crazy in a good way, I'd say. While his earlier works were hit and miss, not even the well received Trainspotting or 28 Days Later garnered the acclaim Slumdog Millionaire, his latest effort about a boy who makes it from rags to riches on India's variant of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, has racked up this awards season. The cast is extremely talented and likeable and the score for the film adds perfectly to its excitement. There are several reasons the film will probably win best picture, so let's discuss.

First and foremost, Slumdog is excellent because it is both timely and timeless. Incorporating India and its globalizing economy as its setting, the country's beautiful landscapes capture the attention of the audience and show just how small the children are in the scheme of things.The film's story chronicles Jamal Malik and his traumatic childhood filled with religious riots and ridiculous amounts of loss and misfortune, to his place on a popular game show's hotseat. The universal ideas of overcoming obstacles and the value of a person's experience are portrayed brilliantly in the film. I can't say that the performances in the film are absolutely fantastic (Patel is a bit one-dimensional and Pinto is fine for what Beaufoy gave her to work with), but they do what they have to do, and that's engaging the audience into a hearthwrenching story. Not too difficult considering the script, but the editing and score are just as impressive and integral. Many critics have knocked the film for being unrealistic, complaining that a boy with no formal education could never fair as well as Jamal did on the popular triva show. I can't say I share their sentiment; movies are almost never believable if you look closely enough, and besides, I'm not sure Boyle or his crew intended for Slumdog to be a work of cinematic realism. It's all about what's behind the plot here, and it's obvious from the reactions of audiences worldwide and the majority of Hollywood's critics that the movie epitomizes effective storytelling.

Another reason the film has done so well is because it's a visual masterpiece. Like directors Wes Anderson and Chris Smith, Boyle utilizes his setting to help tell the story. Chris Dickens is the edtior of the film and his work is fantastically seamless and full of adrenaline. The opening scene where Jamal and his brother run through the slums of Mumbai contends with The Dark Knight and Iron Man and may even get the best of them at times. The score for the film already won a Golden Globe and will probably take another honor at the Oscars. It's diverse and climactic, a vital asset to the movie's pacing. M.I.A contributes to a handful of songs and her rough and tough sound meshes perfectly with what the audience sees. I'm bummed she won't be performing at the Oscars on account of her first baby popping out anytime now, but I have to say that knowing Miley Cyrus' has no chance of winning an Academy Award for Best Original song makes up for it and then some (dear God, i'm sure it's only a matter of time...).

Anyway, it's all the little things that add up big for Slumdog. A lot of movies these days, several of them being Oscar contenders, rely on that one thing to sell their film (Anne Hathway in Rachel Getting Married, Kate Winslet in The Reader, Meryl in Doubt, the overhyped animatronics in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight, etc etc). Yeah, yeah, I'm aware there are a few assisting elements that push those films onward and upward, but none of them are an especially well-rounded final product like Slumdog. Is the movie a crowd pleaser? Yes. But remember, in order to be considered so, you've gotta actually please, and boy does this film.