The Red Shoes

V: Only I watched this - a favorite of mine from childhood. NOT that this is a children's film, no, no, no. But I loved ballet, and this was about ballet, so I loved it. It's difficult for me to give it a very honest review because it is so tied to my nostalgia. I had seen it so often, knew the lines so well. What did I gain from it watching it 20 years later? Mostly an appreciation for Anton Walbrook, who played the obsessed owner of a ballet company, Lermontov. He was fantastic! The film is an artistic portrayal of the Hans Christian Anderson story, The Red Shoes. Particularly, the ballet that they produce of the same name, in the film, departs from reality to show what the ballerina, Victoria Page, is going through in her own struggle with her desires for both dance and love. It is a beautiful film, beautiful music, beautiful dance. Sad story. A classic. I love it. 4 stars

Love Actually (edited)

M: I am a sucker for things that take place in England, and this thing had an amazing cast, really amazing. We watched it edited, and it seemed to have lost a lot. It was pretty good, but not great. It didn't (and maybe couldn't) live up to its cast. 2 1/2 stars.

V: Interesting movie, with "love" looked at from many different angles. Yes, great cast. Touching, sad, romantic, sacrificing: love is a powerful and sometimes devastating motivator. I enjoyed it. 3 stars

Soul Surfer

M: A really good, touching movie. Worth seeing. I hope it didn't scare the kids away from swimming in the ocean (one already said she didn't want to go in the ocean anymore). We explained that he movie is about overcoming your fears. Could almost go higher, but 3 stars.

V: I admit, I cried. The movie is not about the attack- they handled that very matter-of-factly. It is about recovery and moving on - overcoming trials. It was a sweet movie about a real girl who has a remarkable story. 3 stars.

Win Win

M: Watched this edited with our good friends. A good show, with lots of language edited out. Liked it a lot though. 3 stars.

V: And by "good friends" we mean brother and sister-in-law, too. I really love Paul Giamatti. He's one of my favorite actors. I also liked the kid, who was hilariously mellow, but also a bit shelled because of a bad family life. Paul's character and his wife, are people you can relate to, trying to do their best by their family and by this kid. I liked it. 3 stars

The Illusionist

V: A beautiful, bittersweet film. It is worth seeing just for the animation. It is interesting, even though there is not much said, and what is said is in French or another language. It depicts quite naturally human interactions and desires - how we come and go and change each other. Old vs. New. It tugs at your throat a little. See it. 3 1/2 stars

M: Kind of a downer, but hands down the most beautiful animation I have ever seen. 3 stars.

Tess of the D'ubervilles

V: Wow, what a downer!! I maintain that I hate Thomas Hardy. Didn't like him in High School and still don't like him. He's a cynic, a fatalist and a bad, bad man. His poor characters try and try and try and just keep getting knocked down by bad timing and unlucky circumstances. This is a tragically tragic tragedy. Just, please don't watch this - it will depress you. That having been said, I do think I have to rate this movie based on more than just the story. It was well acted, and it did affect me emotionally. I give it 2 1/2 stars.

M: Yea, its a downer. Tragedies are. But, my problem with this story is that in a tragedy, the main character should have a fatal flaw. Like V said, here, there was no flaw, Tess just didn't have the stars aligned for her I guess. It was her "fate" for her life to fall completely apart. It was mean spirited and not very enjoyable. 2 1/2 stars.

Social Network

M: Winner of the golden globe, Social Network is obviously a good movie. But the "best," well, not to me. Although it is well made, and makes you think about whether or not you would want to be the inventor of something like facebook, and therefore one of the richest and most influential people in the world (I wouldn't) it also had some things that bugged me. It was intriguing and sad to see what success did to friendships and trust. It was also sad to see some of the unnecessary drug and promiscuity they threw into this movie. I hope that, like much of the movie, this stuff was not true, and only invented by the writer to soup up what would have already been a really interesting movie. Maybe I am naive. And that's another thing, I don't like movies too much that are "based on a true story." From my understanding, the Social Network is very loosely based on a true story. I don't like it when something is presented as a truth, but I am not sure what is true and what is false. For example, did you know that Mark Zuckerberg has had the same girlfriend since before he invented facebook? The movie really did him a disservice. I think I will have to spend some time on Wikipedia now so I have a better idea of the true story (assuming Wikipedia is accurate). This is the year that if you mention facebook, you will win an award. Although this movie is pretty good, it shouldn't win the Oscar. 3 stars.

V:  First off, I thought Jesse Eisenberg did a fantastic job.  I wouldn't be surprised if he got an Oscar.  Other than that, I wasn't super impressed with the movie.  It focused a lot on sex and drugs, which while obviously offensive, just wasn't the point.  The development of facebook and the interactions between the people involved in the lawsuit was the interesting stuff.  It was a pretty good movie.  I'll never want to watch it again, though.  I found the music loud and annoying, and some references too obvious. 3 stars

Mansfield Park

M: This is the sassy Jane Austin, with lots of loose moral behavior going on. An all-around good show. I like the heroine. I like the actor (Eli Stone guy) who played the hero, but I didn't really care for his part too much. I never really dig a show that has one of its main love interests pine for someone else the entire show only to quickly change their mind at the end. Not as romantic I guess. Plus, they didn't become filthy rich in the end, what's up with that Jane? 3 stars

V: This is the third time I've seen this. I think it is stylistically done. I like it. It is a little harsher than other Austen's, but it goes beyond the book, as the opening credits reveal. They add in some stuff from letters and journals (and maybe a few other things.) I like it. I think the hero, Edmund (aka Eli Stone) did actually love Fanny the whole time. He was caught up in social expectations and, yeah, a really pretty and seemingly charming woman. Anyway, that's what I think. 3 stars

Wives and Daughters

M: Another great mini-series by the BBC. Same author and director as North and South. The characters are likable, and I thought that the leading lady, played by Justine Waddell, was great. But the leading man was not so great. Not the best romance, but a very good and enjoyable show. 3 stars.

V: We both liked this. Some very good actors. Some annoying (because they were supposed to be) characters. Really good. 3 stars

Proof

M: As good as a movie about math can be perhaps. But, not great. 2 1/2 stars.

V: I actually liked this quite a bit. It is not light, fun entertainment, be warned. But I thought it was a really interesting psychological drama and well-acted. Yeah, I really liked it. 3 1/2 stars.

Girl with a Pearl Earring

M: A pretty good show. It tried to be a bit too deep though. And if there was romance, I didn't buy it. But, well done. 2 1/2 stars.

V: I was underwhelmed by this movie. Though I thought the acting was good, the overall mood was just a little too bleak. I mean, I like myself some bleak, don't get me wrong, but it was unwarranted here. It needed a little balance. But, it was good. Not great. 2 1/2 stars.

Ben-Hur

V: So I dragged out another classic for M to see. (It had been a long time since I'd seen it -- as evidenced by the fact that I remember the burping scene as my favorite. Yes, there's a burping scene, not really the most important part of Ben-Hur - which you surely realize if you've seen Ben-Hur. I mean, deep and heavy sweeping epic BEN-HUR . . . and I remembered the burping scene. I was young, OK?) The movie goes a little slowly for our modern taste. The people kind of pause and stare at each other for uncomfortably long, dramatic periods of time. And I wonder . . . did people really used to do that, y'know, back in the day? Were they actually slower than we are now? I digress. It is really, still, a very cool movie. Did you know it held the record for most academy awards until 1998's Titanic? Almost 40 years! It has amazing costumes and sets - and the chariot race! Even people who haven't seen Ben-Hur have seen the chariot race. And M's boss's dark humor was revealed when we watched the galley scene. "We keep you alive to run this ship. Row well . . . and live." Hey! says M, That's what my boss is always telling the associates! Ha, ha, ha. (watch this scene and you'll see. It's hilarious.) It's long. It's good, though. And I even watched the long making-of documentary afterward. (Well, this spread over a couple of days.) It's a winner. Who am I to say otherwise? 4 stars

M: I agree that Ben-Hur is, well, epic. It is absolutely amazing how many costumes and actors are in this movie. No special effects, just tons of man-power and time. And a 3 1/2 hour originally composed sound-track to boot. Really pretty amazing. For me, the whole religion thing clashed a bit with the rest of the show. I know it was an important part, and I am probably a bad person for saying that, but it didn't quite fit for me. That is perhaps the only thing keeping this movie from getting absolute top marks. Even still, Ben-Hur is amazing to watch. There is no way this movie could ever be made today. No way. I cringe when I hear that Titanic broke the record for academy awards. Titanic?! My nemesis. Check out Ben Hur. It is worth seeing an epic that doesn't rely on computerized graphics. A classic. 3 1/2 stars

Invictus

M: This was only ok for me. I thought that Morgan Freedman did a good job as Nelson Mandela, and Matt Damon was likable as always. But the movie itself was a bit much for me. I can be inspired by sports, but this was too inspiring. It is too simplistic to accept that rugby alone saved a nation and changed everybody's perceptions and biases. There were also a few scenes that absolutely bugged me to no end, namely the airplane scene and the scene with the guy scoping out the rugby stadium for, what was at least inferred to be, a good sniper location. The movie tried to add some suspense by inferring danger or assassination potential, but then later completely ignored the fact that it had ever mentioned it. Anyway, that is my take. 2 stars.

V: Interesting. I liked this movie. I didn't think that they were portraying that rugby saved the nation. Rather, I was intrigued by the careful attention that Mandela gave to the rugby team, and the world cup, as a way to reach across barriers and to unite the country. It made me want to know more about Mandela. There was a strong message of forgiveness portrayed, which is particularly poignant given the way things had been for the country and for Mandela, personally. I liked the phony teeth they had Morgan Freeman wear when he appeared in the crowds, smiling that great big Mandela smile. Even though this was a sports movie, I liked it. "Invictus", meaning "unconquered" is the title of the poem that Mandela quotes and gives to the rugby team captain: "I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." That's quite the mantra after 27 years in prison. 3 1/2 stars.

The Time Traveler's Wife

M: I don't want to lose my man card, but I kind of liked this movie. Maybe its because I like the notion of time travel, and it was interesting to see what they did with that. I didn't really care for the relationship in the movie, which I suppose is pretty important. I hated the notebook, same actress, way too sappy. This relationship also dripped a bit of sap, but not nearly as bad. It felt like the relationship moved too quickly and then went backwards though. The first time they meet, at lease that the viewer sees, she is madly in love with him and they jump in the sack. A little while later, he is gone for a few weeks and she is intensely mad at him. This after a lifetime of his being gone most of the time, which she didn't seem to mind? Not buying it. In the end though, I loved the idea of his moving through time and how it came together, especially with his daughter. That saved this from being another lame over-the-top romance. 2 1/2 stars

V: Interesting concept. My disbelief was almost immediately un-suspended though by the way they were so matter-of-fact about the whole time-traveling thing. This poor little boy loses his mom in a car crash, and immediately this weird man shows up and says, "It's okay, I'm you. I time-traveled here." Only the friend of the wife's friend seemed to show some real dismay at the idea. Okay, other than that . . . It made for some good - wait, pause the movie, let's talk about these time-travel implications - moments. But that is outside of the movie, isn't it. The end had me a little teary, not because of what the movie achieved really - but the thought of *Spoiler* seeing your husband again after he had died - yikes. And what does she do? She smiles pleasantly and holds her daughter at her side as he disappears again. No! That is the time for the tearing of hair and gnashing of teeth! What was that blithe "See you maybe some other time for a couple of minutes love." Arg. So, it was kind of interesting, but not particularly well-executed, I thought. 2 stars.

LOST

M: Where to begin. Lost is the only current TV show that V and I have been actively following. After watching the first season on DVD, we started tuning in each week. Thank goodness for DVR and the internet, over six seasons there was probably about a months worth of commercials. Well, Sunday was the final episode. I am left really torn. When Lost is on its A game, there is no better drama, on TV, possibly ever. When it is off, it is really off. As my friend noted, Lost is both the best and worst of TV. The plot walks a fine line between mind blowing mystery and absurdity. See if you can spot the plot twist that didn't actually happen.

1. A giant polar bear attacked a character while she was stranded on a tropical island
2. The characters set off a nuclear bomb that created an alternate reality
3. One of the characters drowned in some murky water and came back to life evil
4. When one of the characters escaped, it caused the island to start jumping trough time
5. A character shot and killed her yet to be born son when he came to the island
6. A character pushed a button every few hours in order to save the world
7. The characters discovered a magical bird that could tell the future
8. A black smoke monster helped a highly radioactive man go into a cave and unstop a glowing well of water, which led to earthquakes
9. One of the character's dead father is spotted alive several times
10. One character plays a cop, a con-man, a murderer, and a 70's security guard for a scientific community
11. One of the characters does not age and has lived for hundreds of years
12. The island had a giant statue (hundreds of feet tall) and a magical man lived in its foot
13. The island contained a lighthouse that could be used to look at people all over the world
14. A man fell into a cave, turned into a smoke monster, and later inhabited the body of a former cripple who was cured when he came to the island but was later killed after he left the island
15. A character can hear dead people talking from their graves. Another character sees dead people and talks to them face to face.

Which plot never happened? Number 7. A magical bird, that's ridiculous! But I guarantee that someone who hasn't seen the show could not correctly answer this quiz. My biggest complaint is that the writers are clearly better at creating intriguing mysteries than in explaining the mysteries. At the end, a lot was left completely unexplained. That bugs me. But still, as my brother in law noted, at times a Lost episode will come along that can only be described as "high art." These moments occurred the most frequently in the 1st, 4th and 5th seasons. I definitely recommend Lost. The characters are great, and, for the most part, the storyline is compelling. But be prepared to get lost a few times. 3 1/2 stars

V: Lost is fun. Watch it. 3 1/2 stars.

Blindside

V: A very touching story. I like the characters. But not perfect. 3 1/2 stars

M: Pretty Good. 3 stars

Martian Child

V: I liked it better than 2 1/2 stars. I am having a hard time remembering it, it was a couple of weeks ago. I'm a big John Cusack fan. (LOVED "Say Anything" as a teenager. Holding that boom box (or was it a ghetto blaster?) in the rain . . . so romantic.) Anyway, I liked it. It was a tender-hearted story. 3 stars.



M: Pretty good, heart warming, worth seeing. Had a classic kiss that made me laugh. Cusack was good, the boy was ok. The end of the movie didn't really do it for me. 2 1/2 stars

Bleak House

M: This BBC mini-series based on the Dickens Novel is great. It has its super-villains, it has its heroes. Very enjoyable show. I considered giving it a 4, even though the lawyers were all absolute villains, which made me feel bad, perhaps deservedly so. Check it out at your local library. 3 1/2 stars

V: I was really drawn into this - it made for many too-late nights. (3 discs, or 4? With many episodes.) It was well-acted with many interesting, great characters. They managed to keep it from not going too far "out there" as Dickens can tend. Really enjoyable with some good lessons, too. Also 3 1/2 stars

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

M: This movie seems to evoke high emotions on both sides. Many I have talked to say they found it long and boring. Many critics loved it. I am on the fence. First, I like the character of Buttons. I thought he was well played, for the most part. Especially young (old) Buttons, who was endearing (When Brad Pitt emerged and the movie turned into a series of beauty shots, he wasn't so endearing). Here are a couple problems I had.

Warning, major spoiler alert.

First, Buttons started as a tiny old man with a baby mind. So he should have ended as a giant baby (like Mork and Mindy's man-baby).

Second, it made no sense that Buttons abandoned his wife and kids. After having been abandoned by his own father, and suffering from those scars, he should know better. His reasons for leaving? He didn't want his wife to have to care for him, and he wanted his daughter to have a grown-up (old) father. Well, his wife ended up caring for him in the end anyway, and his daughter would have had her own father, although young in body and old and wise in mind. (What's wrong with that?) Plus, by the time he was senile, his daughter was grown. Anyway, a tiny senile baby is easier to care for than a full grown senile person anyway, I would imagine. And any child would exchange knowing their father for caring for the father in old age. It seemed like a total cop out. Plus, Ms. Button found a new husband only to cheat on him later with Button. Why?!! I say.

Finally, I have a hard time rooting for characters that frequent prostitutes, and cheat on spouses.

Anyway, I could go on. Like I said, high emotions. And that is worth something. But in the end, this is a visually good looking movie that has no real soul and ultimatly, I think, no point. 2 1/2 stars.

V: What's the point? So it was an interesting concept: a man grows younger rather than older. Yeah it was interesting, but for a show that sure seemed to be trying to be profound, or make some point, I think it failed. They even stuck in this hummingbird twice - obviously symbolic of . . . well, of something, I guess. But you can't just shove things into a piece and say, "Look! a symbol! oooh, deep." So what of this hummingbird? Let's put our high school symbol decoding hats on. First stabs: It represents death, or rather LIFE, and how fleeting it can be, or maybe it's the spirit of someone who has died coming to comfort us when we face death, or when our friends died but we survived, or when we are about to die... Hmmmm. Yessss. Very deep. Something about time. Flying fast? Backward? Anyway, I didn't buy it. What about time? What about life? What about death? That it is? Or that it is (here it comes . . .) CURIOUS? Cinematography and makeup: excellent. Benjamin's mother: great. Felt a little like it was trying to be a Forrest Gump, but lacked the heart. Too pretty for a 2 (fair), too many problems for a 3 (good), so I agree with M: 2 1/2 stars.

John Adams

M: One of the best films I have seen this year. Originally airing on HBO, John Adams is an interesting and inspiring look at the life and times of founding father John Adams. Without sensationalism or over-sentimentalism, the series tells the story of the beginnings of our nation; it simply blew me away. Paul Giamatti, (as John Adams) was brilliant. Laura Linney played Adams' patient and loving wife superbly. This is a must-see. 4 Stars

V: Absolutely. It was so good. I was really sad when we finished watching it. (It is in 7 parts. Each part is over an hour. We ate it up.) Paul Giamatti is just really great, as always. Wonderfully directed, acted, and written. 4 Stars