Movie Review: The Blind Side (2009) & its "Christian" message

As of today, The Blind Side is 2009's 9th highest grossing film based almost exclusively word-of-mouth promotion. The critical reception has been mediocre at best, but audiences continue to laud it and promote it. The secret...well, it's not much of a secret. It's being promoted as a Christian film.

I won't really go into what I thought of the film, nor will I discuss Christianity in the movie biz (a far too weighty topic for a mere college student). But I'm fascinated by the implications that this film has a "Christian" message and I want to examine exactly how the film can be seen as such. I'll try to remain as objective as possible, but expect some snark. Oh, and spoilers ahoy off the starboard bound. Read on, brave ones, if you've seen Blind Side already. Or read it anyway and spoil it. Your choice.

A word about the audience as I see it. The Christian influence on the success of films is notoriously under-appreciated by critics and Hollywood elite. Just look at The Golden Compass (2007) for the smoking gun. A lot of the hype about The Blind Side comes not only from the fact that it's a true story, a powerful factor indeed, but also for the fact that it's an inspirational film. And when I say inspirational, I say "remember your audience."

Well, we're done with the salad, so let's move on to the meat and potatoes. Are the characters in the film Christian?

Nominally speaking, absolutely. The Christian School is a Christian school, touting an adapted version of Matthew 19:26 above a its main entrance. No coincidence that Michael's entry through this gate is one of the better directed and most reprised shots in the film. White walls, white stones, white people... Michael's rather emo poetry does reveal his unfamiliarity with this world of upper class, conservative white Christians. So far, so characterized. But as Michael enters this supposedly Christian world, here's where things get complicated.

We are first introduced to the element of Christian morality when the football coach character (Ray McKinnon) makes his case to get Michael into school at St. Prestigious School. The coach seems like an affable dude and though we know he cares about having Michael play football, he states that bringing Michael in is the "right" thing to do. The "Christian" thing to do. And we definitely believe him. Underneath the dang seal is the word "Christian." It IS the right thing to do. Without quoting specific Bible verses, I think we can safely say that Jesus would approve.

But Michael is still neglected and has no place to stay. In a move straight from the heart, Sandra Bullock's character takes him in for more than just one night. No selfish motivation on her part. Not really even "white guilt" as her friends suggest. She does it out of the goodness of her heart. Let's face it, the Mom is a battle axe who totes poor Tim McGraw around by the throat in this movie. But when it comes to what's underneath the skin, the woman bleeds gold.

Bullock's character is by far the most Christian of the bunch. Her selfless action propels the film and takes a young kid out of a terrible situation. But it's not so black and white than that. Remember her surrounding friends? The ones with which she has that $18 salad. Charitable, upper class white women. Christians. But like a fly swatter, it's pretty clear these folks aren't the kind Christians that Ms. Tuohy is. Besides the not-so-subtle implications of racism and a general attitude of condensation, they're pretty rude to Mike and disrespectful to the Tuohy's intentions. The Blind Side tends to lump these kind of people together with the semi-pejorative term "rednecks." For the sake of simplicity, I'll keep using the term. Added to the fact that I love Jeff Foxworthy, there's something oddly self-indulgent about white, southern upper-class Christians calling each other rednecks. Or maybe it doesn't seem that way to you yet.

Let's continue. The first football game Michael plays tells a lot about the kind of Christians we're encountering in this film. The one racist redneck is at first repelled by "sticks and stones" and turning the other cheek by the Touhy fam. But as time progresses, Sandra Bullock plants a verbal foot up the man's ass. Firmly. Not to say that Christianity doesn't have something to say about sticking up for others, but it's pretty revealing when the so-called "Christian" attendees of a friendly southern football game turn ugly so fast. That's the way it IS in real life too, just in case you people reading aren't from the south. The man in the film might have well as used the "n" word. He was spouting just about everything else a PG-13 movie could take. But in addition to the repulse by Bullock, we get a lot of derision and name-calling, dumbing our opponents down into hicks and rednecks. Interesting.

To me, it's interesting that the film spends so much time separating THESE Christians (racist, mouth-breathing hicks) from Ms. Tuohy & co. The movie does make denominations of it's own by exposing the latent hypocrisies in the Christians practicing the Christianity.

Better example. A later conversation between Ms. Tuohy and Coach Cotton reveals that he pulled all of his strings to get Michael into school so he could play football. Ms. Tuohy retorts, "I thought you said it was your Christian duty." He opts not to give a Bill Clinton type response defining terms or equivocating. His silence gives us the answer. Ouch. We honestly DID believe him earlier when he gave us that meaningful speech about being a Christian school. And now he's just a hypocrite like all the other Christians in the film. No band-aid could fix this. Although it wasn't presented as a major part of the film, I definitely did a double take on this scene.

But that's the interesting part about The Blind Side isn't it? It attempts to divine what is truly Christian in its own way by effectively picking and choosing what constitutes real Christians. The most underrated scene in the movie, I think, is when they hire the tutor (the inimitable Kathy Bates). Plump, deep-hearted Kathy Bates quips that she would have taught at St. Hypocrites Christian academy but she wasn't "Christian enough" for them. Her not so subtle admission that she "has some doubts" might as well be a sign saying "Hello, my name is Atheist."And it only gets better. She pauses, saying "I might as well tell you..." cause, oh goodness, she's got some deep dark secret that might prevent her from being Michael's tutor. The words on EVERYONE'S minds in the theater were definitely "I'm a homosexual," but we're treated with the humorous admission that "I'm a democrat." In this context though, they might as well be the same thing, and that I think, is a victory for The Blind Side's emphasis on Christian tolerance. An interesting angle, don't you think?

And let's not forget Michael's attack on Ms. Tuohy upon NCAA investigation. Though we KNOW that Ms. Tuohy was being genuine in letting Michael in, she herself has doubts about her own ability to give him free choice in where he plays football. Let's pull a "stop...Hammertime" on this point. It's a fascinating psychological implication that, even in Ms. Tuohy's noble intentions, she may have accidentally manipulated poor Michael into choosing Ole Miss unfairly. What she's really asking herself is, did I do the Christian thing; did I in my own selfishness ever have the idea in my head that he'd be an asset to the school sports program? The audience clearly knows that this is a resounding "no", but the very introduction of any form of doubt about it... Well, it's certainly a strong point in the film's depth. Was it possible that her good intentions were clouded? If we consider The Blind Side as a theological film, this makes an interesting point. It MAY have been selfish... BUT what matters ultimately is that the choice is up to Michael. To those who see a "the ends seem to justify the means" conflict here, I'll say this. For the film to work, and the actual real life story to work, we have to know something about the characters. And the film does a marvelous job of giving us characters. We as the audience know that if Ms. Tuohy was REALLY concerned about sports, she'd have never told her husband to turn the car around in the first place. She did a generous thing -- the Christian thing -- out of the goodness of her heart.

All the other characters in the film can't see that. Even dopey, football-watching Tim McGraw husband can't understand that. She is the true Christian of the film. The polarization between her and all the rest is the difference between what The Blindside presents as Christianity and faux-Christianity. And without being preachy or overextended, The Blindside offers its on very specific take on what actions accompany both groups. Tolerance and diversity is as much of a "Christian" message in this film as is generosity and love towards strangers. Whether you see this is a Christian (no air quotes) message, I'll leave up to you to decide.

I'll roll this into a fine point. The Blind Side isn't a Christian movie; it's a movie with Christian character(s?) doing "Christian" things. As I think I've demonstrated from flogging a dead horse, there IS a difference.

Given what I perceive to be the Christian message of the film, it's interesting to see how the marketing of The Blind Side has advanced from being an "inspirational" film to being a "Christian" film. We'll see how the film stands the test of time with the Christian audience AND how the film does with the...well, decidedly less Christian Academy.

Funny closing: I was just watching Ben Hur... Charlton Heston makes a pretty convincing Jew. Don't believe me? Ask Charlton Heston.

Movie Review: District 9 (2009)

Oh yes...I'm back blogging with a vengeance, this time inspired by the greatest movie of 2009 (as of yet). First off, gotta say, Peter Jackson never has been one to make "simple" or one-off movies. Every undertaking he makes as a producer is a sweeping, epic story. District 9 continues his trend of Lord of the Rings and the (misguided, but epic) 4 hour King King and creates perhaps the most deep and exciting sci-fi film since The Matrix.

A VERY brief plot summary: Aliens have accidentally landed on earth and are "rescued" by humans. Tensions with inter-species conflicts escalate and they are placed in the "ghettos" of District 9. The movie follows one man, Wikus van de Merwe, who is deeply involved in the concentration camp like system of District 9 and shows his... well... "metamorphosis" into the harsh reality of alien captivity.

District 9 is brilliant; oh yes it is. But I'm going to point out briefly WHY it's so brilliant, plus some stuff that critics have been missing. The movie ALREADY has universal acclaim for some of the "meat n' potatoes" of filmmaking : great cinematography, terrific special effects and very skilled direction, courtesy Neill Blomkamp, nerd idol. Neill IS quite the guy in the nerd community, having directed all 3 Halo short films, and done animation animation for Stargate SG1 and Smallville. He's a newcomer to the big screen (I mean, I hadn't even heard of him before), but he does a terrific job of bringing the story to life.

Now, let's talk about why else it's brilliant. Number one reason is Sharlto Copley. This previously unknown actor absolutely give the movie all of it's emotional shock value due to his completely authentic portrayal of Wikus van de Merwe. He is quite good and, I'm suspecting, Oscar-worthy. Number two reason is that District 9 is a "message movie" with punch. Uncharacteristic (perhaps) of Peter Jackson's movies, District 9 pulls NO punches in blood, gore, body-counts, deliriously uncomfortable scenes. Some of it can be intense...but I say, grimace and bear it. Every blow, every blood-splattered corpse, it's all worth it. All of with clear backdrops of discussions of "human rights," race/gender/species, human cruelty, betrayal, etc... It's much like the Matrix in that it pairs very probing questions about human society with kick-ass alien butt-kicking action. Well, chest-kicking in the case of the aliens. It's a sci-fi movie that's got action, suspense, and all that jazz...but terrific emotion in all of the conflict that draws the audience into every scene.

MY RATING: District 9 is a must-see. Easily one of the best sci-fi films in recent memory, possibly even the best sci-fi film of the 21st century (sorry, AI: Artificial Intelligence...). In short, you GOTTA SEE IT, folks.

Movie Review: The Apartment (1960)

So I'd been thinking about transferring all of my old reviews from Flixster over to my blog. But after realizing that I rated about 266, I decided against it. Instead, what I'ma do is review movie that I RECENTLY have seen or movies that I feel I have something unique to share with you guys.

For this review, I'm cookin' up some old school flava with "The Apartment". Brief plot teaser: C.C. Baxter is a grunt at his insurance firm, but manages to ascend the corperate ladder by loaning his aparment to his superiors for their licencious extramerital affairs. Kinky...Especially for the 1960's. Add a crush on the elevator girl and one badass Fred MacMurray villain and you've got a hilarious and suprisingly deep comedy-drama.

Billy Wilder, of Some Like It Hot fame, scores again another comedy-drama masterpiece. His hilarious and deep original screenplay includes complex yet easily-identifiable characters, exhibiting the same idiosyncrasies and common flaws that normal people have. For example, even the seemingly insignificant inclusion of C.C. Baxter’s cold provides for great realism and comedy. Plus, the dialogue is hilarious and deliciously off-kilter. My favorite example of this is the classic “spaghetti-making” scene with the tennis racquet and the great line, “You should see my backhand.”

Plus, Wilder's always-inventive directorial style pushes new bounds of cinema (note the great opening scene). The thing that makes The Apartment so brilliant is the seamless integration of meaningful, well-written dialogue (“makes me look just the way I feel”) with well-shot dramatic situations and easily loveable/hateable characters to make it a satisfying film that we can watch again and again. Considered by many to be one of the funniest movies ever, The film lands at #93 on the AFI's (American Film Institute) list of Top 100 Films, as well as at #20 on their list of Top 100 Laughs. Check it out and laugh thy ass off.

Movie Review: Watchmen (2009)

Here it is, folks: my official Watchmen review. For simplicity's sake, I'm going to approach the review from two perspectives: a fan's perspective (my perspective) and I'll sit in the seat of a Watchmen neophyte to try and review this film. Note that I'm GOING TO SPOIL THE ENDING, so beware if you haven't seen the film yet.

First, from a fan's perspective, this movie does a GOOD (not great, but good) job of capturing the major themes and feel of the novel.

Watchmen the movie looks flashy enough, with gritty "superhero" action (a little too stylized for my tastes, but hey this IS Zack Snyder of "300" right?) and essentially a scene-by-scene and chapter-by-chapter adaptation of the novel that is remarkably faithful to the storyline. The subplots are of course eliminated for time's sake, but the fact that the movie consciously recognizes the subplots' existences wins big points from me (eg. the inclusion of the psychologist towards the end of the film). The iconic scenes look AMAZING, like Dr. Manhattan's watch-inspired palace on Mars. I can easily see this film being nominated for Art Direction at the next Academy Awards because, quite simply, the film is gorgeous.

The acting (ironically enough) is another MAJOR strength. All of the characters, with the exception of Ozymandias, are extremely convincing in their roles, especially Jackie Earl Haley as Rorschach. Dialogue is 85% lifted directly from the novel, taking advantage of Allen Moore's brilliant writing style. All the actors use it wonderfully and make the characters come alive on screen. Ozymandias is a little tougher, only because the character has changed so much that it's a little off-putting for a fan to convincingly accept Matthew Goode's portrayal.

As to the cinematography, it is decent, but the "300" visual style gets clunky in awkward places when slow-motion just seems to take too long and can be completely unnecessary. The other major problem is that Zack Synder's antics are no longer "revolutionary" (if they ever were) and now just seem a little overdrawn in the film.

I'll talk only briefly about the Music and score, both of which are sub-par simply because it is too explicit in the film instead of going for subtlety. "All Along the Watchtower" being the most notorious example. Not that it's bad, it just isn't great. The "Desolation Row" cover during the credits, however, is fantastic and fits the mood perfectly.

Now, onto the big "love-or-hate" controversy of the film: the TREMENDOUS amounts of nudity, sex, and violence. Yes, Watchmen the novel is an extremely sexy and violent graphic novel, but the movie takes it to horrifying new levels (eg. when Rorschach confronts the child killer). The problem with this is that it takes Watchmen's axioms of subtlety and deconstructing the superhero archetype and turns it, in the words of my brother, into a "freakshow". I agree that, for a fan, this is one of the most strange and unfortunate changes about the movie.

The other is the ending. I personally can reconcile the new ending due to the fact that a giant H.P. Lovecraftian alienthing can be hard to explain and construct in a 2-hour movie. However, the new ending has the major disadvantage is that it changes the character of Dr. Manhattan into a scapegoat, something that was NEVER in the novel and that Allen Moore would NOT have ever approved of. The other problem about the movie ending is that the CHOICE of whether or not to agree with Oxymandius's actions is taken from the audience. Now, the ending is presented as a lesser-of-two-evils situation in which Nite Owl explicitly states to Ozymandias that it is wrong, although they're forced to go along with it....NOT AT ALL analogous to the Watchmen novel. The movie BEGS to have the "I did the right thing didn't I?" scene in it, instead of Laurie paraphrasing the scene.

To wrap it up from a fan's perspective, the greatest aspect of the Watchmen film is the fact that it DOESN'T suck. Adapting Watchmen into movie format is a bit like adapting Shakespeare for the screen: you know you won't be able to do it better than the original, so you're going to have to make it different, or comparably true to the original. Watchmen opts for the latter and does so effectively, allowing it to appease most non-hardcore fans with a action-packed, visually spectacular rendition of the story.

For a non-fan or a Watchmen neophyte, I imagine the film would be extremely disappointing. It moves quickly, assuming you know the basic storyline, and its complex interworking of flashbacks is otherwise incomprehensible. Synder does attempt to draw in some of the non-superhero crowd by including some well choreographed action sequences (complete with bone-shattering action). It's icing on the cake for Watchmen fans, and a B-grade "Kung-Fu Panda" imitation for others. In short, if you know nothing about Watchmen the novel, I'd avoid the movie like the plague.

MY RATING: Good for fans, confusing for non-fans. Suffers from some notable plot changes, but en masse, captures the spirit and themes of the novel. Enjoyable and replayable.

Movie Review: Revolutionary Road (2008)

As Mr. Garrison of South Park would say, the film was "Only Mmmmkay." Revolutionary Road just doesn't have a lot of "there" there. It was enjoyable in the sense that it was fun watching completely warped characters systematically fuck up their lives even more. Like a train wreck.

The plot deserves almost no introduction, so I won't spend too much time on it. Leo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet are two "special" people who buy in to job security and the 50's suburban culture. This, along with their inability to communicate with each other and reignite the passion of their early years together, lead to a lot of drama and unnecesary shenanigans. Not a particularily dynamic plot, and there aren't any car chases or explosions, but certainly interesting on a psychological level.

Revolutionary Road hinders on the rather presumptuous notion that EVERYONE in the audience holds the viewpoint that the 50's Consumer Culture, Conspicuous Consumption, and Suburban Lifestyles were inherently flawed and hollow. It's a little risky to just lump history into a 2 hour movie, and certainly ballsey to fearlessly tote around this thematic viewpoint so OBVIOUSLY. My biggest thematic problem with Rev. Road was the lack of subtlety. The blatant discussion of the death of the American dream (eg. that long speech by Winslet about how they are "special") is nothing short of a pathetic attempt by the screenwriting crew to make the movie more faithful to the themes of the novel (written in the 60's by Richard Yates). But instead of doing it WELL through subtlety, good shots and character development, Revolutionary Road has the tendancy to editorialize. And it's not a good thing.

The film-making itself is decent. Kate and DiCaprio are VERY good actors and are extremely powerful in the lead roles. Their performaces are enough reason to see the movie, and the combination of tension, physical violence, sexual frustration, and sheer rage is remarkably realistic and intriguing. The subsidiary cast, however, does a terrible job of keeping up with the two leads' power and dynamic development. Essentially, the movie falls apart whenever Kate and DiCaprio aren't onscreen togher. However, the movie is redeemed by good cinematography and a decent original score. If anything, I'd nominate Revolutionary Road for an Oscar simply based on the great shots of Leo DiCaprio in the train station, surrounded by dress-conforming businessmen. Again, blatant, but well-done.

MY RATING: Good acting and mediocre everything else. See only if you're a fan of DiCaprio and/or Winslet. Otherwise leave it to the pile of forgettable American dramas.

Movie Review: Twilight (2008)

Ah, Twilight. The series that everyone loves to hate. I broke down finally and decided to see the movie, hoping that all the fuss about Edward Cullen was actually based in fact, and not the fantasies of adolescent teenagers. I was unfortunately disappointed to realize that Twilight is neither substance nor style. It’s a bit more “suck.”

I’ll provide a brief plot summary: Bella is an awkward high school girl who has moved to be with her father. There are vampires at her high school and she gets the hots for one in particular named Edward Cullen. Hijinks ensue. A rival vampire tries to eat Bella and Edward wants to eat Bella, but doesn’t at the same time. Lots of drama.

Not to say that Twilight wasn’t enjoyable. But enjoyable in the sense that it was just good enough to give the audience some hope of getting involved in the Bella-Edward love story without reading the series and just bad enough to tear these hopes apart. It’s a good story and all, but the moviemaking is just generally shitty.

The acting is sub-par. Bella is awkward in places when she shouldn’t be and overdramatic and “gaspy” everywhere else. Edward acts stoned and boring. It’s hard to see what’s so admirable or attractive about him when all he does is be mean and overprotective to Bella without showing much tenderness. I don’t get it… But the 14-year-old screaming teenyboppers certainly think differently. The rest of the Cullen family gets very little chance to develop in 2 hours and is also pitifully under-acted, especially Jacob, who indeed looks too much “in pain” to be taken seriously.

The special effects look like they were rejected from the early seasons of “Smallville”. The “glitterface” effect on Edward is awfully embarrassing and the strength/speed effects are boring. But hey, at least it makes for fun inside jokes.

However, there are some redeeming moments. The costumes are badass, with Edward, Alice, and James being the most notable. The direction is generally good, with truly impressive scenes, such as Bella and Edward on the top of the trees. And there’s a decent amount of suspense towards the end, though that in itself poses a problem because it moves too quickly to be stained.

MY RATING: Twlight is one of those book-to-movie translations that is mandatory for fans of the series and is decent for 14-year-old girls. For the rest of us “adult” viewers and for film critics, Twilight is decidedly unimpressive

Movie Review: Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008)

It’s been called the worst movie of 2008 and one of the worst movies of all time. Of ALL TIME.
This strange, twisted, violent, hilarious futuristic musical is not all that bad, and it certainly IS a must-see.

Brief plot Summary: Due to an epidemic that causes organ failure, GENECO finances replacement organs for money like one would a car. But if you don’t make your payments…GENECO sends out…the Repo man who will (in the words of Graverobber) “rip the still-beating heart from your chest!” Shilo is an invalid teenager who catches the eye of the President of GENECO, Rotti Largo who is dying and hates his three kids who will inherit his empire. Shilo’s dad Nathan, however, hides many secrets, including the fact that he is a Repo man. Drama and plot twists ensue.

Like a circus sideshow, Repo! is hard to look away from. Since it was produced by the same people who made the “Saw” series, there’s plenty of bodies and gore. The general “problem” or strength or Repo! depending on how you look at it, is the fact that this semi-comedic, semi-serious treatment of very mature themes is wrapped up into a futuristic industrial rock musical. It’s sometimes hard to know when you’re supposed to cover your eyes in fear or to laugh hysterically. If this sounds dumb to you, then you’ll probably hate the movie. If it sounds awesome, then you’re sure in for a thrill ride.

The acting is surprisingly decent. Repo! sports good performances and *gasp* decent singing from the likes of Alexa Vega (of Spy Kids fame), Paris Hilton, Ogre (of Skinny Puppy, the best Industrial band ever) and Sarah Brightman.

The cinematography reminds me of traditional opera structures, returning to leitmotifs and a central image (the huge television floating above GENECO) to move the plot along. The use of comic-book panels to explain background flashback quickly also is extremely effective at imparting crucial bits of information without wasting too much time. And in this film with as many plot twists as dead bodies, it’s extremely necessary.

The soundtrack is really where it’s at. Catchy industrial rock pairs with humor and musical glee in hilarious numbers like “Mark It Up” and “We Started This Opera Shit” and serious numbers like “Chase The Morning”. And the ending…well, by the time you uncover your eyes, it actually is heartfelt and meaningful, making the audience feel like this wasn’t exactly a huge waste of time.

MY RATING: Amusing for fans of the genre (and by that I mean musicals, horror, and industrial rock). A cult classic at its core, but pretty inaccessible to the general movie-going population.

Movie Review: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

To call “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” one of the best films of 2008 is an understatement. To call it one of the best films of the 21st century is more appropriate.

I can’t stop raving about Benjamin Button and its amazingness, and apparently, neither can other critics. There’s so much to talk about, I’ll have to relegate my commentary to stuff that you can’t find on other critical websites. It’s no secret that The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is the new “Forest Gump”. Eric Roth “adapted” both the sucky novel by Winston Groom and the F. Scott Fitzgerald short story. And “adapted” in both instances means improved. Mr. F. Scott’s story is not one of his best and Eric Roth took the best elements (the science-fiction element of a man living his life backwards) and created an almost-original story with which to examine the human condition.

From the start of the movie’s remarkable technique of explaining the story through flashbacks between the past and 2005 Louisiana being ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, we know that we’re being given something different. The strengths of Benjamin Button come from its excellent storytelling, largely due to the efforts of directorial genius David Fincher (who brought us Alien3, Fight Club, and Se7en). There are a multitude of brilliant eye-waterin’ visuals. My favorites are the excellent boat shots during WWII and the scene of Ben and Daisy on the fog-covered veranda. It’s such a joy to watch a director who really knows what’s visually attractive and knows how to exploit it in a way that’s not corny, melodramatic, or overreaching. In the face of so many so-called “modern epics” like “300” that use such sweeping visuals and Matrix-inspired stop-motion techniques, it’s nice to see a little subtlety to make a good scene. There’s no shortage of tension and drama in Ben Button either. You get emotionally invested in the characters and their fates, to the point that if you look around in the theatre near the end of the movie, there’s hardly a dry eye.

There’s so much emotional and thematic depth that I want to just briefly touch on without spoiling the plot. The symbols of the hummingbird and the backwards clock both bridge the story from start to finish, acting as a motif for change and permanency. The fact that life is fleeting and death is inevitable, but also beauty to be had in the life that one can live. Brilliant stuff. Couldn’t be better written in a novel, and certainly works great on the big screen.

And all the other elements of the story work great too. The characters of Benjamin and Daisy are compelling and extremely well-acted by Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. The special effects are worth mentioning too, and I’m confident in their ability to secure Academy Awards.

Speaking of those daggum little gold statues that mean so much, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button should be a shoe-in for Best Picture in any other year besides the 2009 Awards. 2008 had some of the best movies in decades, so it’s a little unfair that Ben Button, Doubt, Slumdog Millionaire, Burn After Reading, Gran Torino, and The Dark Knight have to be running all together for the same spots. Let’s hope the Academy given The Curious Case a little somethin’ somethin’ on February 22nd (day after my birthday, mind you) and give it the recognition it deserves.
MY RATING: Benjamin Button is one of those films that will be considered classic for years and years to come. It’s indeed another Forest Gump. Heartfelt and extremely replayable.