Let's All Go to the Movies!

Many movie theater experiences make you want to fall asleep ("The Good Shepherd"). Many make you fall asleep for real ("Van Helsing"). Many make you want to walk out ("Click"). Many make you walk out for real ("Varsity Blues"). Many make you want to weep for mankind ("Armageddon"). And some make you want to stab yourself because it's 2:45 AM and you had to screen it by yourself at the movie theater where you work since no one else wanted to watch it with you and it seems like it will never end and, dear God, you just want to go home ("Meet Joe Black").

But some movie theater experiences are rewarding to a degree no prose can explain. And two years ago today was one of those very days. Today is the second anniversary of the most transcendent movie-going experience of my life. If anyone does not know this particular experience took place at the Sierra 3 Movie Theaters in Des Moines, Iowa and was a movie featuring the squinting of Clint Eastwood, the gargled-with-rocks voice-over of Morgan Freeman, and Hilary Swank hitting a speed bag. Thus, I decided today would be the perfect day to revisit not only the single most transcendent movie-going experience of my life, but the other four movie-going experiences that also live up to the term transcendent.

1.) Million Dollar Baby. I saw it four times in the theater and have seen it, at least, five times all the way through on DVD. But nothing can compare to my very first viewing. As the film unfolded on the screen before me I slowly came to the amazing revelation that I was watching not just a good movie, or a great one, or even a brilliant one, but a movie that was - as the esteemed film critic Roger Ebert wrote of it - "a masterpiece, pure and simple, deep and true." I still vividly recall sitting in the darkness of the theater after it had ended and thinking to myself if it was really possible that what I had just witnessed was real. Had the last two hours been a dream? I didn't cry in the theater but, I'll admit it, when I got to my car and closed the door a torrent of tears poured forth. Many movie theater experiences have caused the "unforced smile", or made me want to stand up in the theater and cheer, or stop the projector and lecture my fellow movie-goers regarding the ingenuity they're witnessing, or perform cartwheels of joy in the parking lot. But only a single movie theater experience changed my life. This one.

2.) Titanic. Unlike "Million Dollar Baby", which swooped in from left field to stun me, I had anticipated "Titanic" for months prior to its release. It was going to be hard for it to live up to the expectations I had built in my head but, lo and behold, it did. Prior to the Bruce Springsteen show I witnessed last June the only other out-of-body experience I've ever had occured during my initial viewing of this movie. Remember the scene when Jack puts Rose on the lifeboat but then she jumps back onto the Titanic and they run to each other? Yeah, I left my body during that. Someway and somehow I merged with the movie screen. I can't really explain it. And I still remember the kiss the couple sitting one row in front of me shared immediately after the movie concluded. It wasn't one of those obligatory kisses couples share because, you know, they're a couple, but a kiss that seemed to be a true affirmation of their love. Despite the film's naysayers, "Titanic" contains the power to do that.

3.) Boogie Nights. I saw this in Cedar Rapids, Iowa with my friend Caleb, his girlfriend at the time, and her friend. This one was in the manner of "Million Dollar Baby" - not in the life-changing way - but in the way that as the movie progressed you realized how you were in the presence of complete brilliance and you weren't really sure whether or not you believed it. Plus, it was all worth it for the moment when Caleb forcefully grabbed hold of me during the scene in which Mark Wahlberg and John C. Reilly are drinking margaritas and swapping lies and yelled, "They're talking about nothing!" That's what pure joy sounds like.

4.) Signs. Some people may not share my rapturous view of this film but I don't care one bit. I loved it. I was indifferent to "Unbreakable" (writer/director M. Night Shymalan's previous movie) and I wasn't all that into "The Sixth Sense" like so many other people. Therefore I was interested to see "Signs" but I wasn't anticipating it a great deal. But, man oh man, I was hooked from precisely the opening second and the throwback titles. In rare instances you're so deeply involved with the movie that the theater itself feels just like your own living room. You know, like sometimes you're viewing a movie at home and it's so remarkable you have no choice but to pause it and get up from your chair and bust a move of happiness (this just happened last week during "A Fond Kiss"). I had to restrain myself from doing this during "Signs". Plus, there came a moment midway through when something particularly scary happened and the girl sitting behind me screamed way, way out loud. And I - the introverted hermit we all know - was literally this close to turning around and thanking her for enjoying this cinematic experience as much as me.

5.) There's Something About Mary. I was employed at the movie theater when I first saw this one and it was a sneak at midnight solely for theater employees. I know this is my friend Dan's favorite movie-going experience. It was so funny and the whole damn theater was into it. It felt like a tent show more than a movie theater. The auditorium wasn't just filled with laughter, but with applause and even high-fives if something was really hysterical. It felt like drinks were being served even though they weren't. Another part of the magic for me stemmed from the fact I sat next to a girl I really liked (that brightens any situtation). The best exchange we shared of the whole night came during the scene when Ben Stiller busts into the house where Matt Dillon and other guy posing as the invalid are hiding out.

Her: "Is that shit on the floor?"
Me: "I think it is."
Her: "There's shit on the floor."

And we laughed and laughed.

Last King of Scotland

So let me be honest right up front. I attended this movie due to the fact Forest Whitaker has been winning every best actor prize imaginable (from the Golden Globe to the Pawtucket, Rhode Island Film Critics Association). I, of course, wanted to see if his performance lived up to the immense and incessant hype.

It does.

Whitaker is downright incredible as former Ugandan President Idi Amin. There's a lot of things he needs to display in this role.

1.) Charisma. We needed to see that which got the people of Uganda to believe he was their savior.

2.) Paranoia. Give him just half of a strange look and he'll pretty much assume you're out to get him and that pretty much means you're going to get (insert image of throat-slash gesture here).

3.) Vulnerability. Any instance - however brief - in which he is not his proud, powerful self is of the utmost embarrassment to him.

4.) Anger. You can be Amin's "closest advisor" until you advise him incorrectly or he decides he is not going to like you for awhile. And if that becomes the case he is going to

5.) Excessive Swings of Emotion. Amin suspects our main character is English. He gives our main character a look that essentially says, "I'm about three seconds away from slitting your throat". But then our main character advises that he is, in fact, Scottish. Suddenly, the main character is Amin's best friend and Amin winds up trading his general's uniform for our main character's Scotland tee shirt. (This scene, near the beginning, is the one when you start to realize why he's winning every award.)

6.) Menace. Even when Amin is at his most bombastically joyous you can't help but get the distinct feeling he is always on the verge of losing his marbles if someone says just one thing for which he does not care.

So yeah, everything required of the role we get, and then some. There are particular scenes - specifically when showing the aforementioned charisma - when he goes over-the-top but the performance itself never goes over-the-top. Amin was a force of nature and Whitaker plays him that way.

But wait, what about the rest of the movie? There is, contrary to popular belief, more to this movie than Forest Whitaker. The general story details Scottish doctor Nicholas Garrigan who leaves his country to come to Uganda to "make a difference". His difference-making comes in the form of becoming the personal doctor of Idi Amin himself. And slowly but surely, the real nature of Amin and his intentions for the country become clear to Garrigan.

Awhile back on this very blog we discussed "Blood Diamond" being told through the eyes of a white man despite its setting. Well, in the "Last King of Scotland" we get pretty much the same thing. But whereas I personally found Danny Archer in "Blood Diamond" to be complex and moving, I cannot say the same of Nicholas Garrigan (though that is not to disparage the performance of James McEvoy).

Part of the problem stems from the overwhelming quailty of Whitaker's performance. Remember how Shakespeare had to kill off Mercutio in "Romeo and Juliet" because he was threatening to take over the play? I think "Last King of Scotland" needed to kill off Idi Amin. But, of course, thanks to actual history (such a nuisance) this could not be done. If a serviceable actor had been featured in the Amin role we might be discussing what a solid, if unspectacular, movie this was. Instead we're discussing the phenomenal work of Forest Whitaker and the rest of the movie........uh.........well..........there was a rest of the movie?

That's not necessarily a bad thing.

A Fond Kiss

Recently the ever-trustworthy Netflix advised me that based upon the movies in my personal queue that I might enjoy a film from 2004 called "A Fond Kiss", directed by someone with whom I'm unfamiliar and featuring a cast I didn't know. But the premise sounded intriguing to me so I moved it to the top of my queue and a few days later it arrived in my mailbox.

Netflix, you rapscallions of cinema, you've gone and done it again. I didn't merely enjoy it. I loved it. What a fantastic movie! So real, so knowing, so moving. And yet again I ask - why can't we get more movies like this? Haven't we as a collective movie-going audience earned the right to view more movies similiar to this one? I think we have, gosh darn it.

Loyal Reader: "Cinema Romantico, are you just going to rant and rave or are you going to tell us about the movie itself?"

Whoops. My apologies, loyal reader. When I see such an exquisite film I tend to let my emotions get the best of me. Let me get my bearings here.

The premise: a young Muslim man, Casim, and a young Irish Catholic woman, Roisin, both living in Glasgow, Scotland, meet and fall in love only to face strong consequences from his devout family.

Okay, okay, you're thinking "Romeo & Juliet". Right? Star-crossed lovers? It's "been done", you're saying. You've "seen it". Trust me, you have not.

Casim is engaged to his first cousin from Pakistan whom he has never met. But once he meets Roisin - a teacher at his sister's school - he starts a relationship with her despite the arranged marriage. Of course, he will eventually have to advise her about his and that's going to be problematic.

I want to make it clear nothing that keeps these two characters apart is artificial. It isn't a case of the screenwriter backing in a dump truck full of manufactured roadblocks and splattering them all over the road our characters traverse. Everything that happens to these characters is what would happen to these characters in these situations. The way in which the characters respond is how these characters would respond.

Casim's family is not portrayed over-the-top and conniving to force Casim to adopt to what they want for his life. They are fervent in their religious beliefs as many people of this faith are. Within the framework of those beliefs, and their community, he is expected to marry within his family. Anything less than this is a disappointment not simply to his family but to his people as a whole. He knows this. And the movie shows him wrestling with deciding what is right, what he must do, and what he wants to do.

While I don't know for sure, one can imagine this type of problem is much more prevalent in the current world for Muslims. Perhaps not so much in their respective homelands but once they go to a different part of the world, with so many other cultures around them, it must be difficult for a second-generation Muslim to conform to typical family obligations.

Roisin, meanwhile, has to do decide whether or not she can live with the fact Casim's family may never accept her. And her own roots in Catholicism come back to her haunt in regards to the relationship.

My own grapple with religion here in my late 20's helps me idenitfy with these characters. Often times organized religion seems more about what you can't do then about what you can. The scene Roisin has with her parish Priest strikes me as poignantly true. It's their way or the highway and when you've accepted that - and only when you've accepted that - can you start to ask questions.

In reading up on Ken Loach, the director of the film, I learn that he primarily uses not only unknown actors but people who have never acted at all. This is the case of Atta Yaqub, who plays Casim. And at times this fact does show. Some of his line readings are stilted but for the most part his mannerisms ring true. On the other hand, Eva Birthistle - who has acted before - as Roisin is phenomenal. You will feel everything she feels. She will wreck your heart.

And the end - oh, the wonderful ending. I, of course, will not give it away. But the movie ends exactly when it should. Not a second too soon or too late. I love movies that come off as simply a first act in a person's life.

This is filmmaking at its most heartbreaking. This is filmmaking at its most intelligent. This is filmmaking at its most majestic. Excuse me, I'm getting worked up with happiness again. I need to go do a cartwheel.

Letters From Iwo Jima

The knee jerk reaction would be to term Clint Eastwood's latest opus a War Movie. Maybe it is. But it's unlike any war movie I've seen. It's less about war than the inevitability of death.

I cannot say I know anywhere near as much regarding the real side of the Japanese story of WWII as I do the American side. Growing up much of you get on that particular subject is slanted. One of the Japanese soldiers in the film makes mention of how he hears the American soldiers are savages and this is the portrait I recall being given of the Japanese. I'll never forget reading about the kamikaze pilots for the first time. That's always stayed with me. These pilots were so devoted to their country and their Emperor they were willing to sacrifice their lives in such an extreme way. Of course, then you think, hey, those pilots probably didn't want to sacrifice their life. They probably had a wife and kids.

As "Letters from Iwo Jima" opens (and the opening shot is a beauty) a few soldiers are digging a trench on the beach and one of them remarks, the Americans can have the island. Oops. His commanding officer overhears this and rather than simply reprimanding him with words, he proceeds to give him a solid beat-down via whip.

This establishes what we'll be seeing for the next two and a half hours. Loyalty to country comes first and foremost - ahead of your family and your own life and anything else.

General Kuribayashi (Ken Watanabe, who is the only actor you will recognize) arrives to plot the island's defense against the pending American invasion. My personal feeling is that tension in a film is best generated not from a character's fate being hidden from them but from a character slowly and surely becoming aware of his or her own fate. And that is how "Letters from Iwo Jima" generates it.

Kuribayashi learns Japan's combined fleet has been destroyed. He learns he will receive no support from the air force. Then he is given the order that everyone on the island should die defending it. He stays resolute as he is being broken, but can you see him coming apart at the seams. Especially when the officers below him contradict his orders, supposedly out of (here's that word again) loyalty to Japan.

Eastwood is far less interested in showing scenes of war than in showing the reactions of the various Japanese soldiers as the war is being lost. Remaining at your post until the very end and dying with so-called "honor" seems far more important than retreating and possibly maintaining a defense for however long possible.

There's one moment I want to mention in particular. Blink and you might miss it. I almost did. The Japanese soldiers rush out of the cave. The Americans are taking Mount Suribachi. And up there in the corner of the movie screen, almost as an after-thought, you see the six American soldiers raising the flag. Never seen it from this perspective, have we? And I think it's extremely important that we do.

Where "Flags of Our Fathers" felt lifeless, bland and like one of those shows on the history chanel where the actors play out the scene as the narrator describes it, "Letters from Iwo Jima" is real, immediate and makes you feel as if you're on that little slab of an island even if you really, really don't want to be there.

Initial Oscar Nomination Reaction

- Nominees for Best Picture are as follows: "Babel", "The Departed", "Letters From Iwo Jima", "The Queen", and "Little Miss Sunshine". I've seen them all except "The Queen", and despite what I wrote on this very blog a couple weeks ago I will see it within the next month. And I'll do my best to watch it with a fair eye.

- No Best Picture Nomination for "Dreamgirls"! YAY! I really had no desire to see this movie. I mean, no desire. None whatsoever. And now I don't have to! Woo hoo! (Of course, this lends more possibility to "Babel" winning and Lord help us if that happens.)

- I was disappointed "United 93" didn't at least garner a Best Picture nod but director Paul Greengrass was nominated so that's something at least.

- As I watched "Little Miss Sunshine" back in August I certainly did not think I was viewing a nominee for Best Picture. That being said, it is a good little movie. And it's extremely wonderful to see a film from Sundance get to sit at the adult table.

- It was also a little sad not to see Sacha Baron Cohen get a Best Actor nod for "Borat". There was no way in the world he would have won but a nomination would have been the equivalent of winning.

- Jack Nicholson did not get nominated in the Supporting Actor category for "The Departed" but Mark Wahlberg did for the same movie. That's the correct decision.

- I'm pulling hard for Todd Field and Tom Perotta to win the Best Adapted Screenplay for "Little Children". But I have a sneaking suspicion that "Borat" will win this even though it shouldn't. I liked "Borat" but come on, the whole thing is improvised. It's an outline, not a screenplay.

- Cinema Romantico's "sources" have indicated Helen Mirren is currently being listed as a 2-1 favorite to win Best Actress while Kate Winslet has been established as an 83-1 favorite. But then everyone thought Ohio State was going to lay down the royal smack against Florida, too.

- Cinema Romantico's "sources" also have indicated Martin Scorsese has gone off at a 4-1 favorite to win Best Director. The odds are also 12-1 that a mob will burn down the building should he not emerge victorious. (For the love of God, Academy, just give it to him.)

Billy Crudup - A Complete Career Breakdown

Q: I wonder, Cinema Romantico, who is the best actor working today?

A: The correct answer is Billy Crudup.

Q: Billy Crudup? Are you unfamiliar with Al Pacino?

A: Unfair! Completely unfair! Michael Jordan is better than Dwyane Wade, too.

Q: Sean Penn?

A: You're still not getting it.

Q: Johnny Depp?

A: This is not-

Q: Daniel Day Lewis?

A: All right! Fine! Billy Crudup is my favorite actor! Are you happy?!

Q: Denzel Washington?

A: That's it. Q&A is over.

Yesterday I noted that our best working actress has never earned an Oscar though she has been nominated (after this morning) five times. Crudup, however, hasn't earned even a single nomination. Tragic? Quite. Jack Nicholson so much as feeds a pidgeon anywhere near a camera and he gets an Oscar nod but Crudup turns in some of the absolute finest work of the past decade and most people still don't even know who he is.

Crudup isn't merely an actor, he is an inhabitor. He inhabits each role he plays. I urge you to seek out his work, any of his work. You don't have to start with any one film in particular - start anywhere you'd like. The list below is a guide to help you.


Sleepers – When I first saw this I was totally unfamiliar with Billy Crudup. Essentially he just sits in a courtroom while far more famous actors talk a lot. But he reacts to their talking very well.

Inventing the Abbots – I’ll be honest. I’ve seen this but when I saw it I, again, was totally unfamiliar with him. I don’t even remember him being in it but IMDB.COM tells me he was. But I’m sure he was very good.

Grind – I excitedly got this one off netflix after reading somewhere that it was like a Bruce Springsteen song come to life. I was hoping to find something like “Racing in the Street”, or perhaps "Stolen Car", but instead it was more like “Linda Let Me Be the One”.

Without Limits – In one of his best performances he plays legendary American long distance runner Steve Prefontaine. As I’ve stated before there is a fine line between acting and impersonating. He does impersonate Prefontaine’s unique running style to utter perfection (the race scenes combine actual footage of Prefontaine and footage of Crudup as Prefontaine and you can in no way whatsoever tell the difference) but he also makes the famous runner come alive and feel like a real person with real emotions and real problems. He perfectly captures what was utmost confidence and often came off as cockiness. Awesome work and one of the best biopic performances (and movies) ever.

The Hi-Lo Country – In a film about some of the last “real cowboys” Woody Harrelson goes big-gestured and over-the-top while Crudup has to play it straight. He does and holds the film together………for the most part.

Jesus’ Son – This is sort of like "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" lite. I don't really like that movie and I didn't really like this one, either. But Crudup is still pretty good.

Waking the Dead – In this one Crudup plays an aspiring politician who falls in love with an idealist/activist played by Jennifer Connelly. Then, interestingly, it transforms into a ghost story. It’s nowhere near perfect – some of the subplots miss – but the two leads are great and the romance angle is very well done. Very underseen but definitely worth a look.

Almost Famous – This was my true introduction to Crudup (and the best film of the year that was 2000). He plays Russell Hammond, guitarist of the fictional band Stillwater, who befriends a young rock journalist. You’ve probably all seen this and so you know what I know – namely, he’s awesome. Interestingly, the part was originally intended for Brad Pitt but I don’t think that would have worked. There would have been too much of that “Gleam-In-Brad-Pitt’s-Eye”. It would have been Brad Pitt PLAYING Russell Hammond whereas it ended up with Billy Crudup BEING Russell Hammond.

World Traveler – This was writer/director Bart Freundlich’s (“The Myth of Fingeprints” - of which I'm a fervent admirer, as we already know) second film and a huge disappointment to me. Crudup’s performance, however, does not disappoint. There comes a moment when he’s riding a ferris wheel at some carnival and you don’t even think about hokey it is unless you stop and remove yourself from the movie and tell yourself, “Riding a ferris wheel at some carnival is so hokey”. And that’s when you realize, damn, this Billy Crudup can act.

Charlotte Gray – This one is notable for the fact he goes head-to-head with Cate Blanchett, whom Premiere Magazine recently dubbed our best working actress. And, quite frankly, despite the porous material he emerges as Bird to Blanchett’s Magic.

Big Fish – In a movie filled with eccentric characters (it’s a Tim Burton movie, after all) Crudup plays the straight man. And despite the fact his transformation is somewhere beyond inevitable, you still find yourself believing it entirely when it happens. And that’s when you realize, damn, this Billy Crudup can act.

Stage Beauty – As one of the last of the males who specialized in playing women onstage during Elizabethan times Crudup gives perhaps his finest performance. This was a character ripe for overacting or broad comedy but Crudup finds the nuances. He is totally convincing as both a man and as a man specifically being a woman. The movie itself has a few weak spots but I still recommend it to the highest degree. This is acting, readers, of the highest order.

Trust the Man – He is back with Freundlich again and although Crudup is the only cast member to save face he has got to get out of this relationship with Freundlich before it kills him.

Mission Impossible III – Uh…………can I use my Get Out Of Jail Free card now?

The Good Shepherd – As a British special agent he injects some life into the very, very, very slow proceedings. Unfortunately, he only appears for about nine-and-a-half minutes in this eight hour movie (at least I'm pretty sure it was eight hours).

(Dedication will be released this year, though I'm not sure of the exact release date. It sounds extremely promising. Here's to hoping Billy rebounds after a rough 2006. I'm positive he will.)

Kate Winslet - A Complete Career Breakdown

Tomorrow is, of course, one of the biggest days of the year for tomorrow morning is when the Oscar nominations will be announced at about 5:30 AM (PST) in Hollywood, CA. It's not better than Christmas, or Thanksgiving, but it's definitely better than Halloween. Therefore Cinema Romantico has chosen the day prior to the pronouncements to partake in a long awaited and extremely overdue exercise.

Q: Cinema Romantico, who is the best actress working today?

A: Excellent inquiry, loyal reader! Kate Winslet is the proper response.

Q: What about Julianne Moore?

A. Possibly at one time but too many movies like "Laws of Attraction" and "The Forgotten" have rendered that argument null and void.

Q: Hilary Swank?

A. You could say her except one minute she's making "Million Dollar Baby" and the next she's making "The Reaping".

Q: Faye Dunaway?

A: Not since the seventies.

Q: You're not forgetting Meryl Streep, are you?

A. No, I'm not. But that isn't fair. Is Brett Favre all-around, top-to-bottom better than Tom Brady? Probably. But is he better right now? I don't think so.

Q: But wait, Cinema Romantico! What about this long awaited exercise of which you speak?

Ah, yes. The long awaited exercise. I appreciate the reminder. You see, on the eve of the date which is reserved to pay tribute to our finest actors (after all, it's an honor just to be nominated) it's appropriate that Cinema Romantico provide a useful breakdown of every single performance our best working actress has given.

(Note: Tomorrow - on Oscar Nomination Day itself - I will be providing a complete breakdown of every single performance our best working actor has given so be sure to check back.)

It must also be noted the apex of our actresses, while accumulating several nominations, has never actually won. This is a tragedy to rival Macbeth. But then Martin Scorsese has never won either (though that should be rectified this year). But all whining aside, the skill Ms. Winslet possesses and the bold choices she continually makes are becoming much more difficult to find in our current cinematic climate. And I've yearned to give a full breakdown of her oeuvre because I want everyone to be familiar with it. If you take the time to seek out her work, rest assured, you will be rewarded to the utmost.


Heavenly Creatures – If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it 47 times – this is the best film Peter Jackson has made. A lot of that has to do with the very first performance by our best working actress. As a teenager who forms a close (a bit too close) relationship with a female classmate who then delve into multiple fantasy worlds while fearing their parents are conspiring to keep them apart she gives one of the best under-the-age-of-20 performances of all time. She has to run the entire gauntlet of emotion and does so convincingly every step of the way. She is the rock of (and I mean this) one of the best movies made.......ever.

Sense and Sensibility – In just her second movie can she can toe to toe with the formidable Emma Thompson? Indeed, she can. Often these types of movies can seem stuffy and dull but via the energy Winslet brings (and, to be fair, all the other actors bring) this one feels the opposite.

Jude – A slow movie. Very, very slow. Not her best performance but still okay.

Hamlet – This was the version in which Kenneth Branagh filmed the entire text (it ran a little over four hours). And has there ever been a better Ophelia? Not a chance. Unless, of course, Ingrid Bergman played the role once in her young days and I don’t know about it.

Titanic – For all it’s special effects wizardry and the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio it is Winslet that emerges the heart and soul of this film. She makes the transformation of Rose from spoiled, rich girl to young girl in the first flush of infatuation to woman willing to risk everything for love to someone willing to give up all she has to start a new life completely authentic. Plain and simple, she makes the most successful movie of all time work.

Hideous Kinky – This is a strangely appealing film (worth the effort if you're willing to put it forth) and Winslet is wonderful in it as a mother who up and takes her two young children to Morocco but the key here was the simple choice to do it. This was her follow-up to the biggest movie of all time and that spoke volumes about the type of actress she wanted to be.

Holy Smoke – An infinitely weird movie (Harvey Keitel turns up in a dress, for instance) that I wouldn’t really recommend to most people I know. But Winslet is absolutely fantastic as a young girl who has been brainwashed.

Quills – One of the common phrases used to describe an actor’s performance is “chewing scenery”. This term is employed if the actor is going a bit, shall we say, over-the-top, or acting with an immense deal of energy. However, this term only seems to come up in relation to actors, not actresses. Well, Geoffrey Rush certainly “chews scenery” as the infamous French author Marquis de Sade but Winslet “chews scenery” right along with him and chews it just as good.

Enigma – A fairly dull film about English code-breakers during WWII that is injected with life whenever Winslet turns up. Few glamorous actresses can dial it down and convincingly play frumpy if the role requires it but that is precisely what she does here.

Iris – Is there another actress alive who could possibly portray the younger version of a character played by Dame Judi Dench? I think not.

The Life of David Gale – In a pretty subpar message movie about the death penalty she at least saves face.

Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Mind – As one of the greatest characters in cinema history – Clementine Kruczynzki – she turns in some of her most fantastic work. In any other year I would have strenuously argued Winslet deserved the Oscar but it just so happened her work here came up against Hilary Swank in a little film playing a certain female boxer. This is proof of the wonderful things that happen when a great writer (Charlie Kauffman) creates a great character which has life breathed into it by a great actress.

Finding Neverland – Uh oh. The character with the terminal illness. Can Kate make it work? Damn right, she can. Johnny Depp gets the showy role in this one but Winslet is unquestionably his equal.

All the King’s Men – This was one of her more lifeless turns but she is assisted in no way with the bland writing.

Little Children – I loved the main character of this book so much and when I finished reading it I pondered over who could play the part should it ever be made into a movie. "Wouldn't Kate Winslet be great?" I thought to myself. And then I had a good chuckle because rarely is Hollywood that smart. But lo and behold they were that smart. And Winslet again properly de-glamorizes herself and makes Sarah Pierce come alive. Now if we can just wait a few years, bring “How to Be Good” to the big screen and cast her as Katie Carr. I’ll even volunteer to write the screenplay!

(Notes: I have not seen “The Holiday” yet because, come on, I can’t go see that by myself in the theater. But I will rent it once it has been released on DVD. I also have not seen “Romance and Cigarettes” as I can never find it in Blockbuster and it is still unavailable on Netflix.)

An Inconvenient Truth

How many so-called horror movies does Hollywood release each year? A dozen? Two dozen? More than that? Well, if you really have any desire to be horrified I recommend you rent "An Inconvenient Truth", turn out all the lights and prepare to feel your stomach curl. It is truly scary.

This is the documentary film in which features former Vice President Al Gore takes an hour and a half to advise us that global warming is real, and not only is it real but that it is being caused by human activity. He shows us numerous graphics that indicate this is not a "cyclical" situation but a situation in which it is getting dramatically worse each year and will get melodramatically in the years to come.

Do I purport to be a scientist? No. Do I know the accuracy of all of Mr. Gore's information? Of course not. But what I do know is this - on Christmas Eve in Chicago, Illinois I walked to Starbucks and got an eggnog latte without wearing a jacket. I find that interesting.

I knew some about the subject matter coming in but not a whole lot. The information presented in the movie is very interesting and seems based not on hyperbole but on fact. A particular politician is presented at one point stating that "global warming is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the American people." Funky graphics and words via Al Gore's mouth to dispute this are one thing. But when he presents photos showing the shrinking glaciers of Glacier National Park and how Lake Chad in Africa has reduced in just the last few years to virtually nothing, that's another. I see what I see.

But I don't want to waste this entire review repeating the information already provided in the movie itself. Instead I want to discuss the fact that is - as I just stated - a movie. Let's not forget that. If you want to a make a movie, you have to actually make a movie - not just a ninety minute science lesson.

Admittedly, some of it does feel like a science lesson. The movie is structured around a slideshow presentation Gore reasons he has given "at least" one thousand times in many different places. It tries to provide more of a cinematic feel via a fairly static voice-over from the former Vice President and, of course, the inevitable digression into the 2000 election (which is kept brief, thankfully).

There will certainly be those who dismiss this as a political film. This is inevitable when a politician is involved. They will claim this is nothing more than Al Gore's "agenda", perhaps a good way to keep his face in the limelight. And yes, it is true that Gore specifically points fingers at a few people in our current administration.

But there is a line in the film that Gore says and it was - for me - the key moment of the entire movie and is what it made more than a mere science lesson. After Mr. Gore has presented much of the most damning information he says (and I can't remember the line exactly so I apologize in advance), Don't you think we might have some problems besides terrorists?

It's the way he delivers this line and the way he looks while he delivers it. This is not political posturing. He means what he says, truly and deeply and down to the core. And this is when you realize "An Inconvenient Truth" has nothing to do with Al Gore trying to stay relevant. He has a pure concern for the future of our world. He has true and complete conviction.

Early in the movie he talks about an early collegiate professor of his who was the first to measure carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the results of these studies and how it was this that caused Al Gore to be worried for our planet's future and to delve into the problem. This is something he has been pursuing most of his adult life. He came to this before politics.

Al Gore is often described using cliche. He's stiff, lifeless, robotic. But the Al Gore you see onscreen here is different from all that. I consider myself a liberal but that is irrelevant. I respect a person with passion. Al Gore has it.

Random Cinematic Awards

Cinema Romantico's movie viewing for 2006 is almost complete but until it is The 2nd Annual Prigge's (in which we name the year's best movies and performances) cannot be unveiled. I know, I know, this depresses you. This creates a rather bulbous void in your life. After all, in a world that contains approximately 814,737 year-end movie award lists, The Prigge's are the only of those which can be considered definitive.

But worry not, dear and loyal readers, The Prigge's are almost here. Thus, in order to quench your ever-burgeoning thirst I present you with Cinema Romantico's 2nd Annual Random Cinematic Awards. Enjoy!!!

Best Use of Music in a Movie This Year: “We Belong” in Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby

Best Individual Line of the Year: “Marriage is an important part of getting ahead. It lets people know you're not a homo.” – Alec Baldwin, “The Departed” (I understand this line may seem a bit tasteless but, trust me, when you hear it in the movie and listen to the way Baldwin says it, you will ache from laughter.)

Most Underrated Movie of the Year: Marie Antoinette

Most Overrated Movie of the Year: Babel

Worst Movie of the Year: Click (as the Vince Vaughn of "Wedding Crashers" said - "I don't want to get into it because it's only gonna' make me mad")

Best Chicago Movie Revival of the Year: Raiders of the Lost Ark

Best Movie Rental Experience of the Year: Bon Voyage (an utterly fantastic French comedy/adventure set during WWII)

First Annual Honorary Rachel McAdams Award (for cinema’s most promising newcomer): Sacha Baron Cohen, “Talladega Nights” & “Borat”

First Annual Honorary Michael Bay Award (for person in cinema who most needs to go away and sell real estate): Brett Ratner, director of the train wreck that was “X-Men 3”

Movie Review Quote of the Year: “So, bad story: strike one. Unimpressive acting: strike two. Oh, and the gratuitous and disturbing scene with a naked Terry Bradshaw. Well, if that isn't strike three, what is?” – Rory L. Cline (movieidiot.blogspot.com) on “Failure to Launch”

Why I Haven't Seen The Queen

“The Queen" is the exceedingly well-reviewed film regarding the events directly after Princess Diana’s tragic death. It stars Helen Mirren in the title role and she is supposedly spectacular. It also seems she is a lock to take home the Oscar for best actress.

This is why I refuse to watch it.

Kate Winslet is my favorite actress and, damn it, this was supposed to be Kate Winslet’s year. I was so sure “Little Children” was going to do it for her. And, sure enough, she’s garnering Oscar buzz – but it’s merely NOMINATION buzz. And this is all thanks to Ms. Mirren.

I have no doubt Ms. Mirren is fantastic in her role. I have no doubt she is worthy of an Oscar. But, quite frankly, I don't care. I’m being selfish, yes. And petty. And ridiculous. I mean, it's probably safe to assume that Ms. Winslet herself does not care a wit whether or not she wins but that's well beside the point.

For instance, I still harbor resentment for former Ohio State running back Eddie George. Why? In 1995 he stole the Heisman Trophy from its rightful owner, Nebraska quarterback Tommie Frazier. As far as I know, George is an exemplary human being. And as far as I know, Frazier could really care less who took home the Heisman that year. But, as I said before, that's well beside the point. Someone must carry the torch of these grudges. And that person, apparently, is me.

Look, I know all of this is sad. That’s why it’s a full confession. I’m coming completely clean here. I want to watch “The Queen” – I truly do – but I can’t for the sheer fact that I will not be an objective observer. I already have a personal bias going in and I simply can’t change it.

Maybe after all is said and done – after Mirren has won her golden statue on Oscar night and Winslet has gone home empty-handed – I will be able to watch "The Queen" with a fair eye. But until then............piss off, Mirren.

Happy New Year (and then some)

(Note: The following essay will be, again, strictly about college football, though not about my beloved Nebraska Cornhuskers' painful loss in the Cotton Bowl thanks to coaching so inept it makes me want to put my head through a plate of glass. It will be about a true re-affirmation regarding the greatest sport in the world. It will be rife with over-the-top superlatives and unbridled enthusiasm. You've been warned.)

I'm forever grateful in a way the written word will never adequately describe to have been able to experience a true New Year's Day. In fact, I have experienced several of them. My first "New Year's Day" came all the way back in 1986 and they lasted all the way until January 1, 1995.

To clarify, New Year's Day once upon a time was they day when college football held its best bowl games and best bowl games only. The top teams played from sunup to sundown and the National Championship was decided by the stroke of midnight. Tragically, things have changed. The BCS, or Bowl Championship Series, appeared in 1995 and mucked up everything. This was an attempt to appease playoff proponents who are only interested in absolutely, positively deciding who is #1. (What's ironic is the BCS essentially was created due to the whining playoff proponents who are probably the most staunch enemies of the BCS. But that's a subject for another sermon.)

Thanks to the BCS two of the biggest bowl games, including the so-called national championship, are now played after New Year's Day. The title is no longer decided on the first day of the year. It is no longer necessary to stack one TV on top of another in order to maintain tabs on all the action.

To a young kid - well, a young college football fanatic - New Year's Day of what can only be described as yore was truly magical. Not simply because of the wall-to-wall games with the finest teams but because of the feelings the whole day conjured. It was the one day every year guaranteed that my parents would let me stay up way past my bedtime. Even in '86, when I was in 2nd grade, I vividly recall watching Oklahoma defeat Penn State for the national title hours after I normally would have been sound asleep. On the first day of 1991 I stayed up until near midnight in my 220 Third Street bedroom watching on a little black & white TV the amazingly dramatic Orange Bowl as Notre Dame's "Rocket" Ismail had seemingly dashed 91 yards in literally the last seconds to defeat Colorado and spoil their chance at the national title only to have it called back by a penalty.

That was part of the magic. You were watching something you genuinely loved and you were up later than you were supposed to be and so you felt like you were getting away with something and, quite frankly, it was just one of the best feelings in the whole wide world.

As much I've denied it (to myself and everyone else), the advent of the BCS seems to have taken away much of the magic. This is not to say there are not still good games on New Year's Day. The Rose Bowl back in 2005, for instance, was epic. But the stakes of the January 1 games are no longer as high. In the ridiculous fuss to stage college's version of the Super Bowl what has been lost is multiple games on that one beautiful day possessing championship implications. In 1994 we entered New Year's Day with four teams all having a legitimate shot at emerging as national champion. And so as the day progressed and we got deeper and deeper into the night, things became more and more dramatic. On more recent New Year's Days I've gone to bed early during the final game of the day and in some cases (gasp) I have even committed the unthinkable and not even watched it. This truly makes me sad.

But last night? Last night was different. Last night in stunning and unforseeable fashion the (Tostitos) Fiesta Bowl harkened back to the New Year's Days of my glorious youth. The cinderella, as they say, Boise State Broncos beat the Oklahoma Sooners, owner of 7 National Championships. But they didn't just beat them. Goodness, no. They beat them in the sort of game we college football devotees daydream about seeing without ever really believing that dream will come true. They beat them in the sort of game that is legendary a nanosecond after it ends. They beat them in a game that as you watch it you realize is about to become legendary and you just want stop time and bottle it up.

If you didn't see the frenetic finish (and considering it occurred close to midnight central standard time, you probably didn't) let me recap.

1.) Oklahoma converted a 2 point conversion....twice (the first time it was called back by a penalty) to tie the score 28-28 with a minute left.

2.) Oklahoma returns an interception for a touchdown to go up 35-28 mere seconds after having tied the game.

3.) Boise State scores a touchdown on a 4th down and 18 courtesy of an improbable "hook and lateral" play to tie the game and send it to overtime.

4.) Oklahoma's stud running back Adrian Peterson scores a touchdown on the very first play of overtime.

5.) Boise State pulls to within a point when they let their wide receiver (!!!!!) throw for a touchdown on 4th and 2. (I say again, their wide receiver! Who had not thrown a pass all year! The guts! Dear God, the guts!)

6.) Boise State goes for a two point conversion instead of kicking the extra point and converts it to win courtesy of a so-called "Statue of Liberty" play. (Allow me to explain that the Statue of Liberty play is a little ruse in which the quarterback makes like he is throwing the ball only to actually deposit the ball with his other hand into the hands of the running back, leaving the quarterback in a pose somewhat reminiscent of the green lady in New York Harbor. It's straight old school, man. It's like like seeing Halley's Comet. Stunningly beautiful but oh so rare.)

7.) Ian Johnson, the Boise State running back who scored on said Statue of Liberty play, then proposed to his girlfriend (a Boise State cheerleader) after the game on live TV. Yes, this really happened. As Dave said to me as it happened, "It's like a sports movie."

It was like a sports movie. It was UN-FRICKIN-BELIEVABLE. It was the closest equivalent I can recall to the titanic 1994 Orange Bowl in which quarterbacks Tommie Frazier and Charlie Ward - of Nebraska and Florida State, respectively - one-upped each other all night long with breathtaking plays until a finale that left me dazed, heartbroken, proud, awed, drenched with sweat and tears, and laying face-first on our basement floor as if I'd just run a marathon and a half in a combination of blizzard and hailstorm with a sprained ankle. In short - last night felt like a real New Year's Day, god-damn it.

Last night I got to feel like a kid. It felt like I was staying up past my bedtime on a school night. I rose from my chair when Boise State ran the Statue of Liberty much like I rose from my bed 16 years ago (God, has it been that long?) when "Rocket" Ismail dramatically raced those 91 yards even though it turned out to be all for naught. Last night the magic returned and reminded me - despite the tragedy that is the BCS and the needless playoff which will inevitably come - that New Year's Day is still special.