2006

The two jaw dropping leads in Hard Candy are the first in a seemingly endless list of reasons this is such a great movie. The directing from music video veteran David Slade is masterful to say the least, utilizing shot composition and pacing with such a gifted handed it makes my toes curl in pleasure imagining what he could come up with next. The use of the tight close ups, contrasted to the wide 2 shots of Wilson and Page is unbelievably effective in unsettling the audience. The production design dazzles with it's striking use of colour and hard shapes, and the fabulous photography only compliments it with it's consistent use of unfocused to focused images. But more than anything else Hard Candy benefits from gutsy and nuanced performances from Patrick Wilson, and in particular the best breakout start in recent memory Ellen Page. Her confidence on screen at such a young age is a sign of terrific things to come, and how this performance was overlooked by all major awards is beyond me. As if the technical achievements of this picture weren't enough, the story and subject matter are also incredibly relevant, and delivered with a ferocious punch. An instant favourite.

Awkward, at times misdirected, but adorable. The themes that occupy the soul of this movie aren't easy to pick up on, but when you do, it's a real treat to watch. Full of wonderful character work, and a delightfully original script, Little Miss Sunshine is one of the year's best. Abigail Breslin is a scene stealer with tons of potential. This is the kind of indie film that I love to see. More of these please.

A warmly written comedy with a very mature edge to it. While it doesn't have nearly the intelligence level of a Charlie Kauffman script, or the thoughtfulness of a Woody Allen penned film, it's still cute and quirky. Ferrell and the cast are charming and convincing, and Forster behind the camera shows care and a tender touch. Great flick, definitely worth checking out. Works on the emotional level it should better on the second watch.

A brilliant script highly reminiscent of Paul Schrader's Taxi Driver is the backbone of this deeply disturbing and taught thriller. The eeirly beautiful narration of Dench sends shivers up and down the spine, and her performance is (as usual) quite exceptional. Blanchett, who I've never been crazy about as an actress, delivers a devastatingly convincing portrayl, and forces the audience to empathize with her despicable character. The director kind of just stands back and lets the phenomenal script play itself out through the cast, and the film succeeds in every way it should. Bill Nighy's work as husband to Blanchett needed to be scaled back just a tad, but ultimately it doesn't hurt the movie that much. If I were to nitpick, I would say this isn't a masterwork because the casting of Judy Dench was a mistake. Not that the woman isn't the best for the role, not that she's not talented, not that she doesn't do a great job, but I thought as a director, that the film would have been even more creepy and disturbing, if she was played by an unknown actress. But a really underrated film here, certainly one of the best of the year.

Rian Johnson's twisted genre detective story is a real treat in 2006's cinematic wasteland. Inspired by 40's film noir, Johnson spins a high school murder mystery, with Shakespearean writing skill, and stylish directing.

A sleek, smart, and stylish thriller that deserves more recognition than it's gotten. The plot, contrary to things I've heard, is not hard to follow at all, but moves along nicely with confident direction. The art design is very unique, and a pleasure to watch. But the pacing needed some work, and there could have been a little more character development in everyone to make it seem a little less cartoonish. All in all, surprised and satisfied with Lucky Number Slevin.

Maybe I didn't quite understand it, but I'm sure that it is comprehendible to the right people with a certain type of mind. Aronofsky's vision is striking and a downright pleasure, so rare is it in the world today to see filmmaking of this creative calibre. Some of the visual pictures he paints in this film, and their mincing with the outstanding score is sheer magic. And unlike his previous effort, Requiem for a Dream, the story is universal and emotionally appealing. I didn't love this film, but I do think it's a masterpiece, damn good stuff. Spotted a couple problems on a second watch, most notably Ellen Burstyn's performance, which is not weak, but... not... good enough.

Sucks you into a bizarre LSD trip and resounds a trippy out of this world feeling, but at the same time stays true to Philp K. Dick's material, and tells a poignant and fascinating tale of drugs and addiction.

A noir masterwork with a delicious De Palma twist, without a doubt one of the best films of the year. Shrouded in mystery, the story unravels rather cloudily, but by the end everything is revealed perfectly and quite clearly considering how thick the whole mess of events is. Hartnett is startlingly effective as the prototypical film noir lead, and he's surrounded by a very well cast group of actors who all handle themselves very well. The script, while not as obviously brilliant as L.A. Confidential was, is still a very admirably constructed one, and De Palma shows the skill of an old pro. His idol (Alfred Hitchcock) would be proud of this work, that calls to mind 1972's Frenzy.

This is the best directed kid's film I have ever seen, and perhaps one of the most fluidly put together movies I've seen in the new century. Yeah it's a silly story, and a lot of people are going to ho-hum it, but make no mistake, this is a fabulously made film. Luc Besson's writing isn't perfect, but it compliments his directorial style beauitfully. it's unfortunate his career will be ending soon. His contribution to cinema I think has been massive.

Riddled with plot holes and lacking in clarity throughout, but goddamn what a fucking cool movie. The visual effects and photography are astonishing, the concept is imaginative, this Russian horror/fantasy is sure to become a cult classic. I can't wait to see the sequels!

Todd Field's immaculately directed Little Children is without a doubt one of the best films of the year. The acting is all top notch, particularly from Winslet and Haley, and the cinematography is a feast for the eyes. The source material does feel kind of muddled, and I was unsure after it was over what I was supposed to have got out of it. But it's well adapated, with the exception of the unnecessary voice over narration. Field's direction is so clear it makes any narration other than the silent one from the characters totally redundant.

This overrated crime thriller succeeds at being an entertaining, but not much else. The writing and directing do not compliment one another at all. It seems as though the writer had one vision of the film, and Marty had his own trademark crime picture in mind. The result is a jumbled, extremelly flawed film that I don't think deserves a single Oscar. Di Caprio's performance is good, but his character is poorly developed and he's badly cast to begin with. Marty's direction is very steady, displaying the storytelling strength, we remember from Casino and Goodfellas, and not from Gangs of New York and the Aviator. This is the first Scorsese picture I've seen that I didn't like the way it was edited. The continuity is glaringly poor, and it seems choppy and staggered most of the time.

Well I wanted a new favourite out of Gondry's latest, and while I maybe don't quite get that, the product he delivers is more than acceptable. His vision is perhaps the most distinctive seen in the cinematic world in the last few years, and he translates it to screen marvellously well considering how avant garde the material is. His actors do superb work in a tough working atmosphere, but ultimately the audience is unsympathetic to the characters because the film isn't long enough to provide the in depth character development we saw in Eternal Sunshine, and some of the movie seems disconnected from other parts.

Horrifically seductive, dark, and atmospheric. I was surprisingly impressed with the cast, who were very believable. Overall I was quite pleased with this one. Definitely earns it's comparisons to Alien and The Thing.

This is a remarkable film, but it's not all it's cracked up to be. The unit direction and photography are stellar, and a times brilliant. Cuaron utilizes some incredible long handheld shots to great effect, and for that reason alone, the movie deserves recognition. But it's also a well told story, interesting, and well paced. The performances do feel somewhat staged and canned, undoubtebly due to the massive amount of rehearsal the cast must've undertaken. The source material I didn't find completely believeable, but the translation to film is excellent, and the design of the world is completely enveloping and easy to get lost in. Great thriller, one of the best of the year.

The formula for the perfect movie lies in The Pursuit of Happyness. Great acting? You bet. Compelling story? In every way. Well directed? And how. Shot? Very cleanly. Edited? Tightly. Pacing? Right on. So what's missing, everything is set in place for a fabulous piece. Too bad the writer is an unintelligent fop. The man has absolutely no literary skill at all, dumbing down every aspect of the script, condescending to the audience even, to what purpose i have no idea. It's low brow, and unnecessary, as is the most hindering aspect, Will Smith's terrible voice over narration. It's so degrading to the film, insulting to the audience, and a slap in the face to director Gabriele Muccino's fine work. The movie is pieced together magnificently, and the cast is all great. The story is heart breaking, and almost Bergmanesque in it's depressive tone, but the way it's told had to be waaay better in order to make it a masterpiece. Close, but no cigar. This Steve Conrad writer guy is making a habit of spoiling possibly great films (The Weatherman).

Watching Tideland makes me even more concious of the idiocy and hypocrisy of Hollywood and a lot of film critics. While hailing Guillermo Del Toro as a genius, and declaring the mediocre Pan's Labyrinth as one of the best films of the year, Terry Gilliam's magical new film DOESN'T EVEN GET DISTRIBUTED? While Pan's intentions are unclear and the focus askew, Tideland's purpose is consistently clear. It's about many commonplace themes as seen through a children's eyes. How a young girl views and deals with things like death, sex, the mentally challenged, and the unknown. Gilliam's vision is strikingly bizarre, and his design every bit as beautiful as Del Toro's. But Jodelle Ferland's magnificent achievement as the girl in Tideland dwarfs the contrastingly incapable performance of Ivana Baquero in Pan's Labyrinth, and the acting overall in Tideland is far better. Del Toro's script in Pan's is simpler of course, and easier to follow, but Gilliam has a real core and substance to his film that Labyrinth lacked. It makes me sick how the brilliant director of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and Brazil gets shafted by the filmmaking community for making an original work of art, while the director of such classics as Blade II and Mimic receives countless of undeserved awards for a genre-confused inferior piece of work. The lack of recognition for Tideland, a film of a similar story to Pan's Labyrinth but that which does not compare quality wise, is an embarassment to the cinematic community.

A real pleasant surprise. Side-splittingly hilarious, quirky and clever is Flushed Away, the British animated offering that marks itself as the year's best CGI flick. Some wonderful moments of mature, sophisticated humour are the real hilight.

Second watch is even more revealing of all the problems. The directing, oh God the directing. It's unprofessional, and I as a moviegoer do not deserve to be subjected to that garbage. He forces his actors, who all do such amazing jobs, to play these scenes all wrong. And then his camera work is lame and his scenes poorly lit. The script and the performances are the saving grace, but I wasn't as even as happy with the screenplay when I watched it again. But still the story is so compelling and real, it's hard not to like this movie.

Smart and funny satire, but still manages to take the material seriously.

A film that has the possibility of becoming a modern cult classic. Writer Roger Avary, relishes in creating one horror movie cliche after another, and the right audience member (ie myself) gets swept along for the ride. Starts slow, finishes brilliantly.

Like Blood Diamond, The Last King of Scotland suffers from a severely flawed script, and only competent direction. But both boast great performances and a very interesting story, that garner it a solid rating. What can you say about Whitaker's performance other than "holy shit". The guy knocks it out of the ballpark, his portrayl is so powerful and so confident it overcomes everything else in the movie, including some atrocious dialogue. It's a totally different kind of performance than my favourite of last year, Ryan Gosling's in Half Nelson, but it's hard to say it's any better or worse. The supporting cast is also great, although the casting of the boyish McAvoy is a bit of a mistake, but he plays it admirably. The score and soundtrack to this film is also something to take note of, well suited, and adding to Whitaker's at times menacing demeanor.

Eerily perfect in every aspect, except for the story and script, which are too subtly presented for the audience to keep up with, and the ending is very unsatisfying. But all in all I liked this film, although few will. I thought it was very unsettling and masterfully made, perhaps though the director should have put more thought into what his audience would want to see.

Better than the last 4 Bond movies I've seen, but what's all the fuss about? The plot is boring and pulls the audience every which way, completely unfocussed and unimportant, which is the biggest problem the film runs into, and as a result the movie runs way longer than necessary, and the pacing is bizarre and high strung. But for the most part the film is edgy, fun to watch, cleverly written, and capably directed. Craig's Bond is restrained, and just a little bit dark, but lacks the nuances of Sean Connery or Roger Moore. Also thought that the first action sequence in the movie was way too stylized. Looked like a goddamn Matrix sequel. I liked this movie, but it is definitely overrated. Not the summer hit everyone has been raving about.

Not a great documentary, but hugely relevant and interesting material make for a good watch. The script sprawls and has little structure to speak of, and the photography and editing are unnecessairly jumpy and erratic.

A remake that matches the original? You don't say! Oh yes, yes I do. The production design in the Omen is inspired, and there's some excellent directorial decisions that make it an exciting movie to watch. The acting's not great, and the script's a little weak, but it's a horror movie for crying out loud. It suits it's purpose, it's scary.

A sufficiently entertaining thriller, that didn't deserve all the critical bashing it got. Scott's direction isn't original, and perhaps his recent stylistic choices are getting a little old, but it works very well in the setting of the film. The cast are having a good time, the story is interesting (albeit paradoxal and illogical), and overall it's just a real satisfying picture.

One of the best theatre experiences I've had in years. Popcorn flying everywhere, people screaming, laughing, applauding vigorously. An absolute blast. Is it a great film? No way. But God is it fun to watch.

While it does display elements of the formulaic Sandler comedy, there are parts to Click that really surprised me. There's a definite effort to get more of an emotional response out of the audience as opposed to the usual belly full o'laughs, the second half of the movie slipping almost entirelly into the rhelm of a morallity drama, a la It's A Wonderful Life.

Not bad at all. Should be great for the girls, but even I found it mildly interesting and compelling. Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep work terrifically together, and should both get looks for Oscar consideration.

A directorial misfire from Edward Zwick, whose dramatic efforts in The Last Samurai were quite fruitful, but here fall flat. His work here resembles something we might see from the director of Die Hard 3, failing to capture and manipulate his cast's fine performances to the movie's advantage. He's not helped by the screenplay, which is overloaded with cliches and unoriginal moments, and the dialogue is absolutely atrocious. The cast, all great, visibly struggle with the dialogue, and it strongly hinders their performances, Di Caprio's in particular. But all those negatives being said, it's a great story, the intentions are noble, and it's a reasonably pleasant film to watch. But for my buck, I'd go rent Fernando Meirelles' 2005 thriller, the Constant Gardener. A far superior piece, with nowhere near the same amount of problems, and similar material.

A really great surprise. Didn't expect anything from this movie, but it managed to be original and charming all the way through, with a few chuckles thrown in. The cast doesn't take it too seriously, and everything feels really natural and playful. No it's not going to win any awards, but John Tucker Must Die is immenselly enjoyable.

A surprising film that is more talk than action, and is probably the better for it.

Wholesomely unsatisfying and empty, but ultimately still entertaining. Gorgeously shot, acted well, but casted poorly, the Illusionist doesn't disappoint, but doesn't do much of anything else either. The ending bugged me more than anything else, seemed really cheap and tacked on. This film pales in comparison to the other magic flick out in 2006, Christopher Nolan's The Prestige, which I would highly recommend to viewing audiences before this.

Brosnan is terrific, but Greg Kinnear is downright irritating. A novel concept, but it wasn't structured to support and drive it properly.

2006 seems like one big cinematic disappointment after another, and Pan's Labyrinth is no exception. Despite it's stunning visual design and brilliant fantastical elements, the film falls flat due to misemphasis and lack of clarity. While most of the audience is surely there for the fantasy portion of the film, writer/director Guillermo del Torro insists on spending most of his time documenting a Spanish civil war story, whose relevance in this particular film, except for providing a context for the fantasy to stem from, is beyond me. Ultimately there is no "why" in this movie. Characters do and say things that are without motivation, the movie doesn't seem to have anything to say, no profound statement, no emotional impact. It's too bad, because I really wanted to like this movie. But it seems 2006 has little to offer this humble narrator.

Not half bad. The script is refreshingly wacky and outrageous, but Ivan Reitman's direction is unusually misguided, especially for a guy with his comic talents. Good rom-com fun.

Quite disappointing. While moments in the film border on brilliance, director Ryan Murphy insists on spoiling all his good decisions, with more numerous and glaring poor ones. The cast is quite solid, buying into Murphy's vision, and Benning is more than exceptional, but unfortunatelly all the great performances don't do anything to save the film, as no distinct and likable protagonist emerges. While the young boy in the lead is supposed to capture most of our attention, he is rather the least developed of all the characters, and not empathetic in the least. Some very funny moments in it though, but still not enough to make it great. I would sooner recommend those interested go out and rent the far better written 2005 Noah Baumbach flick, The Squid and the Whale.

Succeeds as a drama, but not as a comedy. Which in a sense is a failure because it's intended to be funny, which it's not, but the dramatic elements I thought were excellent.

Shyamalan's terrible direction almost pile drives this wonderful story into the ground. Luckily his cast is so into it, they miraculously manage to save it in the second act, and the audience can leave satisfied. And Paul Giamatti? Wow. Favourite actor list, he makes it.

A decent thriller, a rollercoaster ride of inconsistency, but overall worth checking out. Mos Def is surprisingly good.

Now I have seen this movie completely out of order, 15 mintues at a time. But it seems like a decent way to spend an hour and a half. Good clean wholesome American idiot filmmaking.

Plagued with inconsistency in the script, but an all around good effort from the filmmakers and cast. And FYI, Jo-Jo is smokin'.

Thoroughly unimpressive, but hard to hate. Like all modern CG animated films of late, Over the Hedge looks great, has some cool voice acting, but lacks in a smart screenwriter and an inspired director. Also... tragically unfunny, I went the whole film without so much as a snicker. Although I did think the little social commentary on suburban America was a good idea, but it was dumbed down too much to work for me.

Cheaply scary, and nothing else.

I thought this movie was pretty insulting to the intelligence of most Canadians. Here's a chance to show the world that we're more than billingual hockey players, and uh, no the filmmakers decide to parody the nation and make a big mockery out of us. That being said, it's a well made and entertaining piece, for a Canadian indie film anyway.

As is the problem with most enormous budget studio movies like this one, the script and story has gone through far too many hands, and it totally derails the movie.

A monsotrously (pardon the pun) entertaining b-movie, but for all the wrong reasons.

Akward and unclear story is not a bad idea, just executed very poorly.

Another summer movie dud. No consideration for story or character, the attitude seems to be "fuck all else let's get to the action stuff". Really repetitive. But best line ever "I'M JUGGERNAUT BITCH!"

Studio garbage.

All heart, no brains. Jared Hess, the man who brought us Napoleon Dynamite, shows us again that he is a quirky and passionate writer with absolutely no technical skill to speak of. The structure to the film is laughable, and the script weaker than a wet noodle. But on the other hand Jack Black is very effective, there are moments of hilarity, and the soundtrack is terrific. It's not bad, but it's definitely not good either.

Supremelly disappointing. While Roth flashes us glimpses of a great film, he continually shoots himself in the foot with longer looks at a really lousy film.

Almost without a doubt the worst best picture nominee I've ever seen. The Queen is a horrifically written biopic that stumbles along believing it has some degree of importance, when really the film could not be any more trivial and unappealing. The cinematography and directing are on par with a crummy BBC TV movie from the 90's, and the score is so self-righteously dramatic that it made me want to retch. Provided the whole movie kind of does, but that's besides the point. I will give props to Mirren who isn't as overrated as I thought she might be, but still reeks of an undeserving Oscar win next to the likes of Judi Dench and the unnominated Anette Benning. The Queen is an unnecessary and overrated black mark on the year in film. Avoid at all costs.

This is a surprisingly poor film, but ssh, don't tell Robert De Niro and the cast that, because they don't seem to know. They all seem to have convinced themselves that they were making a great picture, and the attitude of the film reflects that, but the fact is they were doomed for the get go. The script is lame and searches endlessly for interesting dramatic material, and consistently comes up empty. De Niro's direction is typical of an actor turned director, struggling with how to be advantageous with camera, and how to effectivelly shoot emotional moments. This movie is dull, far too long, acted well, but it should not appeal even to it's target audience.

Well put together film. But who the hell would want to see more than 20 minutes of it? It felt like a chore sitting through the whole thing.

Devastatingly stupid, predictable, and frustrating to watch. They should've called it "Spike Lee takes a vacation"

Flat-lines intelligence wisee, but is moderately entertaining at points, and not all the characters are horrenduous. Although the acting is just awful.

Barry Levinson blew it, and that's pretty much all there is to it. The man's not a writer, and it's supremely evident through the whole film, running into plot hole after plot hole, structure problems run rampant, lame dialogue and obnoxious characters plague the whole picture. Flashes of funny, but overall the humour seems very forced, and I was just generally quite disappointed by this flick, especially after the brilliant 1997 satire, Wag the Dog.

Very funny! Oh wait, it's not supposed to be is it...

The occassional funny moment doesn't make up for the mostly unprofessional script and direction.

A film that fails to accomplish anything a movie is supposed to. It looks like a A&E recreation more than anything else. Why would anybody want to see that recreated? Didn't we see enough actual footage of that day. Paul Greengrass misses the point entirelly, and I am left anxiously awaiting a film about 9/11 that will be done properly.

Tasteless and pointless movie borders on being offensive. I mean I'm all for gratuitous violence, but not when there's no context for it at all, it's really quite shameless.

Pointless: the Motion Picture. Whoever thought it was a good idea to do a biopic about Bobby Kennedy, and not show Bobby Kennedy, is dumber than a stump. All we got was an hour and a half of pointless bullshit, irrelevant character development, frustratingly poor dialogue, and lousy acting. And then somebody shot the would-be President. I got the feeling all the way through that I should feel nostalgic and heave a sigh at the times portrayed, so maybe the ironically titled Bobby might be better suited for 60 year old citizens who know nothing about film. Awful awful awful. The whole time I was just raising my arms in exasperation, desperately crying out "Why? Why am I being subjected to this? What the fuck are they talking about? Why are they talking about this meaningless dribble?" Gaaah!

Suffocates itself with cliches, and is one of those "so bad it's funny" movies.

So pointless, such a phenomenal waste of time. Nothing but mediocrity in You, Me, and Dupree.

Comically pathetic. Bad performances all around, especially from Virginia Madsen oddly enough. This flick just pissed me off inanelly. Note to the filmmakers: didn't your mother ever tell you that if you don't have something to say, don't say anything at all?

I left the theatre, because the idiot filmmakers couldn't even manage to light and compose shots properly. But I will give it one star because it had Sonny Chiba in it.

Unprofessionally lousy directing, and lazy acting make this one of the worst films I've seen in a while. Really frusterating to watch.