101-105

Film#101 - True Romance, 1993, dir. Tony Scott

I don't know why this took me so long to see. The cast alone is enough to make this a mind-blowing movie. Christian Slater in the best role I've veer seen him in, Patricia Arquette, Gary Oldman, Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken, Michael Rappaport, Brad Pitt, James Gandolfini, it just keeps going. This movie had so many great moments, literally every 10-15 minutes I would just be ecstatic about something or other. Some genuinely hilarious moments, beautifully written (obviously I think so, it's by Quentin Tarantino), and a fairly original take on a romantic genre. Great stuff.

9/10

Film#102 - The Insider, 1999, dir. Michael Mann

Extremely political and historically significant, this is really something I feel everyone should at least be aware of. It's such a courageous story that's actually true, it's inspiring to say the least. For anyone who has no idea, this is about Jeffrey Wigand, a former executive at a "Big Tobacco" company who goes to great lengths to expose the industry for what it is. He changed the face of cigarettes and took great risks to do so. Russell Crowe and Al Pacino are quite the pair here, and Pacino arguably gives one of his best performances. He's just very well suited for his role as Lowell Bergman, a producer of 60 Minutes on CBS. A bit lengthy but never what I would consider a dull moment.

9/10

Film#103 - Todo Sobre Mi Madre (All About My Mother), 1999, dir. Pedro Almodovar

I was more or less forced to watch this. In a certain class of mine we had to pick a film from a list and do a presentation on it; I got last pick. I appreciate what this film is trying to do, with it's allegory to the global positioning of Spain, and the way it breaks down ideology with it's discussion of gender and sexuality, but really it's just an 'okay' movie. It's well acted, sure, but it also doesn't seem to know what it's doing. The first section, especially the opening credits, are just unlike the rest of the film. It goes all over the place and ignores a lot of thing I felt needed further development. It was good, not great.

7/10

Film#104 - Muriel's Wedding, 1994, dir. P.J. Hogan

Another middle of the road film. Toni Collette is great, just so awkward and honest, but the plot is nothing special. A Girl who wants to be married, an ugly-duckling, trying to find herself. Set in Australia, it gives it a bit of originality just by the way these people talk, playing on Australian culture that I feel gives it a uniqueness to me, but as a representation of Australia it may be poking too much fun at it. It's charm very well may be in it's foreign yet familiar feel. Some pretty cheesy lines here and there, and much of the family is made up of characters whose emotions and desires are in a way unrealistic and nonsensical. Still, it was fun to watch, so it made up for some of it's faults.

7/10

Film#105 - The Ugly Truth, 2009, dir. Robert Luketic

Horrendous. I honestly thought this could be okay. It was a train wreck. Katherine Heigl and Gerald Butler are just the worst actors. The premise, well, it's absurd, and the way these characters become friends and ultimately fall in love (I'd say it spoils it but it's clear from the first 10 minutes of the movie) is just so unrealistic. At first they are at each other's throats, and then just so quickly they are best buds. There were too many moments where I literally wanted to scream at the screen. It was terrible. There were, however, a few good laughs, but mostly at how bad this movie was. There are so many ridiculous scenarios that have obvious fixes but of course the movie plays them up hoping for laughs. I would sincerely look down on someone who loves this movie. There is so much dialogue about gender roles that any morals it might have had have been so forced down your throat that they've completely lost their value. That's not to say there was ever any real value to it in the first place. Do not see this. Ever.

3/10

96-100

Film#96 - The Boondock Saints, 1999, dir. Troy Duffy

I have very fond memories of this movie. Not only does it bring out my Irish pride, but when I first saw it I thought it was just the most badass thing ever. This was many years ago. Sure, it's still packed full of sweet action scenes, but I think most of the generation that grew up loving this film would be surprised to go back and hear the dialogue that comes out of this thing. There was a lot more cheese than I remembered. The overall message is much less subtle than I remembered. Willem Dafoe is breathtaking though, but for anyone who doesn't know this movie, it's not because he's that great of an actor in this. His character though, makes the film. It brings it just a little step further from being too typical of an action film. David Della Rocco, who plays "Rocco", and has literally only ever been in this film, is also phenomenal, but that's mostly because he brings the light-hearteded side of the movie out, giving it a unique place between genres. The film is incredibly self-referential, and plays with the genre very overtly. It's commentary both on film as well as social problems is extreme at times, but it's the kind of satire that goes above and beyond in order to really get the message out there, not unlike A Modest Proposal way back when. This is a classic, although it definitely left me with a different feeling than when I saw it as a youngin', but I think it' definitely something people should see.

7.5/10

Film#97 - The Boondock Saints 2, 2009, dir. Troy Duffy

This, unlike it's predecessor, was much more disappointing. There are just handfuls of little tidbits that fans of the original will love, such as the MacManus brothers have literally become shepherds ("and shepherds we shall be, for thee my lord for thee") and many other things like this. The film really started going downhill when they brought in the replacement sidekick for Rocco, in this case being Clifton Collins Jr, who is absolutely ridiculous. He plays the most obnoxious, over-the-top, Mexican stereotype and it really just makes many of the films scenes just silly. There is no subtlety or comedic timing with this guy, and he butchers the movie. The story, also a bit much but still in the vein of the original. Julie Benz takes over for Willem Dafoe as the FBI agent come to investigate, and honestly, just the worst written and acted character I may have ever seen. Maybe the people behind Dexter saw her in this. The trio of cops from the first film play a much larger part in this one, and their banter is often just too much. If you liked the first one, don't see this.

5/10

Film#98 - The Deer Hunter, 1978, dir. Michael Cimino

An absolute classic, and honestly one of the best films ever made. I've seen it before and in some way I think it gave me a new perspective to watching it the second time around. What become very clear was how much the first act sets up an undeniable air of love and friendship, with such loyalty between friends it's really quite moving. This may be too slow of a film for some people, as the first section is pretty much over an hour long without much of anything happening in terms of plot. What it does do is set up the rest of the movie in extreme contrast, both in the middle section taking place in Vietnam and the last act as the return of the war-scarred men. And let me tell you, it does it so well it's unbelievable. This story still has such social, cultural and political resonance today that it really does stand the test of time so to speak. Christopher Walken like you've never seen him before, and Robert De Niro in one of the best roles of his career. A must see.

10/10

Film#99 - The Last House On The Left, 2009, dir. Dennis Iliadis

This was pretty much appalling. The way this film was portrayed in it's marketing is really just, well it's wrong. I thought this was a teen slasher, something like the typical stuff that makes up modern 'horror'. I was completely wrong. This is a remake, and I can't even imagine how this film was received back in the 70's. It's insane. It's gruesome and some of it is really rather in bad taste. There's just about as much murder, torture, rape and pain I could take before I would have turned it off. And believe me, I've never turned off a movie for gratuitous violence. This however, it left me thinking what the point of it was. It really doesn't say anything worth saying. The basic idea is a family of three go out to their cottage, and the daughter goes into town with a friend. They go to pick up some weed, at which point the dealer's father and murderous friends come back, and so begins an hour and a half of torture. By the halfway point these girls have been abused to badly that they'd be so scarred they would have absolutely no chance of living a normal life afterwards. Stop reading if you care about spoilers, since what happens next is the friend is stabbed to death, the daughter is raped graphically for several minutes, and then shot. The murders then go seek refuge at a local house, pretending to be trapped in the storm. The house nearby? Yeah it's the girls parents house. She crawls back, they figure out whats going on, and now the parents start a rampage against these people. People are stabbed, shot, limbs are put in a garbage disposal, and to cap it off someone gets their head microwaved. I don't know why this was made, and who it was made for. The acting, very believable. But it's not enough justification for the absolutely brutal plot line.

4.5/10

Film#100 - Inglourious Basterds, 2009, dir. Quentin Tarantino

Here we have a film where unlike the previous review, knows how to go about on-screen violence. And it's straight up "glourious." I love this film. It's my favourite Tarantino, and it's one of my favourite all time films. If you haven't seen it, I don't know why. Well, it's probably because you think this is just a shoot-em-up, action-packed typical Tarantino film, and in some ways you're right. But in reality, the violence in this is short-lived and intense, while the vast majority of the film is an absolutely enthralling tale from many different perspectives. I'd give a plot rundown but I can't bring myself to reduce it to something like that. It's visually stunning, with such diverse characters and charm that I can't resist it. I don't know how anyone could. Quirky and fun for sure.

10/10

91-95

Film#91 - Mystic River, 2003, dir. Clint Eastwood

Unbelievable. This was so well done in every sense. Sean Penn, absolutely breathtaking. That man can act something fierce. It's flawless.

10/10

Film#92 - Milk, 2008, dir. Gus Van Sant

I could rave about this, but I'm sure everyone knows by now this is a great movie. Culturally significant, beautifully done, phenomenal acting. It has all the elements of a great movie.

9/10

Film#93 - Fast Times At Ridgemont High, 1982, dir. Amy Heckerling

Fairly disappointing, in many ways. Firstly, as I'm on a bit of a Sean Penn marathon, he was barely in this. He's first billed, but he has such a small role, maybe 10 minutes of screen time. Secondly, for 'fast times' this was surprisingly slow actually. I expected it to be, you know, fast paced. What was weird was seeing all these young actors who would eventually become some of the most respected in their craft in the world, namely Penn, Forest Whitaker, a small cameo by Nicolas Cage, Jennifer Jason Leigh. It's a star-studded cast of people who have yet to become stars. It felt like a failed version of The Breakfast Club both in style and content. I expected more from Cameron Crowe.

6/10

Film#94 - Hard 8, 1996, dir. Paul Thomas Anderson

For a first try, I guess this was okay. I'm definitely a fan of Paul Thomas Anderson, and this was, well, weird. I thought it felt like it should have been trimmed down significantly, and made part of an ensemble polyphonic film. John C. Reilly was very good, as I think he usually is (in his serious roles), but the others felt a little underdeveloped. The story seemed a bit dragged out, and probably could have been told in half the amount of time. Still, it had that Anderson feel and look, which I love, but it wasn't enough to make the movie.

6.5/10

Film#95 - Paris, Je T'aime, 2006, 21 directors

This had been hyped up a lot to me over the years, and some people just love it. I, on the other hand, did not. Some segments are great, that's without a doubt. Others just didn't speak to me. Some of the more absurd sequences broke the feeling the film was creating. In fact, I wouldn't even call this a complete film. It really is just a collection of shorts, obviously, but more so in the way they didn't always play well off of each other. In that sense, each short really has to be judged on it's own, and the number of really good ones just didn't match the number of mediocre ones. Plus I'm not a big fan of short films altogether. Maybe I'm just under the impression that if a story is worth being told, it's worth taking the time to tell it properly. Many of these seemed like the kind of story you might tell a friend when they asked how your day was. Nothing special, maybe some chance encounter or little thing that happened, and they have little meaning if you don't know the context. If you met someone for the first time, asked how they were as a kind of social formality and they told you a five minute story of meeting someone that day who spoke a different language to you and then gave you their number, you wouldn't really know what the point was. On the other side of things though, some of these gave a glimpse into that sort of thing that didn't necessarily need context. Some though, felt as if I'd rather just not have seen them at all.

6.5/10

86-90

Film#86 - Coraline, 2009, dir. Henry Selick

I really liked this one. I actually think it was better than Up, both in terms of animation and overall production value. The story was pretty good, and something that is perfectly suited for animation. There was just no other way to make something like this. I actually thought the look of the movie was one of the most cinematic, eclectic and beautiful aesthetic designs I've seen in a long time. It has such drastic changes in scenery. The story was interesting, voice acting was top notch. Plus there's a cat so I already like it.

8.5/10

Film#87 - Let The Right One In, 2008, dir. Tomas Alfredson

This was hard to judge. Not because I was unsure how I felt about the film, but because the version I got was dubbed in english, rather than subtitles. It pretty much ruined the entire experience. It's as if the translator had no idea what they were doing. Take an early scene for example, where two drunk russian men are saying goodnight. The dialogue went something like this:

"You are my favourite pal"

"Thanks bud, I enjoy you as well"

"Oh friend, have a good night"

This dialogue, along with the horrendous voice acting, it made me cringe basically the entire length of the film. However, beyond this problem with my copy, the film was phenomenal. The basic idea is 12 year old girl moves into an apartment beside a 12 year old boy. She happens to be a vampire, and her father goes out at night to drain people of their blood for her to survive on. The boy, Oskar, he's bullied at school and has no friends. What genre is this film? It's a horror, but it's horror elements are rather toned down. It mainly deals with emotional problems and elements of fitting in, so it's a drama. It's also romantic, and at times very sweet. So I guess it's a horror drama romance. And it's done beautifully.

9/10

Film#88 - Drag Me To Hell, 2009, dir. Sam Raimi

This really isn't a movie for everyone. If anyone saw Raimi's Spiderman 3 and it's notorious dance sequence, you have a vague idea of how cheesy this man can get. This is sightly different though, as the film is very aware it's cheesy, both in style and premise. We've got a woman who gets cursed by a gypsy for not giving her an extension on her mortgage payment. It's filled with voodoo and blood, but the movie doesn't take itself all to seriously, and neither should the audience. I think the audience is somewhere between a Shaun Of The Dead fan and an Evil Dead fan. It's bizarre, and not terribly well acted, but it makes up for it with these strangely funny quirks added to the most horrific and gory scenes.

7/10

Film# 89 - The Machinist, 2004, dir. Brad Anderson

This was like a bad version of Fight Club for me, both in the content of the story and some aesthetic choices. It's dirty. The first thing that sticks out, and sadly one of the most interesting parts of the movie, is that Christian Bale is literally a stick figure. He lost 60 pounds for this role, and he looks disgusting. The director obviously knew this, so Bale spends a considerable amount of time shirtless. It's unbelievable how thing he is. This film is full of strange occurrences you're not sure what to make of, but I guess in the end they all make sense. It's that kind of movie. And it's not particularly well done, in comparison to other films like it.

6.5/10

Film#90 - Moon, 2009, dir. Duncan Jones

This was nuts. I was literally saying, out loud and to myself, "What is going on." Sam Rockwell is an astronaut who is stationed on a base on the moon. The basic idea, that is explained at the film's start so no spoilers, is that in the not so distant future scientists discover that the moon has absorbed helium over time from the sun's rays, and has it stored in the rock. There is an operation where automated machines go along the surface and collect what they call Helium3, which is a clean energy source that supplies the entire Earth. The station is fairly fully automatic, except Sam (both real name and character name) is given a 3 year contract to live there in case things need maintenance. I can't say much more without spoiling the movie, but what I can say is Sam Rockwell is an absolutely brilliant actor. This is a unique story, and it's done so well. So much of the film is just so technically difficult, and it's done flawlessly. Highly recommended.

9/10

Oscar Follow-up

I've got to say, this years Oscars did not live up to last years in terms of the overall show. Hugh Jackman was straight up hilarious, and that opening song and dance last year was just too good to be true. This year, it was just failures left and right. Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin flat out sucked together, although they had a few good jokes when they were on their own. It makes me feel the two hosts thing just really doesn't work. That strange stare-down with George Clooney at the start was incredibly odd, like an inside joke no one understood. The opening song, well, it was fine and all but nothing special. It really didn't compare to last years.

As for the actual awards, I'm pleased to say of the 20 predictions I made, I got 15 correct. I'm surprised I missed some of the biggest awards though, namely both the writing categories as well as picture of the year, which was a pleasant surprise. I officially picked Avatar to win but of course I did say it would be ideal if The Hurt Locker won. I'm terribly disappointed Inglourious Basterds didn't pick up any of the awards I thought it would, minus Christoph Waltz for best supporting. The little introductions to each of the best pictures throughout the show, well, I'm sure if I hadn't seen any of them I'd be loving it, but the problem is I'd seen them all so it was a bit of a bore. The introductions to each best acting category seemed very dragged out at times, and some of the speakers, unfortunately, weren't very good at telling their stories.

I was actually quite shocked at some of the award winners, since I was fairly confident in those predictions that ended up being incorrect. The White Ribbon of all things I was under the impression it was a certainty for best foreign film, seeing as how it won the Golden Globe as well as the Plame d'Or, only the most prestigious film award in the world. As for Precious winning best adapted screenplay, I just don't know about that. Content wise, yes it's compelling but I don't know if it was all that well written, especially in comparison to the magic of Up In The Air. When Inglourious Basterds didn't pick up best original screenplay it was like a knife in my heart.

Here are the winners:

Editing - The Hurt Locker

Visual Effects - Avatar

Makeup - Star Trek

Costume Design - The Young Victoria

Art Direction - Avatar

Cinematography - Avatar

Sound Editing - The Hurt Locker

Sound Mixing - The Hurt Locker

Original Score - Up

Original Song - The Weary Kind - Crazy Heart

Animated Short - Logorama (I called it based on the short clips they showed so I though I'd include it)

Documentary - The Cove (I also called it, but it was purely based on publicity)

Animated Feature - Up (as a side note, seeing Coraline just hours before the show, I felt it should have won)

Foreign Film - El Secreto de Sus Ojos

Original Screenplay - The Hurt Locker

Adapted Screenplay - Precious

Supporting Actor - Christoph Waltz

Supporting Actress - Mo'Nique

Actor - Jeff Bridges

Actress - Sandra Bullock

Director - Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker

Best Picture - The Hurt Locker

Also, what was up with the Best Picture award being the most rushed thing in history? They went over time either way, they might have as well done a proper introduction.

81-85

Film#81 - 3:10 To Yuma, 2007, dir. James Mangold

This right here is a little gem that seems to have been overlooked. I was under the impression that this was somehow basically the same thing as Letters To Iwo Jima but no, this is really quite a wonderful story. It's a remake of a 1957 film of the same name, and it is indeed a western. You really don't see many westerns being made these days, and this film makes you wonder why not. I haven't seen the original, but I have to assume it isn't as graphic as this one, as there are several scenes that were honestly jaw-dropping. The basic premise is Russell Crowe is a notorious thieving, murdering outlaw, and Christian Bale is just a simple farmer trying to survive a drought. Through circumstance, Crowe is captured, and has to be taken to jail, so the mission is to get him on the train to Yuma prison. Yes, the train comes at 3:10 in the afternoon. Crowe's gang is still on the lose and desperate to get him back, and here lies the problem. They are understaffed, so townsfolk are recruited to guard the prisoner on route to the train station, Bale being one of them. It's really quite good. Crowe is deceptive and ruthless, but he has a side of civility towards Bale, and the pair make an interesting connection. A film about honour, respect and struggle in the face of certain death, this some I highly recommend.

9/10

Film#82 - The Bourne Identity, 2002, dir. Doug Liman

It took me forever to get around to seeing this, and it wasn't what I expected. Anyone who doesn't know, the basic idea is Matt Damon is found floating in the ocean by some sailors, and he has no idea who he is. Interesting, he has the reflexes of a God and seemingly out of control will react to dangerous situations. It's like he's on autopilot and it's working wonders for him. Other than that plot element, it's a fairly typical action movie, but a good one at that. It has everything you'd expect, car chases, gun shoot outs, seemingly superhuman enemies at points as well as hopeless guards who are dispatched just too easily. A love interest to top it off. But still, it went about the whole thing very well.

8/10

Film#83 - Das Weisse Band (The White Ribbon), 2009, dir. Michael Haneke

This film not only looks like it's 70 years old, but it's overall style of filmmaking is reminiscent of something you might be forced to watch in a film course. I would normally have some reluctance getting into those types of films, but this was just enthralling. Set in what I believe to be set in the early 1910's in Germany, the film revolves around a small village. The movie is starts with the town doctor being tripped on his horse by a trap set for him, and he is sent to the next town for treatment. Later on, at the town's annual festival all the cabbage crop is destroyed by an angry townsman. The plot really picks up when the son of the family of nobles (is that a correct thing to say?) is found hung upside down and badly beaten, although still alive. They leave town, and later on another boy is found in a similar situation. No one confesses to this crimes, and suspicions are on high. Meanwhile, there are several stories being told, namely of the town school teacher and his new love interest, the doctor and his family issues, and the town priest and his disobedient children, although by anyone's standards today they would be some of the most disciplined children you've ever seen. The film is narrated at times by the school teacher, in a voice that seems as if he is retelling the story as an old man, while in the film he is in his early thirties. It's interspersed with wide shots of fields of wheat, and with the high contrast of the black and white film, the wheat glows bright white. It's really quite beautiful. In contrast, much of the film is very dark, playing on the lack of electricity of the time. It doesn't even seem like actors in the film. It's stunning. Some key scenes really do stick out, particularly one where a young boy, maybe 4 years old, asks his sister about what death means. Really touching stuff.

9/10

Film#84 - Blue Velvet, 1986, dir. David Lynch

I don't even know what this was. David Lynch, he's a nut job in my opinion. This right here is a film that's 'visual art' and I have to say, in my view of what makes a good movie, this is pretty much terrible. The story is bizarre, but more importantly it's told in such a strange fashion, with characters that seem under-developed while at the same time just so distinct it's difficult to put my finger on whether or not this is actually good acting. There's some intense cursing on the account of Dennis Hopper, who is just out of his mind. Many scenes are very uncomfortable to watch, and make me wonder why it's necessary at all. What point does have a film have if it's just to make you uncomfortable? I'm not sure. I just don't know about this film. I did however watch it all attentively and it never really lost me, which is really it's redeeming quality.

5.5/10

Film#85 - Observe And Report, 2009, dir. Jody Hill

This is another film I just don't know what happened to. I thought this would be a hilarious movie. No no, not at all. I've seen Paul Blart: Mall Cop before and it was terrible. This is pretty much the same movie. The dialogue may be the worst I've ever heard. There is just so much unnecessary swearing, it goes far beyond the shock value of a joke and into a place where it's just an embarrassment. The basic idea really is quite basic: Seth Rogen is a mall security officer and he feels under appreciated. Crazy I know. Where this film really confuses me is what it's trying to be. On one hand, it's marketed as a comedy. On the other hand, Rogen's character is bipolar and it's really just weird. It's like it had the potential to have depth and be a real story but it goes around with these strange scenes where I'm not sure what's funny. There is no comedic timing in this at all; the jokes are told like someone who is trying to be funny but no one in the room is laughing, and they just keep pushing it, getting more and more shocking, but it just gets awkward. I can't stress enough how much this film relies on shock value. I think the film actually sums itself so well when a character who has been eavesdropping comes out and says something like, "I thought this was going to be funny, but it's really just kind of sad."

3/10

Oscar Predictions

So in spirit of the upcoming Academy Awards next sunday, and since I've seen nearly everything nominated in the major categories, I figure I'd make some predictions. These guesses are not always what I think should win, but what I think will win. I've usually been quite wrong in my predictions since I always base it on my personal opinion, rather than the merit of each nominated film. This year I'm putting myself in the shoes of the Academy, trying to imagine what they would think is the best. With that, let's do this thing.

Art Direction - Avatar. Although I though Dr.Parnassus was more original and interesting in it's style, Avatar is an obvious choice here.

Cinematography - Avatar. I would have to say it's all thanks to how 'ground-breaking' this film is, that the cinematography had new obstacles to overcome in order to achieve a unique look in terms of technology. In a more traditional sense of film though, Inglourious Basterds was just beautiful and would be my first choice, however, it's obviously not up to me.

Costume Design - This is one of the categories I haven't seen everything, and this particular one I've only seen three out of five nominees. That being said, some what I saw, Dr.Parnassus was again very original and inventive in it's aesthetic, but The Young Victoria had very elaborate costumes. Of course, Victoria had nothing audiences haven't seen before. I can't really gauge this category because I honestly just don't know what makes a good costume. If I had to guess though, it would be Victoria, Bright Star or Coco Before Chanel, which I've only seen the first of.

Editing - The Hurt Locker. In my mind Inglourious Basterds was perfect. I think the cuts and transitions and literally all editing elements worked so well with the tone of the film, giving such a unique experience. However, I think the Hurt Locker will win. It was beautifully edited, giving just the right pacing throughout the film.

Makeup - Star Trek. Again, another category I can't really judge. If I had to guess though, and I do, I would go with Star Trek. Past winners in this category have been shocking i.e. Norbit, so I think Star Trek has a real chance.

Original Score - Avatar. It's a toss up between Avatar and Sherlock Holmes for me. If I had to pick one, I'd have to side with Avatar due to it's insane popularity.

Original Song - I've only heard two of five songs here, and both songs from Nine and Crazy Heart were nothing special to me, so I can't even guess with this category.

Sound Editing - Inglourious Basterds, simply because of the rapid action sequences with flawless sound continuity throughout.

Sound Mixing - The Hurt Locker, because every scene has so many levels of sound that flow so perfectly together, never disjointed and always with a complete sense of realism.

Visual Effects - Avatar, obviously.

Original Screenplay - Inglourious Basterds. It was honestly like poetry for two and a half hours. Both the dialogue and overall story arc are just incredible. I'll be very sad if this one doesn't win this category.

Adapted Screenplay - Up In The Air. This one gave so much heart-felt dialogue, with such realism yet at the same time everything is so perfectly phrased it's almost unbelievable.

Foreign Film - The White Ribbon. I'm only saying this because, well, it won the Golden Globe, the Palme d'Or, and it's the only one in the category I've seen.

Animated Feature - Up. I wasn't a huge fan, but it was definitely very good. However I'm certain it will win as it's the only of these animated films to be nominated for Best Picture as well, so it's just makes sense for it to be the best of it's type.

Directing - Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker. Of course James Cameron is a front-runner for this award, I think Bigelow created an immensely powerful film that brings so much to today's audiences, as well as incredible social and political implications. She's given the style and tone to a unique take on modern warfare, and deserves to win.

Supporting Actor - Christoph Waltz. He took home the Golden Globe, best actor at Cannes, and literally every award across the board. Not only is he the favourite going into this, he really gave such an unbelievable performance that made Inglourious Basterds the film it is.

Supporting Actress - Mo'Nique. This category almost seems disappointing to me. None of the nominees were that incredible in my mind. That is, they all have great performances but no one stood out above the rest. Mo'Nique gives such an ugly performance, intentionally, that it's really the basis for the film. She gave a tone to Precious that I really can't imagine anyone else doing it. For that, I think she will win.

Leading Actress - Sandra Bullock. Yes, she won the Golden Globe. She isn't my favourite in the category though. I'm in favour of Meryl Streep, but she's won enough of these statues. Sandra Bullock was great in The Blind Side, this is true. But my problem is how can an actress be simultaneously be nominated for the Best Actress the same year she is nominated for the Worst Actress by the Golden Raspberries. That complaint aside, I do think she will pick this up. She leads the category.

Lead Actor - Jeff Bridges. I have to say everyone in this category gave a performance that I can't imagine anyone else doing. They were all perfectly cast. Bridges though, he really was something special. I have to think this category comes down to the type of character they all played, and Bad Blake in Crazy Heart was a role written for Bridges (not literally).

Best Picture - Avatar. This was a good movie. The Hurt Locker was better, in my opinion. But, Avatar is a huge accomplishment. We have to remember that Best Picture goes to the producers. Why? Because the production goes far beyond just the shooting that the director takes part in, the editing after, or the writing before. Cameron spent however many years making this thing possible, developing new technologies, getting a massive budget, just an overwhelming amount of work. Not only does it have value in that sense, but also in it's popularity, as well as it's meaning. It has significance on many levels, and that is where this film shines. Yes, the plot is weak, but this isn't the Best Screenplay category. Yes the actors aren't phenomenal, but this isn't an acting category. This is the Best Picture, and Avatar is the most significant to the most number of people. Of course it could win just on the basis that too many people on the Academy have time and money invested in this movie that it not winning would result in too big of a loss financially in DVD sales and all other markets after it's theatrical release. Having that "Best Picture Winner" on the front of the DVD will do immense help for this, and so in a financial sense, Avatar will win. If for some reason the Academy decides to judge based on artistic merit and traditional cinematic values, The Hurt Locker will win. Otherwise, it's Avatar.

I didn't guess for Documentary Feature, Documentary Short, Live Action Short, or Animated Short. Why? I haven't seen any of them.