A Review of Trailers for Fall and Holiday Films

A scene from Spike Jonze's Where The Wild Things Are.

Just some thoughts on films coming out later this year.

A Serious Man (October 2nd)
There are very few directors working today who get me giddy and excited every time they release a new film, no matter what it’s about. The Coen Brothers are two (or is it really one?) of those directors. Their latest effort, centered around a professor who tries to figure out his life when his wife leaves, if fast approaching and I’m getting more and more antsy by the day. The trailer is expertly cut, leaving you intrigued, a little disturbed and laughing. That’s the Coens for you.
Verdict: Yes. Very much yes.

Couples Retreat (October 9th)
Okay, so this probably isn’t one Fall’s biggest movies, but I just wanted to say: script from Jon Favreau and Vince Vaughan? Yes. Both appearing on screen with Jason Bateman and Kristen Bell amongst others? Yes. And most importantly, is the trailer funny? Yes. Let’s hope those aren’t the only funny parts.
Verdict: Date night with the wife, should be good fun.

The Lovely Bones (October 11th)
Peter Jackson (one of those few directors I talked about above) adapts the best selling novel. I haven’t read the novel, but the name Peter Jackson is enough to get my attention. The trailer presents an eerie atmosphere juxtaposed with beautiful images of Heaven as only Jackson could paint them. I’ve heard people complaining about Mark Wahlberg being in here, but after Boogie Nights, I Heart Huckabees and The Departed, I’m willing to give the man the benefit of a doubt. The preview ends with tense, dark visuals that capture your attention and leave you waiting for more. I’ll hopefully be picking up the book some time before this comes out.
Verdict: Definitely interested.

The Road (October 16th)
Cormack McCarthy’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel gets big screen treatment from John Hillcoat, the director of the marvelous “The Proposition.” As long as Hillcoat sticks to the novel, which is brilliant (go read it now!), it should be a dark, riveting, hell of a depressing time in the theaters and a strong contender. For the most part, it looks as if he’s done an admirable job. If it’s even half as good as No Country For Old Men Hillcoat can be expecting some more lucrative offers coming his way. Also, Viggo Mortensen as The Man? Thank you, God.
Verdict: Fingers crossed.

Avatar (December 18th)
It’s been over a decade since James Cameron last released a fictional film. In case you’re living on another planet, that film was the abysmal Titanic which somehow went on to become the highest grossing movie of all time and winner of eleven Academy Awards. This new project, a supposed step forward in digital effects and the 3-D experience, is due to arrive smack dab in the middle of awards season. Can we expect another box office records smashing, awards snatching film? The trailer didn’t convince me that I can. The effects look decent enough, but not anything we haven’t seen before; the mechs looks like video game versions of Ripley’s weapon of choice in Aliens; the alien race known as the Na’vi really don’t look any different (or better) than half-a-dozen of the extraterrestrials to appear on screen in the last decade; and the giant flying lizards? The same. I’ll have to wait and see how critics react or I see a better trailer before I hop on board. Also, Cameron doesn’t have a good track record with me: two good, the rest bad.
Verdict: We’ll see.

Where The Wild Things Are (October 16th)
Raise your hand if you have not read Maurice Sendak’s Caldecott Medal winning children’s book. Exactly. I don’t know a single soul who isn’t looking to Spike Jonze’s feature adaptation, and not just because of the source material and Jonze. You have Dave Eggers co-scripting with Jones, costumes and animatronics instead of computer generated Wild Things, the voice cast, Catherine Keener and Mark Ruffalo, and so much more. The only thing one can’t be sure about, and this is true of all adaptations of this sort, is whether or not they can successfully expand a short story into a full length film. From the looks of the newest trailer, I think they might succeed.
Verdict: I’m there opening weekend.

The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus (December 25th)
I mentioned above that there are very few living directors who give me a thrill every time a new project comes around. How fortunate I am to have four movies coming out this year by five such directors. Terry Gilliam’s The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus revolves around a traveling show whose owner (Christopher Plummer) made a deal with the devil (Tom Waits) and now owes his first born child at the age of 16. As the age approaches, Dr. Parnassus enlists the help of an outsider (Heath Ledger) in order to protect his daughter. The movie looks absolutely amazing. Fantastical dream-like sequences abound, along with Gilliam’s stark imagery of the real world. This will largely be recognized as Heath Ledger’s final performance, but for me, personally, it’s all about Gilliam. And Waits as the devil! Perfect casting.
Verdict: There. There. There. Just try to stop me.

Sherlock Holmes (December 25th)
Guy Ritchie (eh) updates the Sherlock Holmes tales for the 21st century, enlisting the help of Robert Downey, Jr. (yay!) in the title role and Jude Law (sure) as “sidekick” Watson. While I love Downey, Jr. and enjoy Law most of the time, Ritchie’s… well, he’s Ritchie. Maybe now that Madonna’s gone he can get back a little of that Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels quality that he lost so long ago. Still, the trailer doesn’t convince me. Too much action and all that bullshit. The Holmes stories were cerebral and Ritchie hasn’t figured that out.
Verdict: Rental… maybe.

Review: Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Written and Directed by Quentin Tarantino
Starring Brad Pitt, Mélanie Laurent, Christoph Waltz, Eli Roth, Michael Fassbender, Diane Kruger

“You probably heard we ain’t in the prisoner-takin’ business, we in the killing Nazi business. And cousin, business is a boomin’.”

Allow to admit right up front: I am a great fan of Tarantino. He’s one of the few directors who gets me giddy as a school girl whenever he releases a picture. Why? Probably because his absolute love of what he does and the work of those in the same field is so entertainingly and expertly conveyed that it rekindles my love of cinema every time I see one of his films. With his latest release, Inglourious Basterds (yes, that’s really how it’s spelled), I felt that giddiness boiling to the surface once again. Did he deliver?

There are two stories intermingling through the film and each is given the same time, care, and respect as the other. The first story presented in the film centers around a young French Jewish woman named Shosanna Dreyfus (Laurent) who escapes the hands of SS Col. Hans Landa--also known as The Jew Hunter--assumes a new name and becomes a cinema owner in Paris three years later. As she changes the marquee on her theater one night, she becomes the object of affection for a handsome SS war hero and actor who desperately attempts to woo her with his knowledge of film and his exploits in the war. She resists him at first, but when the young officer persuades Joseph Goebbels (the minister of propaganda for the Third Reich) to hold the premiere of their new film at Shosanna’s theater, she takes the offer in an attempt for revenge on her murdered family and a chance to end the war.

And then, there are the Basterds, a rag-tag group of Jewish-American soldiers led by Lt. Aldo Raine (Pitt, with a thick, thick Tennessee accent) who are dropped into France before the Normandy invasion and scour the country in search of Nazi platoons. They murder, beat, dismember and scalp any and every Nazi they come across, showing no mercy and invoking fear into the highest ranks of the Third Reich. They prosper for three years in their mission until they, too, learn of the premiere and with the help of a double agent/actress plan to blow up the theater and every major ranking SS Officer.

There is much to be discussed with the aspects of this film, but I will start with the performances. While Brad Pitt gets top billing (he’s Brad Pitt, after all), he is not in the film any longer than the other actors, and in the case of Laurent and Waltz, maybe even less. What screen time Pitt does have is a treasure. His Tennessee Lieutenant is pure enjoyment from start to finish: funny, charismatic, and just plain cool. Some of the lines in the movie work solely because of his devotion to the accent (the scene where he tries to speak Italian would’ve made Groucho and Chico Marx very proud), but Pitt never takes it too far, teetering right on the edge of overacting, a balancing act worth admiring. As the young Jewish woman seeking revenge, Laurent is capable and admirable in her role, holding her own in scenes that require subtle nuances that allow us into her character’s thoughts and feelings without giving anything away to the other characters on screen. The scene where she meets Col. Landa three years after he massacred her family and is forced to eat dessert with him is an exceptional testament to her talent. All around, everyone cast in the film fits their roles nicely with the exception of the Mike Myers cameo. It’s not that appearance is distracting or annoying, but rather pointless and easily replaceable.

Then there is Christoph Waltz as the evil Colonel Hans Landa. There has been much acclaim heaped upon Waltz’s performance--he won Best Actor at the Cannes Film Festival--and every iota of it is more than deserved. Waltz delivers a villain so frightening, charismatic and devious, often all within the same scene, that you love and loathe every second he’s on the screen. The opening scene on the farm is so powerful and terrifying it belongs in the ranks with Henry Fonda’s first scene in Once Upon A Time In The West as one of the best villain entrances in cinema. Sitting at the farmer’s table, he delivers a speech comparing Jews to rats so meticulous it is sure to be shown when he’s nominated for an Oscar come next February. Waltz is the true pillar of the film and should be considered Best Actor instead of Supporting.

Of course, we can’t talk about a Tarantino film without bringing up dialogue and violence. The man is famous for extended scenes of his characters carrying on normal conversations before sudden bursts of violence and despite what the trailers lead you to believe, Inglourious Basterds is no exception. Some of these dialogue scenes play out for ten or more minutes but each is underlined with a sense of danger, making every word worth hearing. Probably the longest of such scenes--and my favorite scene in the movie--takes place in a basement tavern where three of the Basterds, including a newly recruited British soldier, meet their double agent Bridgette von Hammers mark (Kruger). When a Nazi high-ranking officer joins the Basterds and Hammersmark for drinks and a game, the tension in the room is almost unbearable. Tarantino’s knack for letting these characters talk as danger lingers brings a richness to the proceedings that we know will eventually end with gunplay.

It will probably be noted by some that Tarantino’s violence has become too graphic with his recent efforts Kill Bill, Death Proof, and now Inglourious Basterds. While this is true to some extent, there is an explanation. In his earlier films, the majority of the violence took place off screen and only seemed excessive. Now, we have a Tarantino who provides us with limbs being chopped off left and right, heads caving under the force of a baseball bat and blood spraying in every direction, but these new films have all been a homage to species of film that either no longer exist or are in danger of expiring. It is only suiting that the violence should be portrayed in the way it is, as a tribute to those films Tarantino grew up watching.

Inglourious Basterds also marks a new undertaking for the writer/director. This is his first foray into a time period different than ours. The sets, costumes, and makeup recall the early forties with exceptional precision. Mélanie Laurent, especially, is picture-perfect image of the era, decked out in bright red lipstick and dress that brings to mind those film-noir women in red that we associate with the time period. Even the small details--yes, that’s gunpowder that Lt. Raine snorts--help to create a new World War II that looks like the one we all know but, thanks to Tarantino, gives us an ending most of us wish had actually taken place.

Favorite Performances - Jean Adair and Josephine Hull (Arsenic And Old Lace, 1944)

The great director Frank Capra was well known for his whimsical, bright, and intelligent films. They were often filled with some of the biggest leading men of the time such as Jimmy Stewart and Clark Gable, but it was for a film called Arsenic And Old Lace that he made two of the wisest casting choices of his career. The movie follows Brooklyn’s most notorious bachelor, Mortimer Brewster, coming home to his two dear aunts to announce he has eloped with the girl next door. The celebration is quickly put on the back burner when Mortimer finds a dead body in the window seat and his long-lost fugitive brother Jonathan appears with his plastic surgeon and a corpse of his own.

While the entire movie is perfectly cast, the masterstroke is in the choices of Jean Adair and Josephine Hull as Mortimer’s Aunt Martha and Aunt Abby, respectively. Both women carry a vibrant charm rarely found in cinema. Together they create two elderly sisters so sweet and engaging that their sinister deeds never create an air of incredibility. They so rightly believe they are doing a great justice that you love them and care for them despite their actions. If the film was remade today, you would have a hell of a time finding two actresses capable of never seeming dangerous or evil in the midst of their plot. Watching the film as I child I yearned for such sweet, wonderful women in my life, even if they happened to be serial killers. When I viewed the film in a theater with my mom on Halloween in 2005, I felt like the loony old gals had become a part of my family, having been there in my youth and still to this day. It’s a marvelous feeling that is sadly not felt enough.

Throughout their careers, both Adair and Hull only acted in a handful of films, focusing most of their time on the stage and I can’t help but think of what a shame that is. While I have nothing against the theater at all, there’s no possible way for me to view their work from the twenties and thirties, no time capsule for future generations to experience their art. To think of how often we could’ve seen these two women brightening our movie theater and television screens is heartbreaking. Why were these two immense talents never given more chances to fill our movie experiences with the joy and laughter they were more than capable of providing? Did the film industry miss out on the first female comedy duo whose natural gift for their work is so rare? Of course, these questions can never be answered, but in a way, their notable absence from the movies makes Arsenic And Old Lace all the more important.

On Adair - After Mortimer first discovers the dead body in the window seat, he believes his Uncle Teddy (who believes he is actually Teddy Roosevelt) has killed the man and hidden him in the seat. Upon hearing this scenario, Aunt Martha informs him she knows of the body and that Teddy would never kill a man. When Mortimer asks what happened to the man, she cheerfully replies, “He died.” The cheerfully morbid delivery of this line flows so naturally from Adair she shows how she could hold her own against the most talented of comedians, male or female, living or dead.

On Hull - When Mortimer is questioning his aunts’ involvement in the death of the man in the window seat, Hull becomes offended by his refusal to believe that what she is telling him is truthful. Finally having enough with her nephew’s antics, she stops what she’s doing and proclaims, “You don’t think I’d stoop to telling a fib!” and scuttles out of the room, hurt that her nephew won’t believe she is capable of murder. The delivery is funny, furious and even a little sad.

If you haven’t seen Arsenic And Old Lace, please, drop whatever it is you are doing, rent it, netflix it, DVR it, obtain it by any means possible, then sit down relax and be whisked away by the two sweetest mass murderers you will ever meet.

My Favorite Films: Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (1977)

Written and Directed by Steven Spielberg
Starring Richard Dreyfuss, François Truffaut, Melinda Dillon, Teri Garr and Bob Balaban

Aliens. Any time the word is uttered, what do we think of? Little green men descending from the stars with probe in hand ready to steal a person away in the middle of the night and painfully examine his inner workings? Or grotesque, vile creatures invading our planet with a mission to obliterate any and all human existence? Chances are, one of these descriptions was the first to come to mind. Why? For decades, the film industry has made most of its visitors from beyond Earth into villains or sadists who must be thwarted by the latest action star. Of course, this is just one of the answers, but the one with the biggest impact on humans. Very rarely are we treated to friendly extra-terrestrial beings who are friendly, or merely curious, and have no intention of causing harm. Funny then, how we automatically think of these beings when we hear the words “I come in peace.”

Steven Spielberg’s Close Encounters Of The Third Kind was one of the first, and to this day only, science fiction films to treat other worldly beings seriously, with dignity and respect. The creatures presented here are not malevolent creatures bent on the extinction of the human race. Nor are they sadistic beings examining the human body with extreme measures. They are merely a curious race of peaceful beings studying our life forms with careful observation. There is a scene about halfway through the film we are led to believe that maybe these beings are the kinds of aliens we have seen before, but in actuality it is merely a scene designed to allow the child involved a sense of adventure and wonder. When we finally meet the beings at the end of the film, they are not presented as monsters like in Ridley Scott’s Alien, but as simple, even graceful creatures--the younger aliens were portrayed by young ballet dancers to convey this innocence.

The film centers mainly around a line-operator named Ray Neary who comes into contact with an alien craft and becomes obsessed with the impressions--both physical and psychological--left by the encounter. Driven to near madness by the vision of a large mound, he frightens and alienates his family and absorbs himself in an attempt to solve his own questions. Along his journey he meets a single mother who’s only son has disappeared after spacecraft came to their house and he followed them outside. They form a friendship based on their need to discover what has happened to their lives.

These scenes are inner cut with awe-inspiring, often magical scenes involving a French scientist’s research into the phenomena occurring across the world and his attempts to make contact with the alien life forms. From the Mojave Desert where fighter planes reported missing during the second World War appear out of nowhere to the Gobi Desert where a large ocean freighter lies imbedded in the sand, these scenes inspire a child-like wonder at what could have brought these surreal situations to fruition. Joined by a translator, the scientist flies travels the globe searching for the answers.

Few films can create the magic produced within the scenes of this film. Spielberg’s serious handling of the subject brings a realistic look and feel to a genre forever riddled with flashy special effects. Of course, there are plenty of visual effects in the movie, each more glorious and magical than those before it, but they never get in the way of the story or the characters. In fact, they serve to enhance the characters’--and viewers‘--sense of amazement with the events transpiring. We see what they see and are engrossed in the proceedings.

What makes Close Encounters different from other films of its “genre” is its use of drama and emotion over action and style. In actuality the movie is a drama documenting the disintegration of a family and a mother’s desperate search for her missing child; it just so happens to feature aliens and UFOs. The scenes featuring Ray ‘s family tearing at the seams has the feel of real domestic occurrences. You feel like a neighbor watching from the street as his wife gets in the car and drives away with the kids. The performances from Dreyfuss as Neary and Teri Garr as his wife Ronnie are tense, heartbreaking portrayals that hint at trouble before Neary’s encounter with the UFO.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind is the first film I remember vividly from my childhood and the film that made me fall in love with the art of cinema. From the scene where the young child opens his front door to the brilliant alien lights dancing outside to the moment when the alien mothership impossibly rises from behind the Devil’s Tower in Wyoming, Spielberg fills us with a sense of spectacular wonder, one that sticks with you long after you’ve seen the movie then re-imbeds itself on each subsequent viewing. There is such a masterful care in handling and presenting each scene that you wonder why more science fiction films haven’t approached the genre in such a fashion. Then again, if they tried, I doubt they would reach the level of emotion and wonderment found here.

Previous My Favorite Films entries:
My Favorite Films Introduction

My Favorite Films

What makes a film great? Everyone has a different opinion on what factors come into play when critiquing a movie. Some may focus on technical aspects, such as cinematography, pacing, direction. They may list Citizen Kane or 2001: A Space Odyssey as their favorite film. Others focus on things like story and character, naming films such as Casablanca or One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest as top achievements in film. You prefer entertainment value over what might be deemed more “serious” ingredients? Perhaps Raiders Of The Lost Ark or Star Wars would rank high in your mind. Are any of these options wrong or more important than the other? If you answered yes, then perhaps you’ve been watching the wrong movies.

Whenever someone asks me what my favorite film is, my answer is usually the following: “Depends on what kind of mood I’m in.” If you asked me on a miserable, rainy day my answer might be different than if you asked me on a beautiful sunny day. Ask me in the summer, then again in the winter; I guarantee you’ll get a different answer. So how do I make a list of my favorite films? I try not to these days. As fun as it is to jot down a bunch of titles and let them duke it out for the top prize, it seems unfair to put one above the other. How can you say The Godfather is better than Some Like It Hot? They’re completely different but wonderful films in their own right. Taking that into consideration, I’ve decided to pull an Ebert and chronicle my favorite movies, in no particular order, in essays designed to hopefully bring you, the reader, insight into my personality. A film may appear in this section because I watched it last night and felt like letting you know how I feel about it. Or perhaps I was talking about the film with a friend and the conversation got my literary juices flowing. Who knows.

Now, what makes a great film for me? Anything. Most of the films that I will write about in this blog are movies that belong in my “top ten.” There are easily a hundred films I could think of that would break the top. These films are the kind of experience that, no matter what’s going on in the world, you can pop it in the DVD player or catch it on cable, or even see in the theater and become completely oblivious to everything around you. These are the films that from one single frame pull me in and don’t let me go until the end credits are rolling. It might be funny, it might be depressing as Hell; but it takes me to another place where I feel right. A place where I need not worry about what time it is or worry about what I need to cook for dinner. These are my favorite films.

Favorite Performances - Choi Min-sik (Oldboy, 2003)

Imagine you’ve had a few drinks, you’ve gotten in trouble with the police, your friend has bailed you out, and now you’re standing on the street in the rain while your friend wishes your daughter a happy birthday on the phone. The next thing you know, you’re locked in a room with only a television set for company. Your meals arrive through a slot in the door, the same meal every day. For fifteen years you live this imprisoned life until one day, spontaneously, you’re set free on the roof of an apartment building with a new suit, a cellphone, and five days to find the person responsible. This is the setup for Chan-wook Park’s brilliant revenge thriller Oldboy.

The imprisoned man is Oh Dae-su, an ordinary business man played with raw intensity by Min-sik Choi. The character of Oh Dae-su spirals through an array of personalities. At first a loud, drunken fool, you laugh at him despite your sympathies towards an apparent sweet side that lies underneath. Even as he drunkenly fights with the police officers, you don’t feel he’s a threatening force capable of taking another man’s life. Once imprisoned, he begins to teeter on the brink of insanity. Suffering through drug-induced hallucinations and a decade-and-a-half of isolation, he attempts to hang on to himself by training against the wall. Then, released back into the real world he becomes a one-track minded machine bent on destroying the person who destroyed his life. And yet, that’s just the beginning. As he gets closer and closer to the truth he appears to losing his grasp on reality, and in the final act he becomes a man so desperate to rebury what he has unearthed that he goes to extreme lengths to do it.

There is much to marvel in Min-sik Choi’s performance. Rarely have I come across an actor displaying what must surely be an exhausting menagerie of emotions without losing the character. From the first scene, he fits into Oh Dae-su like a snake inhabiting its skin. Then that skin is shed and a new skin is grown, but it’s the still the same snake. It is an exceptional skill to possess and Choi possesses it better than any other actor on the silver screen in today’s world cinema.

Best Scene: **WARNING: MAJOR SPOILERS**
After finding the man responsible for his imprisonment, thanks to the help of Mi-do, a young girl he has fallen in love with, Oh Dae-su finally comes face-to-face with Woo-jin Lee. After a ferocious fight with Lee’s bodyguard, Oh Dae-su’s imprisonment is explained. It is also revealed that Mi-do’s involvement and romance with Oh Dae-su was part of Woo-jin’s payback, though Mi-do is not aware of it. As Oh Dae-su flips through a photo album presented to him by Woo-jin, he learns that Mi-do is in fact his daughter. In order to keep Mi-do in the dark about everything, Oh Dae-su vows to become Lee’s dog. He crawls around on all fours yipping and growling. In one of the most jarring moments of the film, he proceeds to cut off his own tongue with a pair of scissors to prove he will never speak of what happened. The intensity of this scene is a testament to Choi’s immense skill.

Review: (500) Days Of Summer (2009)

Directed by Marc Webb
Written by Scott Neustadter & Michael H. Weber
Starring Joesph Gordon-Levitt, Zooey Deschanel

"Author's Note: The following is a work of fiction. Any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental. Especially you Jenny Beckman. Bitch."

It’s been a while since American audiences have been treated to a realistic look at the rise and descent of young love. In fact, as far as realistic films about young twenty-somethings falling in and out of love go, they’re a rare species. When one eventually comes along a chord is struck with the generation it documents, and if we’re lucky, brings insight to those of a age and/or lifestyle. With the release of (500) Days of Summer, we arrive at such an occasion.

The film begins with a warning that “this is not a love story.” Some have said that this is misleading or a lie, but the truth is, this is a “relationship story,” one that truthfully--and sometimes brutally--examines the ups and downs of trying to find or create a love story in the twenty-first century. We begin at the end: Summer (Deschanel) has broken up with Tom (Gordon-Levitt) and his friends come to his aid, hoping to get him out of a rut they’ve found him lying in before. And so begins the relationship story.

Tom meets Summer at his job; he’s a greeting card writer, she’s the new assistant to Tom’s boss. One day in the elevator Summer hears The Smiths coming out of Tom’s headphones. She compliments him on his taste in music and he’s stricken. During a night of drunken karaoke with co-workers, the two sit in a booth and debate the existence of love--he says it’s real, she believes it’s all a fabrication--and unable to persuade each other, agree to disagree. The next time they meet, they kiss for the first time and are soon going on dates, though Summer insists it is “nothing serious.” It isn’t long before Tom feels differently and becomes consumed by what their relationship could and does mean.

The casting in (500) Days of Summer is one of those unique occasions where everyone fits their roles perfectly. Even the supporting roles feel created and lived in rather than simply acted in. Let’s start with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. For the longest time, I just knew him as “the kid from 3rd Rock From the Sun,” a show I thoroughly disliked, but I’m happy to say he’s redeemed himself nicely. Along with Brick, he’s created a new respect as a young actor to be watched. In the character of Tom he finds the perfect balance in scenes where he’s on top of the world as well as in the depths of love Hell. We understand Tom, feel his pain, his happiness, and his love for Summer. Credit goes to Zooey Deschanel, of course, who creates a character worthy of the love. As Summer, she’s mysterious, bright, fun and frustrating. The small things that Tom loves about her, like the way she licks her lips before she speaks are integrated in Deschanel’s performance and we catch her subtly using these mannerisms. And as Tom’s friend McKenzie, Geoffrey Arend pulls off a bright little comedic performance that left me wanting more of his character.

As strong as this movie is, and as much as I loved it, it is not without its faults. The script isn’t quite up to the standards met by the direction and acting, and the choice of Tom’s love advisor is cliché and completely useless. These are minor quibbles, however, for a film that, in my opinion, could be come this generation’s Annie Hall. To be sure, the film even uses several of the techniques Allen used in his pivotal romantic film: animation, voice over, split-screen and direct-to-camera dialogue are all present. Of course, Annie Hall didn’t have a Hall and Oates dance number, but then again, who does?