I loved the movie but whoa does this trailer emphasize how manipulative and ultimately silly the movie really is.

Yes, it is a rather conventional ad, but the sanctimony is dripping. Hey! Look! A pretty white woman is being nice to that black oaf in the rain!





Screenwriter: John Lee Hancock (The Alamo)
Director: John Lee Hancock (The Rookie)
Actors: Sandra Bullock (Speed), Tim McGraw (Four Christmases), Quinton Aaron (Be Kind Rewind) and Kathy Bates (About Schmidt)






Click here to buy your copy of
You Are What You See and learn
to change the world from your couch

Labels: film, Kathy Bates, movie trailer, Quinton Aaron, Sandra Bullock, Tim McGraw

I adore this film.

The Blind Side tells the true story of Michael Oher (Quinton Aaron), a homeless black teen who has fallen through the cracks. Michael applies to a private school and is accepted through the successful campaigning by the school’s football coach. Michael's large build and quick feet make him a natural for the position of left tackle on the school's football team. Michael attends the school but remains homeless, friendless and still suffering from his miserable childhood in the projects.

One evening, Leigh Anne Tuohy (Sandra Bullock) and Sean Tuohy (Tim McGraw) see the teen walking in the rain. Leigh Anne, a very commanding woman, makes the choice to not only invite the stranger into their car, but also into their home.

Michael finds safety and love in the Tuohy’s home. Through their efforts and sacrifice, Michael discovers his athletic gifts and develops his scholarly abilities as well. Michael graduates from school and is swarmed by colleges hoping to get him on their teams.

The plot of the film may make this sound like yet another black kid(s) + sports = redemption movie (Remember the Titans, Glory Road, The Express, Pride, Coach Carter and on and on). This film above comparison to these films. The performances, the acting and the careful direction are all exceptional and the film looks beyond the racism elements. The story itself is so invigorating and inspiring that it transcends its genre.

The story offers a clear example of living the Christian life. The Tuohy’s are Christians who understand the faith isn’t just going to church and memorizing passages. The heart of the Christian faith resides in relationships. The faith lives in our relationship with Christ and allowing His love to reflect in our relationship with each other.

Much of the reaction to the film is focused on Sandra Bullock's infectious performance as Leigh Anne. Bullock, looking like a Kathy Lee Gifford clone, offers what is easily her best performance. Leigh Anne is a sassy, direct woman who obviously knows how to get whatever she wants. Bullock manages to keep the strong willed aspect of the woman at the forefront but allowing her maternal caring to peek through when needed. The duality of her strong will and her soft heart makes for a wonderful character to witness on screen.

In contrast to Bullock's assertive performance is Quinton Aaron as Michael Oher. Oher is notoriously introverted. Playing someone who avoids interaction is a challenging task. Aaron is able to present Oher's almost debilitating shyness while also making him endearing. It would have been easy to wind up having Oher be little more that a oafish prop living in Leigh Anne's shadow. Aaron's nuanced performance is the emotional anchor for the film and provides the context for the entire piece. His delicate performance deserves the credit for the film's success. If he wasn't so engaging on screen his Oher's transformation wouldn't have been as fascinating.

The old line “Dying is easy, comedy is hard” can be changed. "Dying is easy, inspiring others is hard." The attempt to inspire an audience is one of the biggest risks an artist can make. Inspiration reminds us of the good deep in our hearts and encourages us to open our better natures to the world. Inspiration promotes the higher ideals such as the Golden Rule of Matthew 7:12, “In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”

When a filmmaker attempts to inspire they risk the sarcasm of misanthropes. As we have seen with the release of this film, the attacks come easily from those who think upbeat equates simplicity of thought. If you come across critics bashing this film for being racist or manipulative you can assume the critic is filtering their own personal issues through their writing. This is simply a great movie. It is honestly inspiring and challenges the audience to not only improve their lives but to improve the lives of those around them. The production promotes all that is good in us. In an age of torture-porn and filth-laden Hollywood blockbusters this film is an absolute must see (as soon as you can).


Final Note: If you enjoyed this film, I strongly suggest you search out a documentary titled The Heart of Texas. Like this film it is inspiring and presents one of the most incredible stories of forgiveness and love I have ever seen.


Related Reviews:
Sport movies
Facing the Giants (2006)
Hoosiers (1986)


Other Critic's Reviews:
The Phantom Tollbooth
Hollywood Jesus

Labels: football, Sandra Bullock, sports, sports movie, Tim McGraw

Screenwriter: Kim Barker (License to Wed)
Director: Phil Traill
Actors: Sandra Bullock (Speed), Bradley Cooper (Wedding Crashers) and Thomas Haden Church (Spider-man 3)

Labels: Bradley Cooper, film, movie trailer, Sandra Bullock, Thomas Haden Church

Looks boilerplate but Bullock and Reynolds both have considerable on-screen charm and have used it to turn around other projects (Miss Congeniality and Just Friends). This will probably be in theaters for a couple weeks but kill when it hits DVD.




Screenwriter: Pete Chiarelli
Director: Anne Fletcher (27 Dresses)
Actors: Sandra Bullock (Speed), Ryan Reynolds (Just Friends), Mary Steenburgen (Step Brothers), Craig T. Nelson (The Incredibles) and Betty White (Bringing Down the House)

Labels: Craig T Nelson, film, Mary Steenburgen, movie trailer, Ryan Reynolds, Sandra Bullock

Short Review: A bad ending to a good movie is like eating a sub sandwich only to find the final bite has a toenail it in.


If you’ve seen Capote, there is no compelling reason to see this film. This aside, there is much to recommend this piece. There is some fine acting and directing and the story itself is inherently interesting. The issue is that the overall point sullies any positive effort made by the production. The film tells the same story as Capote: New York big shot writer/raconteur/human squeak toy, Truman Capote goes into a small Kansas town to report on the events of the murder of the Clutter Family. While investigating the story, Capote gets drawn into writing about the two thugs who brutally murdered the family. It is clear the story behind the story is a riveting human drama.

This film succeeds in a couple of ways. The performances are quite good. After seeing Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote it seemed impossible for anyone else to successfully pull off this strange character. Toby Jones’ portrayal of the impish writer is in many ways superior to Hoffman’s work. Hoffman deserved the Oscar he received for his performance. His rendition of Capote fit his production perfectly and is a brilliant piece of acting. To his credit, Jones’s Truman is one step more real, more human and his physical likeness is striking. It would seem that Jones was born to play this role.

The other strong point of the film is writer/director Douglas McGrath’s polished script. Much of his script is taut and plays to the best parts of the story. The interactions of the Kansas residents and Truman, a flamboyant, gay banshee is priceless. McGrath smartly juxtaposes the elite world of Manhattan and rural Kansas to great effect. Each of the characters, even those with a moment of screen time are, if not fully realized, quite interesting to watch. The writing allows for the actors to act. The fullness of the piece even allows Sandra Bullock to achieve what is easily her best performance as Nell Harper Lee.

In spite of its successes, the film ultimately fails. In the final act a homosexual relationship between Truman and killer Perry Smith (Daniel Craig) develops. I have no idea if this relationship was factual, but it doesn’t matter. The film concentrates so much on this love affair and the complications it forces on the conflicted Capote it overwhelms the story. While this is effectively used to support the climatic scenes where Smith is executed for his crimes, it pulls the focus away from what Capote was doing. In Cold Blood is a brilliant book but it is also a product of Truman Capote serving his (and on a larger scale our) needs by trampling on the tragedy of a dead family. He also used the deaths of the killers to advance his goals. Through his development of the true-crime novel, Truman Capote watered down the immoral behavior of profiting from the dead. The film Capote deals with this issue in the end. This film gives Capote a pass.

In the end of the film Sandra Bullock, as Nell Harper Lee (author of To Kill A Mockingbird) complains that Capote’s final years of drunkenness and stagnant creativity were the result of American culture and not Capote’s guilt. She complains that America isn’t as fancy as a place like France where things more "effervescent" can survive. Our memories are short and we Americans want things now. Are you kidding me? I do not know if these were Lee's words but even so, can someone take Miss Congeniality aside and explain that she’s a part of the sickness not the cure? I know she’s playing a character and I’m sure she’s a nice lady, but that complaint coming out of that actress’s mouth? Sandra Bullock, the star of Speed and Speed 2 complaining on camera that American culture is too hurried? Why not have Paris Hilton on camera bemoan our culture has gotten too flippant?

To bring this to a close, this is a well done film but its lack of moral clarity drains the movie of the potency it could have contained. Proof that there is more to a good movie than solid dialog and quality scenes. You must always have a good point.


Related Review:
In Cold Blood (1967)
Capote (2005)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Reel Talk
The Movie Boy

Labels: film, movie review, Sandra Bullock, Sigourney Weaver, Toby Jones, Truman Capote

I'll be honest, I am probably the last person who should review this movie. Why? This was almost the last movie I ever watched. I watched this movie about a wife (Sandra Bullock) who kisses her husband (Julian McMahon) goodbye one morning only to have him die later that day. She then wakes up the next day and he appears to her still alive. Following that, she wakes up and her world has turned back to normal and he's still dead. You see, I watched this movie with my wife. The next morning she kissed me goodbye and I'm the one who died. I went out that morning to take some change to the bank and then buy some donuts. I never got my donuts. I had a heart attack in front of the change machine and was spared by the grace of God. Now, from my wife perspective, having seen this particular movie with its themes of death, cherishing life and the main character dealing with being a widow - well, its easy to see how this movie has a little extra meaning for my family.

Looking critically at this film, I have to say it is typical for a Sandra Bullock vehicle. Ever since she's established her post Speed career, Bullock has clearly picked pieces that suit her personal taste. Each piece from The Lake House, and Infamous, to Miss Congeniality, all seem to have the same thread running through them - they're well intentioned but somewhat monotone works. Bullock has built a resume of works that are drab, forgettable efforts, this outing is no different. The basic premise of the piece is good and there are moments of reasonably good film making but ultimately there was no reason this film had to be made. It is uninspiring (unless you just happen to die the next day) and since that is really the point here, the work winds up just sitting there doing nothing.

Julian McMahon (The Fantastic Four) provides his typical performance, his natural smarmy vibe works as it typically does and he gets the audience to mistrust him as we typically do. His character never really develops however and his death, and his wife's mourning for him, never have any sincere depth. This is likewise for the other characters and their development, no one rises beyond their initial introduction.

The piece's layered time line - or perceived time line if you will, with Bullock dealing with seeing her husband after his death and then dealing with his loss in a world where he is still dead is well managed and it maintains some sense. This is the film's best point since it would be easy to lose track and fumble into a void of confusion. But this technical feat rings hollow when the movie fails to close with a meaningful ending.

Overall, this is a boring and unneeded film. You should be able to find something more worthy of your time when you're searching for something to see.

Labels: film, Julian McMahon, movie review, Sandra Bullock

Labels: Julian McMahon, movie trailer, Sandra Bullock