By Adam Spunberg

I left my screening of Brigitte Berman’s Hugh Hefner: Playboy, Activist and Rebel persuaded that Hugh Hefner was one of the most influential figures in American history.  The Playboy Mansion?  Just an erotic sideshow.  Objectifying women?  Irrelevant.  Civil rights advocate?  Nothing short of Martin Luther King.  Perverted sex maniac?  Try editorial workaholic.

Berman’s plan was to gather a slew of recognizable faces – many who had been touched by Hefner’s kindness – and let them campaign on his behalf.  Then the camera would return to Hefner, who would dazzle the audience with sparkling stories of his unusual life (reminiscent of Philippe Petit’s stirring narrations in Man On Wire).  It was a simple formula in theory, but the effect worked extremely well.

If you can accept Berman’s film as an ode to Hefner’s good works, then the documentary will resonate strongly with you.  If you have reservations about Hefner’s exploitation of women (which he denies, and the film lets him get away with it), then you may leave dissatisfied.  Berman fails to challenge Hefner on those gritty issues, partly because she recognizes it has been done numerous times.  This is about Hefner the humanitarian, a title he most certainly deserves.

Among his accomplishments are rebelling against racism, sodomy laws, McCarthyism, and religious fanaticism.  Those stands were often brave, putting his businesses at great risk, and his interests in these matters were highly cultural and intellectual.  In a sense, Hefner was the epitome of anti-prejudice, defending against civil injustices because it seemed the natural thing to do.  He was not a racist because he saw people as people.  He did not judge sexual orientation or political belief.  All he cared about was providing a haven for every kind of person, and there happened to be a bunch of gorgeous naked girls involved to finance the pot, to entertain the guests.

Most people see him now as the old geezer with multiple young girlfriends (how many depends on the year), but don’t discredit his achievements because he turned unconventionally adolescent in his twilight years.  Hugh Hefner may have been a controversial figure, but as Berman’s quality documentary illustrates, he was also a great man.

Perhaps George Lucas summed it up best: “I create fantasies, Hef creates fantasies.”  Hefner’s dream may have been a little different from the norm, but he helped a staggering number of people along the way, and Berman does a solid job of conveying that on screen.

By Rebecca Rose

Usually when I tell my friends I’m going to a movie to do a review, there’s no shortage of volunteers who want to tag along and help me with my “work”. This movie was a hard sell. My boyfriend refused to come with me; my friends made horrified faces like I had asked them to accompany me to a root canal. Another film reviewer colleague even passed in lieu of catching Grown Ups (He claims to have not regretted his decision). There’s something about the name “Joan Rivers” that is just polarizing. Either you’re someone who hears the name and thinks of a grotesquely caricatured plastic surgery addict making bad jokes, or you feel something like awestruck giddiness. I’m of the latter. For a female comic like myself, it’s impossible to discount what she’s meant, not just to women in the industry, but to show business in general. And as a comedian, I just couldn’t turn down the chance to find out what makes her tick.

Spanning a year of her life starting with her birthday in 2008, the film follows Rivers on the road, as she jumps from project to project, gig to gig. Rivers makes no bones about being a shameless self-promoter, and has no qualms about accepting anything that will earn money. After all, she rightly points out, this is exactly how she’s managed to survive for all these years and still be on the pop-culture radar. Films in the past have had great examples of artists/stars coping with aging and fading from their coveted limelight. From My Favorite Year, starring the brilliantly vulnerable Peter O’Toole to the understated heartbreak of The Wrestler, the subject matter has been tackled with more insight and depth before. What makes Rivers’ different is that she’s not waning; she’s not fading out of the limelight, worried about her. She’s kicking and screaming, having a blast, and probably best of all of her, she’s cashing checks. (Now that I realize what a workaholic she is, I could probably have paid her to join me at this screening…she seriously does not turn down any paying gig.)

Filmmakers Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg treat her as seriously as they treat many of their past subjects (this is the same team that made an acclaimed documentary about the atrocities in Darfur). They strive to capture not so much the glamour of celebrity; but rather, the nuances of maintaining a career that has survived nearly every major social evolution. One of the most mesmerizing things about the film is her unique, mind-boggling filing system; she has saved quite literally every single joke she’s ever written. (Looking for an old Imelda Marcus joke? It’s probably here.) And the movie certainly has no shortage of hilarious moments. Rivers shines when she’s “on”, whether it’s regaling viewers with humorous stories from her legendary past, making cracks at her own expense, or just being on stage, doing what she does best.

If the film has a flaw, it’s that there’s so much left unsaid about what motivates the comedienne. She possesses a raw fire, a rage that fuels her to perform, that many of comics, myself included would no doubt love to tap into. She’s fearless about her material (9/11 jokes are something even today’s most shock-ish comics stay away from; Rivers has tackles them like a linebacker through a field of dandelions).

Much like her heir apparent, Kathy Griffin (who appears in the film), she’s perfected the art of self-effacement on camera. At times it feels a bit forced, almost a hollow effort to bury herself behind the persona she’s crafted so carefully for these many years. She tackles her obvious flaws so fearlessly (of all the Joan Rivers plastic surgery jokes, hers are by far the best), it’s hard to not wonder if she’s not trying to throw us off. There is a real vulnerability underneath her fiery assaults, but unlike other documentaries that tackle stand-up comedy (the inevitable comparisons to Mr. Warmth: The Don Rickles Project will occur), there’s never really an effort to define it. All in all, however, the film is a bright, funny escape into the world of someone who by all accounts, just wants to make you laugh…for a price.

“Educational Reform done right: Vote Geoffrey Canada and Michelle Rhee”, this could be a possible tagline for a joint educational campaign, but in the real world politics and bureaucracy stands in the way for people like Gregory Canada, educational reformer and president of the Harlem Children Zone in Harlem, NY and Michelle Rhee, chancellor for the District of Columbia Public school system, both of whom want to improve our national educational system. Unfortunately, the red tape and various levels of offices one has to go through prohibits improvement and change in the system.

Academy Award winning director Davis Guggenheim of An Inconvenient Truth brings the topic of education onto center stage in his new documentary Waiting for Superman. Canada and Rhee, both champions in reforming education, are also reasons to watch, the film shows how their own tactics improved and changed their respective local educational systems. Guggenheim’s Superman provides a moving and thought-provoking film look on a “backburner” subject such as education.

Canada anchors the film by providing information and explains his approach of improving the educational system by focusing more on the students needs instead of worrying about union finances. John Anderson, columnist for Daily Variety says, “A point that Canada makes so articulately is that what he and others are doing, including Washington, D.C., schools chancellor Michelle Rhee and Pittsburgh educator Bill Strickland, proves that effective education isn’t incumbent on income or geography, but on individual attention to students and the eradication of stultifying union rules that prevent the firing of bad teachers or the institution of merit pay.”

This was the running theme in the film. Quality teachers can do so much, but the amount of attention students receive in the classroom can take them far.

The film follows six students who all excel in their respective [failing] schools, and their parents, who would do anything to provide their children a better education even if it means placing them in a lottery to get into that coveted charter school. The film first introduces us to Anthony, an elementary student from Washington DC, who lives with his grandmother who wishes to provide a bright future for his family. There is Daisy, a student from Los Angeles, who one day wants to become a doctor in order “to take care of people.” Second grader Francisco from Bronx, NY, whose teachers claim that he is falling behind in reading, but seems to be doing great when he gets home and reads for his mother. There’s Bianca, a student from Harlem, whose mother pays monthly dues to take her daughter to school, and discovers a charter school across town which appears to be better than Bianca’s current school. The film also touches on Emily, a student from the Silicon Valley, CA, who works hard in school but wishes to attend the local charter.

Geoffrey Canada

I enjoyed the successful takeover of the District of Colombia School system by Michelle Rhee who was appointed Chancellor and D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, both working together in setting the failing D.C. school system straight. What makes Rhee so interesting is that she never held any high official positions and only had taught in a few schools. In her first years she made a controversial move by closing poorly performing schools, sparking up debate that her firings were unfair and even racists. I loved the no holds barred, take it or leave it attitude that she conveyed.

Guggenheim makes many comparisons regarding finances spent by government on other public services, such as prison over education. One comparison stands out where, on average government spends about $132,000/year for an inmate and still has $107,000 to put that inmate through college.

I wasn’t a fan of documentaries until I saw Morgan Spurlock’s Super Size Me. Statistical facts back-up statements, detailed diagrams and charts made it easy to follow what was going on during the film. Thanks to Spurlock I knew I was ready to watch another documentary, and to top it all off it was directed by an academy award winner, so I knew what to expect. Watching the film made me thing back to the many bad and few good teachers I had growing up, as for someone who when through the public school system battled my way through intermediate and high school and clung to dear life in college, leaving the film I felt that if it wasn’t for the good teachers I probably would be flipping burgers and have a degree from a trade school, instead of doing what I love.

Thanks to The Lottery, I now have one of my favorite movie moments and quotes of all time:  “Barack Obama wears pants. And socks. And shoes.”

These words come from one of the captivating children in Madeline Sackler’s powerful new documentary, who eloquently sums up the film’s core stance better than I as a critic probably ever could. See, Barack Obama wears pants….so he should to, too.   And Barack Obama believes Charter Schools will save the American educational system.  So we should, too.

A deaf single mother, an African immigrant, a married couple who are union members themselves, and the wife of a convicted felon serving a life sentence; these are the parents of the four children who vie for a spot in the illustrious Harlem Success Charter School.  In a district where the public schools have appalling conditions that show no hope of ever changing, many parents find the option of charter schools a welcome new change.  But with only a few hundred openings and nearly 4000 applicants, demand far outweighs supply. The school (by law) must hold a lottery to select new candidates. Harlem Success chooses make their lottery public, to draw attention to the crisis at hand.  If 4000 families in Harlem and the Bronx see a need for a drastic, immediate change to this system, then what exactly is standing in their way?

Why unions, of course. And a deep-seeded fear of gentrification. And politics. And ACORN.  Sackler’s take on the material is blunt and direct. There is no mistaking where she as a director stands on this issue…unions take a harsh beating, as does New York’s deeply entrenched political landscape.  More importantly, she never lets the audience forget the power or the significance of what’s at stake here, behind the rhetoric and the posturing.

The best part about the film is the scenes with the families themselves.  Sackler’s strength is when she lets the cameras roll. Mothers fret, fathers discipline, and children take all of this with the kind of naïve, uncorrupted charm that makes it all the more painful to see what’s really at stake.   There is raw power in these moments.  As a diehard documentary enthusiast I relish the art of true verite filmmaking (uncorrupted by what we are force-fed as “reality TV”.)  Critics have been bemoaning the disparity in the marketplace for documentaries since the days of Siskel and Ebert, and there is no doubt that great documentaries can provide more dollar-for-dollar entertainment value than most big-budge Hollywood entries. I was more solidly entertained as filmgoer watching these families than in anything I saw in the last three Jennifer Aniston movies.  (Side note: Why do I keep going to her movies??)

I wished I would have gotten more of these moments, and that the filmmaker had let the families themselves tell the story of their struggle with the educational system. Rather, we get long interviews and rigorous explanations from deeply rhetorical interview subjects, clouded in dark black backdrops, trying to explain why the system is broken. I got lost in too many facts, statistics, and experts explaining why this or that doesn’t work.  Frankly, I don’t need one “expert” to explain to me why the educational system isn’t working once I’ve heard it come from the lips of a mother desperate for change.

As a filmmaker, Sackler could be a case study as to why a director should never edit their own material.  She would have benefitted from a more focused direction, and a less heavy-handed attack of the facts. And while I can’t help but admire her zealous commitment to her stance, I was shocked about the omission of certain vital elements (No mention of New York’s legendary “rubber rooms” for teachers pending disciplinary action?  Not one single mention of “vouchers”??).

But all of that amounts to little more than aesthetic nitpicking.  Could this have been a better “film” with some different editing choices? Sure, but who’s counting Oscars on your mantle when you have a nation of where 58% of African American fourth graders are functionally illiterate, where companies get contracts to build future prisons by “betting” how many convicts there will be based on elementary school failure rates, and where 50% of students from low-income families will not graduate high school when they turn 18.  Maybe Sackler’s attempts as a filmmaker may fall short in some areas, but ultimately, she is right about one thing. What’s most important in this entire dialogue is the future of these children. The Lottery (along with the upcoming Waiting for Superman) is going to be an essential part of push towards trying to change a system that all sides agree is just not working.

That is why I would not only recommend, but strongly encourage everyone to make room in your movie viewing schedule to see The Lottery. Parents, teachers, union advocates, legislators, voters…all of us. Because even if you don’t like charter schools or Barack Obama or wearing pants, it’s important to be informed about how we are educating the children of this country.  In a world that gives us an Alvin and the Chipmunks sequel, and an upcoming movie based on the board game “Battleship!”(yes, this is actually going to happen)  there has to be at least 90 minutes for that.

Alright Awards Picks readers, let’s play a game. I want you to think of the first few things that come to your mind when you hear the words Disney Animation. Are you thinking? I know I have mine. I think, Ariel, Aladdin, Belle, Beast, Genie, Mufasa, Simba, Ursula, Jafar, Scar, etc. You get the picture. For me, and I may be dating myself, these are some of my greatest childhood memories. I can recall everything from the day my dad took me to see The Little Mermaid, and when I fell in love with the Aladdin soundtrack. These are films that have made me such a fan of animation even to this day. I would guess that many of you have a similar nostalgia. This is why I highly recommend getting to a theater to see Waking Sleeping Beauty.

This documentary directed by Don Hahn, producer of The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast, is, basically, a bunch of archival footage with a home video feel from the 10-year heyday of Disney Animation. The film starts around 1979 and then quickly gets you into the 1984-1994 period. We get an inside look into what some great animators were going through. We even get to see some amazing footage of Jeffrey Katzenberg and Michael Eisner and how they became the first outsiders to run the Disney studio.

The film does a great job with its pacing and narration of the story. The archival footage and interviews are just jaw dropping. It really gives you that directors cut feel but with so much more. Eisner brought on Katzenberg to clean up the “mess” that Disney animation had become. Not many people know that the very foundation of what made Disney, well Disney, was on the verge of being shut down altogether. Not only that, but the animation department was even relocated from the Burbank studio to a run down building in Glendale. That was a big slap in the face for the animators who were working just as hard, but the move may just have been the key that opened the door to a “whole new world” of creativity. This is just one of many interesting story lines that give us a view into the magic.

Some highlights to look out for include, Howard Ashman. Half of the great composing team behind The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and parts of Aladdin. There is footage of Ashman teaching Jodi Benson, Ariel, how to sing Part of Your World. A moment that every children’s vocal teacher should watch. Other moments include footage of Robin Williams improvising some Genie dialogue, Angela Lansbury and  Jerry Orbach singing Be Our Guest in the studio, interviews with the late Roy E Disney as well as a young Tim Burton and the birth of Pixar.

Don Hahn was right when he said, “We are trained so well in the disciplines of animated films that we made another 82 minute long film with a laugh and a cry.”

If you are Disney fan, an animation fan, a historian, or just have a special place in your heart for Ariel, Simba, Aladdin or Belle, then get out and see this film! This nostalgic fan not only walked away with a smile, but having learned a little too.

Technically, this review covers a span of time greater than a week, but if the Academy can expand its Best Picture category, surely we can do the same with days in a week. In this first “week,” four AwardsPicks writers (Bowen and Freiberg doubling up, excellently if I may say) covered six of the so-called “lesser” categories, although many of these efforts likely required more devotion than the banner ones and are often of higher quality.

I was really struck by the audacity of some of these filmmakers. In Freiberg’s Best Documentary report, we learned of incredibly dangerous feats, ranging from Burma VJ’s raw, revolutionary footage to the plight of environmentalists as they are pursued frighteningly by Japanese poachers (The Cove), along with impoverished children risking everything for a chance at a now-dilapidated American Dream (Which Way Home). Regardless of who wins, these are all highly compelling tales that deserve to be noticed. When the award is announced at the Oscars, there are bound to be people hearing about these injustices for the first time and probably remarking things like, “I had no idea they were killing dolphins in Japan ,” or “What, there’s oppression in Burma?” If awareness is the ultimate goal, getting nominated is a huge accomplishment.

Kit Bowen tackled the truly obscure in her Live Action Short and Animated Short pieces. In Live Action, she introduced us to a wild combination of candidates. Two of the nominees are tragically serious: The Door seems especially intriguing as an avant-garde take on the horrors of Chernobyl, while Kavi – about child slavery in India – just seems sad. Instead of Abracadabra has that charming, winsome feel to it and Miracle Fish appears to have remnants of The Twilight Zone (Bowen informs us). As for The New Tenants, starring well-known actors, I think it has to be your cup of tea. I concur with Bowen on The Door as a likely winner, but let’s see what the buzz (if this category stirs any) indicates as the Oscars near.

In Animated Short, the race should be extremely tight and unpredictable; look for some Oscar pools to be decided here. This is one of my favorite categories, since there’s always bound to be colorful ingenuity. You can watch French Roast, Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty (a distorted bedtime story), and The Lady and the Reaper (Scoop meets a farcical The Sea Inside?) in their entirety, while getting a taste of Logorama and the new Wallace and Gromit short. Bowen endorsed The Lady and the Reaper, but I found it too silly despite its clever premise. I’m wondering how Granny O’Grimm even got a nomination, since the storyline was entirely predictable and lacked any original insight. It was by far the worst of the nominees. French Roast, however, was executed brilliantly and was masterful in its amusing twists and turns. I absolutely loved it. Since the dialogue in Logorama was a little too forced (almost unnaturally urban) for my taste, I would see this as a two-horse race between French Roast and the always-wonderful Wallace and Gromit. Keep in mind, though, that I am not an Academy voter, and Kit Bowen knows how they think. Go watch the films and decide for yourself.

Christa Youngpeter provided some stirring analysis of the Documentary Short category. I was pretty touched just from the descriptions alone, especially in the case of Music by Prudence (which Youngpeter endorsed). China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province about the toll of an earthquake and The Last Truck: Closing of a GM plant (self-explanatory) are more standard tragedies, which while enlightening, probably lack the punch of a more unorthodox effort. The Last Campaign of Booth Gardner is another euthanasia story, which may be a little overplayed for Oscar glory. For me, the final two candidates pose the best chance, which are the aforementioned Music by Prudence – about a Zimbabwean girl who sings despite horrendous disabilities – and the incredibly unique Rabbit a la Berlin, which shows rabbits running wild within the Berlin Wall construct.

Paul Popiel was quick to dispense his viewpoints in the Best Foreign Film review, but such a controversial topic can benefit from an opinionated presentation. Happy, enjoyable efforts like Amelie appear to be missing from this year’s pool. The much-discussed The White Ribbon (a dark portrayal of a pre-World War I German village) is the clear favorite, especially with Ajami (violence in Tel Aviv) and Milk of Sorrow (highlights crimes of Peruvian fascism) unlikely to inspire away any votes. A Prophet appears interesting, even if it’s not quite groundbreaking, but it probably lacks the capability to take down The White Ribbon. The Secret in Their Eyes also has a compelling plot, but the personal/political story of a crime revisited – good as it may be – has had neither the following nor attention of The White Ribbon.

Lastly, Nate Freiberg adventured into the Best Animated Film category and laid out the particulars with expert craftsmanship. The increase to five nominees has still left worthy options out in this exploding genre of film (see Freiberg’s list of potential snubs), and Up’s inclusion on the Best Picture list pretty much guarantees a win in the Best Animated Film scrum. That being said, it was nice to see a couple of idiosyncratic nominees (Coraline and The Fantastic Mr. Fox) get acclaimed. The Princess and the Frog, though nominated, is the real loser here, as expectations were much higher than what ultimately resulted. After the success of Enchanted, I fully anticipated a lucrative showing, but viewers were more transfixed by the other nominees this year and of course, Avatar (which is almost a CGI film itself). As Freiberg points out, The Secret of Kells has virtually no chance, but it should benefit greatly from the somewhat-surprising nomination. Tremendous praise must be extended to Pixar, however, for once again leading the pack in the animated genre.

What a superb first week of reviewing, especially when you consider the obscurity of some of these films. Week 2 will focus more on the technical side of things, but it should feature some movies more recognizable to the everyday audience. Stay tuned for next week’s recap, and make sure to follow along each day.

Though it carries a relatively-low profile with the general public, Best Documentary Feature is one of the Academy’s more controversial Oscar categories, with many alleging that the best documentaries often get overlooked when it comes to nomination time. So with that caveat out of the way, (and acknowledging tips o’ the cap to Capitalism: A Love Story, Good Hair, The September Issue, Every Little Step, Yoo-Hoo Mrs. Goldberg, Tyson, La Danse: Le Ballet de l’Opera de Paris and The Beaches of Agnes), let’s take a look at this year’s nominees:

—

—

Foreign journalists are banned from reporting within Myanmar, still called Burma by much of its oppressed populace. The military junta in power also so tightly manages the domestic media that it’s a rare occasion when objective content is produced. Burma VJ: Reporting from a Closed Country offers a tiny glimpse into this repressive nation, with footage of defiant, public demonstrations (predominantly featuring the country’s Buddhist monks) that are promptly squelched, often violently, by the military. The video journalists (VJs) responsible for this footage smuggled it out of the country to foreign news agencies at great risk to themselves. Indeed, we actually see and hear soldiers pursuing reporters with cameras during times of chaos. Knowing the stakes involved with bringing these images to the screen makes for powerful viewing.

Here is the trailer:

—

—

Having long ignored global pleas to protect whales, Japanese fishermen have now moved onto dolphins, which they’ve found easier to hunt. The Cove exposes the slaughter of perhaps the world’s second-most intelligent animals in a hidden cove near a Japanese coastal village. There, fishermen lure, trap and then harpoon dolphins, which they mislabel as whale meat, to be served in cafeterias across the island nation. In obtaining the clandestine footage of these attacks, dolphin activist and former “Flipper” trainer Richard O’Barry and his team snuck underwater cameras disguised as rocks with up to a year of prison at stake. The documentary often plays as a feature thriller, which is to say it’s got a lot going for it.

Here is the trailer:

—

—

Likely to be the most well-known nominee (it finished third to Earth and Capitalism: A Love Story at the box office among docs), Food, Inc. is an examination of the troubling, drastic changes to the ways in which food has been grown, raised and produced over the last several decades. With cheap costs as the ultimate motivator, the food industry is shown to support deplorable and unsafe conditions at poultry farms, cattle ranches and slaughterhouses. The questionable use of genetically-modified corn in just about anything sold at the supermarket further muddles the equation, with the film imploring consumers to purchase organic and locally-grown products. Likely to be an eye-opening viewing experience for anyone.

Here is the trailer:

—

—

Called “the most dangerous man in America” by Henry Kissinger, Daniel Ellsberg was the Department of Defense official responsible for leaking the highly-classified Pentagon Papers to The New York Times in 1971. Nearly four decades later, he’s also the narrator of The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, which takes a decidedly favorable look at his extremely controversial actions. In exposing America’s history of military involvement in Vietnam, Ellsberg also severely damaged President Nixon’s public image and set off a fierce debate over First Amendment rights. With lively interviews of the principals involved, the documentary delves into both the how’s and why’s of Ellsberg’s decision and the ensuing firestorm. A must-see for any political or historical junkie.

Here is the trailer:

—

—

Fans of independent film may have seen Cary Fukunaga’s Sin Nombre, about a Mexican and Honduran teenager on the run to the U.S. on the top of a freight train. The real-life teenage and adolescent stories of this form of illegal immigration are on display in Which Way Home. Dangerous assault by smugglers and corrupt police and the natural perils of low-hanging branches and tunnels while riding “The Beast” are among the routine dangers of this journey for the children seeking a vague notion of a better life in the States. While some kids have run away from their families, others are running to their parents, who in some cases emigrated years before. Likely to be harrowing material, particularly for those who have children.

Here is the trailer:

* * *

* * *

Without a heavily-marketed favorite leading this year’s pack as Bowling for Columbine and March of the Penguins did in recent years, it is easy to envision several of these films taking the golden statuette. With its relatively more-limited scope and shock value, we can probably safely eliminate Which Way Home from contention first. The Most Dangerous Man contains elements of two recent Oscar winners – both The Fog of War and Man on Wire – but doesn’t execute as well as either of those films did. In a race like this, the raw, harried footage of Burma VJ may prove not only to be the film’s greatest strength, but its greatest weakness as well.

That leaves us with the two exposés: The Cove and Food, Inc. While Food, Inc. has quickly become required viewing for any health-conscious American, the thinking here is that the tale of abused dolphins will carry the day over abused chickens and cows. The gripping thriller elements of The Cove ultimately leave the most lasting impression, which should net first-time director Louie Psihoyos his first Oscar.

Road to the Oscars series:

Podcasts – Kit Bowen, Nate Freiberg, Adam Spunberg, and Phil Wallace

February 4: Live Action Short – Kit Bowen

February 5: Animated Short – Kit Bowen

February 8: Documentary Short Subject – Christa Youngpeter

February 9: Documentary Feature – Nate Freiberg

February 10: Foreign Language Film – Paul Popiel

February 12: Animated Film – Nate Freiberg

February 15: Sound Mixing – Jeremy Martin

February 16: Sound Editing – Jeremy Martin

February 17: Original Song – Adam Spunberg and Savanna New

February 18: Visual Effects – Mallory Pickard

February 19: Original Score – Adam Spunberg

February 22: Makeup – Christa Youngpeter

February 23: Costume – Steve Neumann

February 24: Art Direction – Christa Youngpeter

February 25: Film Editing – Steve Neumann

February 26: Cinematography – Paul Popiel

February 27: Original Screenplay – Jeremy Martin

February 28: Adapted Screenplay – Jeremy Martin

March 1: Supporting Actress – Marla Seidell

March 2: Supporting Actor – Phil Wallace

March 3: Actress – Marla Seidell

March 4: Actor – Kit Bowen

March 5: Director – Adam Spunberg

March 5: Picture – Kit Bowen

March 7: The 82nd Annual Academy Awards!

The Oscar nominations out, the dresses purchased, tuxes fitted. It’s a joyous occasion here in Hollywood – excitement in the air like the fresh smog surrounding the rainy, new decade. It’s a pleasure just to be nominated, right!? What about the snubs! What about the dynamite performances that got left behind?  Its time to shed some light on the ‘almosts’ this season; the top ten…well, eleven.

Best Picture:
Star Trek – One would hope for a little respect for this innovative grassroots story in a year where the nominations go from five to ten! A large portion of Americans had their biggest smiles of 09’ as they left Star Trek. Purely, the movie was a total blast, and worthy of a nod in a year where the Best Pic category proved to love its dramas just a little too much…again.

Best Actor:
Sharlto Copley – District 9 – First time actor Sharlto Copley dominates every minute he’s on screen in this incredible portrayal of a dimwitted, nerdy government official assigned to evict aliens in the perilous District 9. Assisted by incredible special effects, Copley’s portrayal of Wikus Van De Merwe was top notch at the least. Give the man his nod.

Matt Damon – The Informant! – I knew I’d be in for a quirky ride alongside The Informant!, but it wasn’t until the halfway mark that I realized the razor-edge line that Damon had been walking for the past hour. His interpretation is genius, endearing and utterly depressing; perfect for the Academy, right?

Hal Holbrook – That Evening Sun – This small film made almost no waves around the nation until Hal Holbrook’s performance was discussed for early Oscar lists. Holbrook – the bitter, savvy old man, Abner Meecham – comes on the tails of his Oscar snub for Into the Wild and is dually as moving. If you haven’t seen That Evening Sun, see it. A splendidly small film by director Scott Teems and a true testament of Holbrook’s strength when left alone to his craft.

Best actress:

Zoe Saldana – Avatar – I get it, I get it; I know many believe Avatar doesn’t belong in the Best Actor/Actress category alongside some of the other nominees, but hear me out. Everyone always talks about the power of progress — Dustin Hoffman was nominated for Tootsie, Jaye Davidson for The Crying Game — it would only seem right that Saldana was given a fair shake for her pioneering vision of Avatar’s main female lead, Neytiri. Ha! She didn’t even wear a CGI bubble suit….

Samantha Morton – The Messenger – Again, if you haven’t seen this tiny, beautiful picture, you’re going to need to go out and rent it, if only for the kitchen scene between Alpha Dog’s, Ben Foster (who is also brilliant) and Samantha Morton. This epically long, intrinsically beautiful slow-zooming scene leaves you pondering…did I actually just watched real life? Its worth the price of admission and surely should have been worth an Oscar bid.

Best Supporting Actor
Zach Galifianakis – The Hangover – Call me crazy, because I probably am, but there’s got to be more room in this shindig for comedies, especially comedies with the power of The Hangover. Throw in Galifianakis as yet another comedic tragedy to be looked over. Are you listening Steve Carell (40-Year-Old Virgin)?

Best Director:
Tom Ford – A Single Man – I wasn’t a very big fan of A Single Man, but I can say that it was a remarkable film. Beautiful, poignant and horribly sad, Tom Ford marched well down the path to mastering his new craft in a few short moments on screen. The bedroom scene alone is staggeringly made, but it’s worth noting that without Colin Firth, Ford gets only half noticed. But as is, well done Tom – you can do far more than make amazing suits.

Neil Blomkamp – District 9 – A terrific movie and outstanding directing. A movie where the lead character becomesmore human as he becomes more alien…genius! District 9 created drama in simple situations and a dazzling story from dynamic characters. To be honest, its going to be real hard to take down Cameron or Bigelow, but hey, atta boy, Neil.

Best Original Screenplay:
500 Days of Summer – the more I sit back and think, the more this movie inches closer to the top of my 2009 top ten. The script was extraordinary– I read it – and the movie splayed the words out like a fine sushi chef. I loved 300, 12 Angry Men and 3 Ninjas, so maybe I just like movies starting with numbers…

Honorable Mention:
Best Documentary
Tyson – In a year where Food, Inc. and The Cove basically changed my life, its tough to say another doc should be included in the fray…then I watched Tyson. The single power of Tyson’s interviews demand respect and afford the viewer no ability to turn away: a broken, shattered, shell of a man pouring his heart to the world which tore him down for so long. I can’t describe the power of some of these talking-head interviews; I walked away utterly grateful for the life I had been given.

It’s happened; the list of 15 has been released. Yes, the Academy finally named the shortlist of 15 potential documentary film nominees for the upcoming Oscars. Here they are:

“The Beaches of Agnes”
“Burma VJ”
“The Cove”
“Every Little Step”
“Facing Ali”
“Food, Inc.”
“Garbage Dreams”
“Living in Emergency: Stories of Doctors Without Borders”
“The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers”
“Mugabe and the White African”
“Sergio”
“Soundtrack for a Revolution”
“Under Our Skin”
“Valentino: The Last Emperor”
“Which Way Home”

Shocked to see a few omissions and a few films you’ve never even heard of? Apparently a few people are none too happy about this list. While the most obvious omission is Michael Moore’s “Capitalism: A Love Story,” I am far more surprised by the absence of James Toback’s “Tyson” and “Anvil! The Story of Anvil,” which, while I did not include it in my original discussion of hopefuls, has garnered excellent reviews all across the board and was one of the favorites.

But the Academy likes its little surprises. There was “Crash” beating “Brokeback” for Best Picture in 2006, then we had Sean Penn’s gay activist Harvey Milk robbing Mickey Rourke’s superlative wrestler in 2009 to make up for the “Crash” mishap, only spawning another one. Mind you, this was the same year the Academy Awards were host to the utterly inexplicable and horrifyingly miscalculated “Departures” Foreign Language Film win over “Waltz with Bashir” and “The Class.” The Best Documentary category is also hardly without its own controversies. Have you heard of “Hoop Dreams”? “Roger & Me”? “The Thin Blue Line”? None of these films even received a nomination. Yes, I too sometimes wonder why we have the Oscars in the first place.

Nevertheless, while there are countless Oscar upsets, the list above is hardly without strong contestants. “The Beaches of Agnes,” “Burma VJ,” “The Cove,” and “Food Inc.” are probably the most obvious likely nominees, due to a combination of either critical reception, box-office returns, the filmmaker’s reputation (in “Agnes’“ case most especially), subject (political protest in “Burma,” animal rights in “Cove,” or personal diary in “Agnes”), or risk involved in capturing their subject (“Ocean’s 11” approach to “Cove,” or the smuggling of footage in “Burma”).

Admittedly, there are a handful of documentaries on the shortlist whose appearance is pretty surprising. These include “Every Little Step,” which documents dancers going through auditions for a revival of the musical “A Chorus Line,” and “Valentino: The Last Emperor,” which brings us into the world of the famous designer. “Valentino” has the distinction of being one of two of this year’s documentaries dealing with the fashion world, the other being “The September Issue,” which was not included in the shortlist and probably shouldn’t have been. The question is why “Valentino” was.

Finally, there are some films that are less likely to get a nomination, but are worth seeing based on their subject alone. For instance, there is “Garbage Dreams,” which looks at Egyptian garbage collectors in Cairo, who essentially form a separate social class. If you’re looking for a good scare, see “Under Our Skin,” a documentary about Lyme disease and the health care system that is failing to deal with it.” Which Way Home” covers the familiar topic of Central American migration the US, but it has the distinction of being a documentary and of focusing on unaccompanied children. Other interesting entries include “Living in Emergency: Stories of Doctors Without Borders” and “Mugabe and the White African.”

While documentaries are generally the most fascinating of films, they are also most seldom seen. With the advent of pop documentaries, reality television and new methods of distribution, this trend is hopefully changing. I challenge you to view as many of these films before the nominations are announced on February 2, 2010 and come up with your own list.

The Best Documentary Oscar category used to be populated by obscure films that earned little money and got little exposure. This has changed over the last two decades, most notably with Michael Moore’s groundbreaking and hilariously subjective investigation into American gun violence and culture in “Bowling for Columbine.” Moore, and a few others before him (like Errol Morris, for example), demonstrated that documentary can be a very engaging art form. This year there are several exciting front runners for the nomination, and the race is likely to be an exciting one.

James Toback’s passion project “Tyson” is certainly one of this year’s stronger documentary entries. An empathetic, subjective, entertaining though somewhat apologist take on Mike Tyson’s life, it has garnered positive attention and a Regard Knockout award at the Cannes Film Festival.

One of the most popular documentaries of 2009, “Food Inc.,” is an expose of the American food industry. It is the top-grossing documentary of the year (and #15 top-grossing doc of the decade) and an entertainingly disturbing look at what our food is made of and how it’s produced. While there is a lot to like about the film, it breaks little new ground. Nevertheless, it is still very effective in doing so and worth seeing.

“The Cove,” which has gotten nothing but rave reviews, is emerging as one of the strongest candidates for the golden statuette. It has already conquered several festivals and captured the Audience Award at Sundance. It tells the story of a crack team of underwater experts who infiltrate a cove in Japan to save dolphins. Yes, it sounds banal, but it is apparently a must-see.

Another potential nominee is “The Beaches of Agnes,” an autobiography of the famous French New Wave director Agnes Varda. Varda, 81-year-old director of classics like “Cleo from 5 to 7,” and “The Gleaners & I,” turns the camera on herself and her life. The film has garnered excellent reviews, but because it is a foreign film (and a documentary) it has received small exposure in the States. However, due to its maker’s reputation and the praise it has already received, the film is like to get a nomination.

A discussion of the potential documentary nominees for 2010 would be incomplete without Michael Moore’s “Capitalism: A Love Story.” Like all of Moore’s films, the documentary made a lot of money and was positively received. However, the praise for it has not been as unanimous as it has been for his previous films, notably “Sicko” and “Fahrenheit 9/11,” the 2004 winner of the Palme d’Or at Cannes. The primary criticsm leveled against the film is that it lacks the focus of his other documentaries, instead leveling a very general attack against capitalism. Nevertheless, I found the film to be a solid dose of anti-corporate rage and watching it will provide a catharsis for anyone who has been a victim of the global recession, or of corporate greed. It’s comforting to know that Michael Moore remains very reliable in voicing that rage.