Oscar Roundup: Best Picture & Director Contenders

Now it's time to round up the very confusing options we have this year for Picture and Director. In some ways it seems like a wide open year with no clear frontrunner, yet in other ways it reminds me of 2011, when voters didn't love any of the nominees enough to prevent The Artist from sweeping everything as a kind of default, least disagreeable winner. This year, that option looks like Boyhood to me, but let's see where we end up.

BEST DIRECTOR

Oh boy. This category is the toughest to suss out. The directors branch of the Academy is the most idiosyncratic of the major branches and they tend not to pay any attention to things like precursors and buzz (not even the Directors Guild necessarily influences them). Yes, strong Best Picture contenders usually have their directors nominated as well, but there also tends to be out of left field moves no one saw coming, such as in 2012, when the branch snubbed the two people everyone thought were the only safe bets that year, Ben Affleck and Kathryn BIgelow, in favor of auteur choices Behn Zeitlin and Michael Haneke. This year looks to me like a potential shocker along those lines, because aside from two seemingly surefire nominees (you never know with this group), I don't really know who else will make it in.

The two locked in look like Richard Linklater for the Best Picture frontrunner Boyhood, and Alejandro Inarritu for Birdman, both seen as heavily artistic directorial achievements in line with what the branch tends to admire. After that it's tough. Many think Ava Duvernay is another lock for Selma, but I'm not so sure. The movie has gotten stellar reviews and many assume she will be nodded because she'd make history as the first black woman ever nominated in Director, but I do wonder if stats like making history hold much sway over this branch, which includes many foreign directors only concerned with the achievement at hand. Still, Duvernay is a member of the branch, so that would presumably work in her favor.

Then it's kind of a crapshoot. The Imitation Game is presumed to be a top 2-3 picture contender, which usually means the director gets in too, but the unknown Morten Tyldum hasn't been nominated in non-industry places like the Golden Globes or BFCA. We'll see if Bafta and the DGA go for him though- if they do it bolsters his chances. Then there's the respected David Fincher, a two-time nominee for Gone Girl, which was a huge hit this year, and Wes Anderson, never nominated but now up for the very popular Grand Budapest Hotel (but does this branch like his films at all?). Mike Leigh is a strong possibility I think, for Mr. Turner, even if the movie doesn't show up in many other above-the-line categories- he's enormously well respected within the branch, nominated twice before, and this film may be the pinnacle of his directing career. Finally, newbie Damien Chazelle directed Whiplash this year, which got great reviews, is reportedly loved by the Academy and would be a very Behn Zeitlin-esque nomination- but will they pull that same hat trick twice?

My predicted 5:

• Ava Duvernay, Selma
• Alejandro Inarritu, Birdman
• Mike Leigh, Mr. Turner
• Richard Linklater, Boyhood
• Morten Tyldum, The Imitation Game

I didn't even mention possible contenders Clint Eastwood for American Sniper (a veteran two time winner and four time nominee) and Bennett Miller for Foxcatcher, but they're in there too. Basically I think this is the hardest category to predict this year and I fully expect to be wrong. I certainly don't feel strongly about anyone but Inarritu and Linklater (of course, watch them get snubbed now). We'll definitely know a little more when Bafta and the DGA weigh in here, but even then this branch can often go its own way. There's less suspense when it comes to the win- I don't see how anyone can take this away from Linklator and the 12-year project he accomplished.

BEST PICTURE

So now we come to the big prize. This is a very strange year, because most would argue it's a weaker year for movies, and in this case it's hard to predict what makes up a list of nine or ten nominees. It would certainly be a year like this one that argues for going back to only five, because even then it's hard to see what would ultimately make the cut this time. I'm just going to go ahead and lay out what I've predicted will get in, based on the various precursor noms given so far, even though we are missing two crucial ones in Bafta and the PGA- maybe I shouldn't predict before hearing a bit more from the industry, but oh well- here we go.

Predicted 9 in alphabetical order:

American Sniper
Birdman
Boyhood
Gone Girl
The Grand Budapest Hotel
The Imitation Game
Selma
The Theory of Everything
Whiplash

There's a couple of films that could slide in here, and to my surprise Nightcrawler is definitely an option. It could have enough passion to force the nominee count to ten, which would be the first time that's happened under the preferential ballot system they've been using for the last three years. The movie has defied all predictions and made a great showing all over the place, starting with the critics, then the NBR, AFI, and the ACE Eddies yesterday. Again, seeing if it shows up at Bafta and the PGA will be the real test, and at the expense of what movie. I think the weaker films on this list that could theoretically be knocked out are Sniper, Theory and Gone Girl, but I'd only give any of them the slightest chance to be snubbed. I actually feel better predicting the BP nominees than I do director at this point. And I suppose there's still a small chance that Unbroken could land a slot despite the bad reviews (box office helps sometimes), but as of now I think that's only a remote possibility. We'll see how close I am come Jan 15th- I actually predicted all the nominees last year, but given the uncertainty this year, I don't expect that to happen again. And for the win, well- I continue to think it's Boyhood unless/until another movie wins the top prize at a major guild. If something else wins the PGA, Bafta or even the Globe, I'll take it seriously, but right now it looks like this movie's going all the way.

Oscar Roundup: Best Actor & Actress Contenders

It's time now to round up the lead acting contenders, wherein as usual, the Best Actor category is totally overstuffed with worthy candidates while Best Actress can barely scrape together five nominees. Sad, but it's the same thing every year now, unfortunately.

BEST ACTOR

This race is stacked to the masses this year, with all kinds of great performances from actors. Still, there are those who've hit all the precursor nominations, and with their films following suit as strong Best Picture candidates, it seems unlikely that Michael Keaton, Benedict Cumberbatch and Eddie Redmayne would miss out here. After them, we have Jake Gyllenhaal, who landed a Globe, SAG, and BFCA nod for Nightcrawler, a movie that has been looking stronger and stronger by the day. I wasn't convinced that he could happen here until Nightcrawler started to really materialize in strength from the industry, which it did today by scoring an ACE Eddie nomination from the powerful editors guild. I now think Jake is in.

Steve Carell was once thought to be a surefire nomination for his creepy performance in Foxcatcher, and he does still have a chance, having also gotten Globe and SAG nods. But the movie did poorly at the box office and was also surprisingly ignored by most critics awards. It just doesn't look to be the kind of film that voters will embrace, as they tend to like their villains gleefully over the top rather than genuinely unsettling (see Gyllenhaal). David Oyelowo has gotten very strong reviews as MLK in Selma, and I tend to think he will also make the cut with AMPAS for the film, which is still thought to be a major player. But coming up on the outside very strong (and right as people are voting) is Bradley Cooper for American Sniper, a two-time nominee already and in a film that's surging at just the right moment (these can often lead to surprise nominees, like Christian Bale last year, swept in on the late-breaking love for American Hustle).

On the very fringes is still beloved British character actor Timothy Spall for Mr. Turner, but I think these other heavy hitters are just too much for him to overcome. It's hard to say who's going to get squeezed out here though- most of these guys have a lot going for them, and honestly, even though some think he's a possible winner, I could see Eddie Redmayne missing in a huge shock, because Theory of Everything isn't as strong a BP contender as some of the others.

Predicted 5:

• Benedict Cumberbatch, The Imitation Game
• Jake Gyllenhaal, Nightcrawler
• Michael Keaton, Birdman
• David Oyelowo, Selma
• Eddie Redmayne, The Theory of Everything

This is not set in stone. I desperately want to place Bradley Cooper in here somewhere, because I have a strong feeling he's going to get in, but I just don't know who he'd push out. Oyelowo? Redmayne? Gyllenhaal? Could even Keaton or Cumberbatch miss? Unlikely, but when you follow the strength of the BP nominees you tend to be right- so, if Cooper does make it I think it's more likely at the expense of Oyelowo or Gyllenhaal. It's also wide open for the win here- Keaton is the critics favorite, Redmayne delivers a Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot kind of performance (not as good, imo), and Cumberbatch is in a strong BP contender that's tearing up the box office right now. Too close to call.

BEST ACTRESS

This is much easier. There's been four locks all season long, and a search for who might make it into fifth place, not because there are so many options, but so few. The locks are Felicity Jones, Julianne Moore, Rosamund Pike and Reese Witherspoon. That open slot is likely between Jennifer Aniston and Amy Adams, with only a fringe contender like Marion Cotillard as a remote possibility, after having been boosted by critics awards. But her film wasn't even shortlisted as a Foreign Language contender, so I don't think there's any way enough voters see Two Days, One Night (although, who knows- in a year like this she may manage it).

Aniston got Globe, SAG and BFCA nods based on a heavy publicity campaign and name recognition alone (no one has seen that movie either). Adams got a Globe nod and has Harvey Weinstein behind her film, which didn't do well at the box office- but she is a five time nominee and Academy favorite nonetheless. I don't know- I was blind to the Aniston thing for a long time, but she is popular and publicizing herself to no end...I guess I'll have to fall in line with it.

Predicted 5:

• Jennifer Aniston, Cake
• Felicity Jones, The Theory of Everything
• Julianne Moore, Still Alice
• Rosamund Pike, Gone Girl
• Reese Witherspoon, Wild

That's probably the lineup. Julianne Moore has been locked in for the win for quite some time, but there is zero enthusiasm for the film or her performance. It's an overdue career award only, which would normally leave room for an upset and if there was anyone in this lineup who had a passion vote behind them, they'd win. But I don't know who that is among this group of actresses, except, I hate to say it but...Aniston? The campaigning is out of control for her- if she gets in, she's going for the win, and hard. As insane as it sounds, in a year this weak, it's a very real (and very scary) possibility. Come  back tomorrow for the Best Picture/Best Director roundup.

2014 ACE Eddie Nominees

The second guild after SAG has weighed in, and this is an important one. The editor's guild nearly always has the eventual Best Picture winner in their nominees. The last time a movie won BP without an ACE nomination was 1989's Driving Miss Daisy, and the editors have a big say over the BP favorites.

Best Edited Feature Film (Drama)

• American Sniper
• Boyhood
• Gone Girl
• The Imitation Game
• Nightcrawler
• Whiplash

Best Edited Feature Film (Comedy/Musical)

• Birdman
• Guardians of the Galaxy
• Into the Woods
• Inherent Vice
• The Grand Budapest Hotel

Best Edited Animated Feature Film

• Big Hero 6
• The Boxtrolls
• The Lego Movie

Best Edited Documentary Feature

• Citizenfour
• Finding Vivian Maier
• Glen Campbell: I'll Be Me

Given the fact that there was an actual tie for Drama nominees here, I'd say that does not bode well at all for any movie that missed the cut. Selma in particular looks to be in trouble, as does Unbroken. On the other hand, American Sniper is coming up fast- this is a huge hint that the industry has taken to Clint Eastwood's film, and with late reports that voters are loving it, coupled with its huge box office in limited release, I'd say that now looks like a serious threat to take the ninth slot in Best Picture (especially when voting is happening as we speak). This also forces Nightcrawler into that conversation- that movie has been sneaking in everywhere, but now that it managed an Eddie nom over the likes of Selma is really has to be taken seriously as well.

Oscar Roundup: Best Supporting Actor/Actress Contenders

Okay, with Oscar nominations coming in just two weeks, it's time to do some roundups of potential contenders for the bigger categories this year. In fact, ballots are in Academy voter's hands right now, and the deadline for turning them in is next Thursday, so we're going to start examining who's in, who's out and who seems to be coming up fast in this crucial voting period, so stay with me as we start with the supporting acting races.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Given the essential precursor nominations- the Golden Globe, SAG and Critics Choice awards, there are actually four women who've gotten every single one. That's Patricia Arquette for Boyhood, Keira Knightley for The Imitation Game, Emma Stone for Birdman and Meryl Streep for Into the Woods. Normally, hitting those three groups means you're close to a shoo-in for a nomination, but there have been surprises in the past. These supporting nominations can often ride the coattails of the film's strength overall, and given that Boyhood, Birdman and Imitation Game are all thought to be very strong with the Academy, Streep's nomination here looks like the weakest.

On the other hand, she's Meryl Streep and to be quite honest with you, in my opinion that's the only reason she's getting any attention at all for thi films. Which is why I don't think she's impervious to a snub despite the precursor support. The movie has no critics awards love, not even for her alone, and Disney has often been a very weak campaigner for their films in the past (last year she had Harvey Weinstein, the Oscar whisperer behind her nod for August: Osage County). If Streep doesn't land a Bafta nomination next week (the last precursor and second in importance to SAG for acting nominations) I'd say there's every chance she could be overlooked this time for someone else.

In that case, who takes her place? Well, there are several options here. Jessica Chastain got a Globe and BFCA nom for A Most Violent Year, but the film is not considered a heavy Oscar contender and there's a question of how many voters will see it. Tilda Swinton is a real wild card choice for Snowpiercer, having gotten some obscure critical love for it, but again, faces the challenge of having her film seen (pure passion votes could help her though). Laura Dern, despite having not gotten any precursor support, still seems like a very viable option to me thanks to her friends in the Academy and the benefit of being in a film (Wild) that will get seen, because of Reese Witherspoon's impending lead nomination. Rene Russo could also surprise, given the fact that Nightcrawler is clearly very popular and probably getting more seen than some of these other films. And finally, there's Carmen Ejogo, a British actress who plays Coretta Scott King in Selma, a film thought to be a major contender- her only drawback is that she's completely unknown and with a smallish role.

So here's who I'm thinking gets in:

• Patricia Arquette, Boyhood
• Jessica Chastain, A Most Violent Year
• Keira Knightley, The Imitation Game
• Emma Stone, Birdman
• Meryl Streep, Into the Woods

In spite of my doubts on Streep, I'm still too chicken not to predict her right now. If she does miss the Bafta nod, I'd probably replace her with Dern in the final lineup. And for the win, I do think Arquette has it locked up already, I can't see anyone else winning.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

This category was seen as being very weak this year, but still seems to have four for sure nominations. That's Ethan Hawke, Edward Norton, Mark Ruffalo and J.K. Simmons. They've all hit the necessary precursors, and there's so little consensus on who else delivered an outstanding supporting male performance this year that I can't imagine any of them not making the cut.

But there does need to be five, and the nod is likely to come from these contenders. Tom Wilkinson has a flashy role as LBJ in Selma, and he's a respected veteran actor, there's a chance he'd get in. And then there's Robert Duvall for The Judge, which was a dreadfully reviewed movie and not a hit at the box office either, but as the respected longtime vet that he is, he did manage a Globe and SAG nod for the part, so frankly I think he could easily make the cut here based on his name alone. Outside shots are Josh Brolin for Inherent Vice (not a well-received film but occasionally scene-stealing actors from PTA movies can surprise), and Christoph Waltz in Big Eyes (also not a popular or warmly received movie, but Waltz is a two-time winner and Academy favorite with a big, flashy role and Weinstein behind the film).

Who I predict:

• Robert Duvall, The Judge
• Ethan Hawke, Boyhood
• Edward Norton, Birdman
• Mark Ruffalo, Foxcatcher
• J.K. Simmons, Whiplash

Yes, I'm playing it safe, although Wilkinson could easily sneak in, or Waltz. Like in Supporting Actress, Simmons has this thing locked up for Whiplash, the only chance at a possible upset is Norton in Birdman. Check back in tomorrow for the lead acting contenders.

Happy New Year

Welcome to 2015 everybody! To help ring in the new year, I'm recommending ten movies from one of my favorite genres- musicals. Musicals aren't for everyone, but if you love them, you really love them, and they're a perfect way to start fresh and put you in the right mood for a brand new 2015. Head to the Movies for Every Month page to read more about why musicals are a great way to ring in the new year, and click here to check out my ten musical picks (now with full trailers) for the month of January- it includes old classics, concert documentaries, modern day musicals...everything you need to start the year off right. Happy movie watching!

Movie of the Day: "Silver Linings Playbook" (2012)

On this New Year's Eve, I'm recommending a more recent film that takes place during the holiday season, culminating in a big New Year's Eve dance off for a happy ending. This movie stars Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence (in her Oscar-winning role) as two outsiders who appear a little bit crazy to other people, but find a kindred spirit in each other as they start to fall in love. This movie is a bit of a spin on an old-fashioned romantic comedy actually, or the closest thing they make to it nowadays. It also tries to say that we're all a little bit crazy on the inside, but it's a sweet, funny, well-acted romp- it doesn't really go deeper than that but sometimes that's enough. Happy New Year, everyone!

Trailer:

REVIEW: "The Theory of Everything" (2014) Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones. Dir. James Marsh

For what he's accomplished and the genius that he is, Stephen Hawking deserved better than a glossed over, surface level biopic that completely ignores his scientific achievements and the details of his work in favor of focusing on the relationship he had with his first wife- but what's worse, fails even to do that in any real depth or honesty.

The Theory of Everything is based on Jane Hawking's memoir about her marriage to Stephen, whom she stayed with for 27 years, an admirable achievement on her part to be sure. If the focus of this film takes things from her perspective and strives to really examine what it took to be the wife and for many years, sole caretaker of a man whose disease repeatedly took a toll on both their lives, there is an interesting story to tell in that material. This movie however, chooses to reveal none of the truth- only showing in brief glances and sighs from Jane how hard the struggle is to cope with the task she's undertaken. From this film you'd assume the only difficulty was in helping him to get dressed or feeding him at the table- never mind the bathing or the hardship in raising three children along with taking care of him, never mind the complete avoidance of the issue of their sex life (an important part of marriage sure to be affected by this, yet forbidden by Jane from being explored at all onscreen).

So what do we see in this relationship? Well, we see Jane and Stephen meet at Cambridge in the 1960's, we see them start dating, and then we see Stephen struck down by illness, which is explained as motor neuron disease and only given the briefest possible explanation for what causes it (none about how Stephen managed to outlive every doctor's life expectancy predictions). After that Jane decides to stay with him and the two go on with their lives, often in various montages set to flowery music about how years are passing by with virtually no conflict. According to this film, Jane and Stephen never fought, had one slight conflict regarding her belief in God and his atheism (a subject which is brought up once in the beginning and then recalled for a split second at the end), and parted happily from each other, even though Stephen essentially chooses to leave her for his nurse. Still, she's accepting and never angry. Does anyone believe this is the truth of any marriage?

It's not as if the film is terrible- the glowing cinematography gives everything a very polished hue that makes each shot look like it's being flooded by outer light, but in retrospect the look of the film only serves to enhance the feeling that this is really a fantasy you're watching. But credit where credit is due here- Eddie Redmayne takes the incredible challenge of playing Stephen Hawking and runs with it, delivering a very believable, grueling physical performance that mostly dominates the movie in spite of the extremely shallow script. And Felicity Jones is sturdy and shines as Jane, especially as the second half of the film allows her more to do when Stephen becomes immobilized and the story starts to feel much more like hers than his. But I never felt like I knew either of them as people in the slightest- no one in this film has a conversation that lasts longer than three to five lines of dialogue, and the sole characteristic for both of them is that early reference to her belief in God and his rejection of it (never mind the total glossing over of his work, the thing he's most famous for).

It's not so much the non-focus on his work that I object to- if this was Jane's story, than I can accept that this movie was intended to be the depiction of a unique marriage. But it failed at that by leaving out nearly every detail of what their lives must have really been in order to keep things as superficial and sunny as possible. Still, Redmayne really does deliver as Hawking, and the movie may be worth seeing just for him. But be prepared to leave with far more questions than answers about the life and marriage of Stephen Hawking, and that's a shame indeed.

* * 1/2

Movie of the Day: "The Poseidon Adventure" (1972)

The first of the big all star 1970's disaster movies just happens to take place on New Year's Eve, so it's a perfect pick for this week. The SS Poseidon is overturned by a tsunami at midnight, and now it's up to Gene Hackman as a rebellious preacher to lead the small band of survivors through the bottom of the upside down ship to safety. This movie is silly and somewhat campy of course, but every minute is enjoyable all the same, thanks to the cast that includes Ernest Borgnine, Roddy MacDowell, Red Buttons, Shelley Winters, Jack Albertson and Leslie Nielson (before his Naked Gun and Airplane resurgence) as the Captain. This movie kicked off a wave of imitators (The Towering Inferno, Earthquake, Airport, etc.) but my favorite in this is the fiery Hackman, who makes everything better by just appearing in it- even a silly disaster flick like this one. There's nothing like a pissed off Gene Hackman screaming orders at people who won't listen to him- after all, who'd be stupid enough to dismiss Popeye Doyle of all people?

Original 1972 Trailer:

REVIEW: "Mr. Turner" (2014) Timothy Spall, Marion Bailey. Dir. Mike Leigh

Mike Leigh's directorial style has always been characterized by his work with actors. The improvisational flourish of the interactions between the characters in his films is a marvel to behold, and one that has often led to stunning, naturalistic, unforgettable performances from so many of them. Who can forget Imelda Staunton's Vera Drake, Sally Hawkins in Happy-Go-Lucky or Lesley Manville in Another Year, just to name a few of the more recent ones. Leigh has shown a propensity for genius with actresses in particular, but here he elicits an astonishingly brave, unsentimental tour de force from veteran character actor Timothy Spall to easily rival any of those past performances.

Spall plays 19th century painter JMW Turner, one of England's most famous artists. Turner lived in a cold, damp and ugly time, but the beauty he observed and tried to capture in his work led to some of the world's most treasured paintings, still observed for public viewing, as he bequeathed his work to the British government upon his death. Turner sacrificed everything for his art- personal relationships and the treatment of other people were of no importance to the man, as is carefully observed in this film, which is a slow burn, yet filled with breathtaking detail across every frame. Rarely does a period piece evoke the time in which it was set so specifically- it seems by design that one can see all the trappings of how harsh life could be in 1800's England, yet the costumes, production design and intensely gorgeous cinematography (the very best I've seen this year) reproduce the time as it may well have existed in Turner's paintings.

As absorbing as the film is, the challenge is to embrace Spall's characterization of Turner himself- the man as portrayed in this film is a wheezing, sickly, snorting, grunting, utterly repulsive individual, and Spall goes full on with the unappealing physical mannerisms of the performance. The intention is clearly to contrast the lack of beauty in the man himself with what he was able to wring forth from the world around him, and the movie is a ringing success depending on how much you're able to take in. For me, the film is so stirring and beautiful that I could mostly get past the uninviting nature of Turner and marvel at the world around him, but it takes some getting used to, especially as you're unable to hear much of his dialogue in the face of all that grunting and snorting (he comes across almost literally as a squealing pig). You can't help but admire Spall though for going all in with it- it's undoubtedly the best performance of his career.

As with most Leigh films, the cast is made up of sensational character actors in support of Spall, including Marion Bailey as the wise-to-it-all innkeeper he falls for, and the sickly and suffering Dorothy Atkinson as his maid, whom he treats as his sexual property when not ignoring her entirely. Both women, along with several of the various fellow painters and patrons he comes in contact with give the film a vibrant sense of overflowing life around the edges- this is a fully realized world we feel we're inhabiting. With a masterly sense of control and perfectly paced rhythm, both with actors and with atmosphere, Mike Leigh seems to have reached the pinnacle of his career as a director with Mr. Turner. I hope the Academy is paying attention.

* * * 1/2

Movie of the Day: "Trading Places" (1983)

It's time for some New Year's movies to help ring in 2015 everybody! We're starting with this classic Eddie Murphy comedy from his rising star days, and it's a perfect example of the kind of wisecracking charisma that made him such a huge star at such a young age. Dan Aykroyd and Murphy are the unwitting subjects of a bet by the callous millionaire Duke Brothers (old Hollywood vets Don Ameche and Ralph Bellamy) to see if they can turn street hustler Eddie into a successful stock broker and snooty rich guy Aykroyd into a cheap crook by New Year's Eve. John Landis directed this hilarious story that spins The Prince and the Pauper on its head, and despite how very, very '80's the message is in this Reagan-era film (literally nothing in the world matters or can make you happy except money) it still holds up today...for the most part. There are a few homophobic and racially insensitive jokes that would never make it into a movie now, but movies like nothing else reflect the cultural values of the time in which they were made, don't they?

Original 1983 Trailer:

BOX OFFICE 12/26-12/28: 'Hobbit' Tops a Busy Christmas Weekend

The Hobbit outshone the new releases this holiday weekend, but it was good news all around for the Christmas box office, as Disney's Into the Woods and Universal's Unbroken both defied expectations and came in very strong, neck and neck since opening on Thursday, Christmas Day. The Battle of the Five Armies grossed $41 million over the weekend, a slim 24% drop since last week, making it on track to at least match the last movie's $258 million total.

Meanwhile, Unbroken managed to overcome the bad reviews to earn $31 million over the weekend and $47 million since Christmas, which was way above expectations for the WWII drama. It did come with a hardcore fanbase, since the book by Seabiscuit author Laura Hillenbrand has been on the bestseller list for years, and as always with these kinds of films, there's a built-in audience of conservative Christian moviegoers (think Passion of the Christ fans). But Into the Woods was no slouch this weekend either, making $31 million and $46 million since Thursday, right behind Unbroken and in line with Les Miserables's debut two years ago. It did receive a middling "B" Cinemascore though, so it's uncertain how high it can climb in the end. The rest of the top six was filled out by Night at the Museum, Annie and The Hunger Games, which all received the usual holiday boost.

Top 5:

1. The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies- $41.4 million
2. Unbroken- $31.7 million
3. Into the Woods- $31 million
4. Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb- $20.6 million
5. Annie- $16.6 million

In other news, The Imitation Game expanded to 747 theaters and earned a stellar $7.9 million, cracking its way into the top ten and tracking significantly ahead of The King's Speech at this point four years ago (and with Oscar nominations still to come). Clint Eastwood's American Sniper had a sensational opening in limited release, earning a scorching $152k per screen average on 4 screens, for the second biggest debut of the year, so that can be expected to be big hit when it platforms out. Selma opened at 19 locations for a solid PTA at $31k, but it will expand wider on January 9th, hopefully with awards buzz to increase the hype. Finally, The Gambler and Big Eyes both disappointed in wide release, while The Interview (you may have heard something about that one last week) opened in 331 theaters for $2 million total since Christmas, but it's also available for rent on Youtube and Xbox live. Whew. Well, that's it for this year folks. Next week there's the limited opening of the final 2014 release A Most Violent Year, but for the next month it will be all Oscar hopefuls trying to make money off awards hype as the various end of year ceremonies begin to roll out. Happy New Year everyone!

REVIEW: "The Imitation Game" (2014) Benedict Cumberbatch, Keira Knightley. Dir. Morten Tyldum

The story of Alan Turing is criminally unknown history for much of the world- especially for a figure who accomplished so much in his short life, and was nearly singlehandedly responsible for the modern world that we live in today. The world of labtops, cell phones, the entire digital age that encompasses so much of our lives. We take it for granted, but it all had to start somewhere, didn't it? Well, in The Imitation Game, we're shown the birth of that technology, and the man responsible for creating it, for having the wild imagination to dream it up...along with the horrifyingly ungrateful and uncelebrated manner in which he was treated by his own country, and essentially erased from the history books until very recently, when he was given an official pardon by the Queen in 2013.

The story is amazing enough on its own, but in this movie it's given a supremely polished and incredibly well acted telling, starting with Sherlock's Benedict Cumberbatch as the genius himself. A collection of tics and verbal barbs that go hand in hand with his utter disregard for most people, Cumberbatch carries the screen with a radiant charisma, even playing a character that's supposed to repel most of his fellow humans. Not so for the audience, as we buy him instantly in this role and are entertained by his personality "problems," even as others in the film label him an irascible genius. The screenplay by Graham Moore (based on the book Alan Turing: The Enigma by Andrew Hodges) deftly moves back and forth between three different time periods, showing us Turing's 1951 arrest and interrogation for "indecency," juxtaposed with his top secret government job during the war, and his early days as a schoolboy where he experienced the one, most important personal relationship of his life.

The way the film balances these different time frames, gradually revealing the secrets behind Turing's life is so slick and edited so seamlessly that it makes it look quite easy. But in fact it's much more difficult to form a story together in a coherent way when you're juggling narration, the revelation of a personal mystery, and the center of the film which focuses on the code-breaking that Turing and a group of colleagues did during the war, a classified activity that eventually helped save millions of lives during WWII. This section of the film is the most exciting, which is an accomplishment of its own, as watching an activity as tedious as code breaking might not easily lend itself to suspenseful cinema.

But the top secret mission at Bletchley Park is in fact where all the biggest thrills took place. Assigned to crack the German enigma code for the Allies, it was here that Turing churned away for years, building what would ultimately become the world's first computer- it sends a chill down your spine to see it finally "click" for the first time, knowing what couldn't be known in 1942- what this invention would lead the world to become, aside from what it did for the war effort. It's also here where Alan befriends another outsider in the group, a woman named Joan Clarke (Keira Knightley at her feisty best), the only woman on the team and one who understands, like him, what it is to be unappreciated for your differences. Their relationship (they were briefly engaged) is touching, and the interaction between the various code breakers (including Matthew Goode, Allen Leech, and Mark Strong as the head of the newly formed MI6) is filled with a lot more humor that you might expect, making the overall movie a rollicking entertainment for general audiences.

The end of the film reveals that despite Turing and his colleagues' ultimate success in cracking Enigma, for all his heroic achievements, what brought about his downfall was the arrest for soliciting a prostitute in 1951. Homosexuality was illegal in Britain at the time, and Turing was given a choice- chemical castration or a prison sentence. Choosing the former, the effects ultimately ruined his life, and he committed suicide in 1954, thus giving the British government the easy option of choosing to bury his life's work and give short shrift to the monumental achievements of a man who was gone far too soon. If I had a complaint about this film, which I enjoyed nearly every minute of, it may be that it goes too easy on the officials who destroyed Turing's life in the end, although it does illuminate how incredibly stupid and pointless societal prejudices (against gays, against women) can rob us of the brilliant minds and important works they can produce for this world. How much have we sacrificed in the persecution of those who were outcast for not conforming to society's norms? That question haunts you, but The Imitation Game is far more of a celebration of Turing's achievements than a rumination on his bitter end, and for a world that knows next to nothing about who this man was, I'd say it's a story worth telling to as many people as possible.

* * * 1/2