Now that the Oscars are done with, we hit a nice lull in the award season drama. It's time to check in with the prediction results. Hopefully you did well. This year My predictions were pretty spot on with some notable exceptions. For example, "The Hurt Locker" won best original screenplay? It may have been put together well, but to say that it was better written than "Inglourious Basterds" is kind of insulting to the art of screenwriting. I mean, have you seen the dialogue in that movie? Also, I am bummed that "Up in the Air" didn't win anything. It's still one of my favorite movies from last year. That and "The Brothers Bloom." Oh well, 10 points overall isn't awful.

My predictions are in italics and actual winners are in bold.

Best Supporting Actor:

• Matt Damon in "Invictus" 
• Woody Harrelson in "The Messenger" 
• Christopher Plummer in "The Last Station"
• Stanley Tucci in "The Lovely Bones" 
• Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds" 

Best Supporting Actress:

• Penélope Cruz in "Nine"
• Vera Farmiga in "Up in the Air"
• Maggie Gyllenhaal in "Crazy Heart"
• Anna Kendrick in "Up in the Air" 
• Mo'Nique in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"

Best Adapted Screenplay: 

• "District 9"
• "An Education"
• "In the Loop"
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• "Up in the Air"

Best Original Screenplay: 

• "The Hurt Locker"
• "Inglourious Basterds"
• "The Messenger"
• "A Serious Man"
• "Up"

Best Animated Film:

• "Coraline"
• "Fantastic Mr. Fox"
• "The Princess and the Frog"
• "The Secret of Kells"
• "Up"

Best Actor:

• Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart"
• George Clooney in "Up in the Air"
• Coin Firth in "A Single Man"
• Morgan Freeman in "Invictus"
• Jeremy Renner in "The Hurt Locker"

Best Actress:

• Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side"
• Helen Mirren in "The Last Station"
• Carey Mulligan in "An Education"
• Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"

Best Director:

• James Cameron- "Avatar"
• Kathryn Bigelow- "The Hurt Locker"
• Quentin Tarantino- "Inglourious Basterds"
• Lee Daniels- "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• Jason Reitman- "Up in the Air"

Best Picture:

• "Avatar"
• "The Blind Side"
• "District 9"
• "An Education"
• "The Hurt Locker"
• "Inglourious Basterds"
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• "A Serious Man"
• "Up"
• "Up in the Air"  

Yes! It's that time of year! We all get to put on our analysts hats and try to see who will win what at the Oscars. This is a game I've been playing on my blog ever since it started. Here's how it works. For the following categories, see if you can predict the winner. Simple. You get a point for every right answer, 2 points for best actor/actress/director, and 3 points for best picture. Put your predictions in the comments and we'll see who wins. Let the guessing begin!

My choices are in italics.

Best Supporting Actor:

• Matt Damon in "Invictus" 
• Woody Harrelson in "The Messenger" 
• Christopher Plummer in "The Last Station"
• Stanley Tucci in "The Lovely Bones" 
• Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds" 

Best Supporting Actress:

• Penélope Cruz in "Nine"
• Vera Farmiga in "Up in the Air"
• Maggie Gyllenhaal in "Crazy Heart"
• Anna Kendrick in "Up in the Air" 
• Mo'Nique in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"

Best Adapted Screenplay: 

• "District 9"
• "An Education"
• "In the Loop"
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• "Up in the Air"

Best Original Screenplay: 

• "The Hurt Locker"
• "Inglourious Basterds"
• "The Messenger"
• "A Serious Man"
• "Up"

Best Animated Film:

• "Coraline"
• "Fantastic Mr. Fox"
• "The Princess and the Frog"
• "The Secret of Kells"
• "Up"

Best Actor:

• Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart"
• George Clooney in "Up in the Air"
• Coin Firth in "A Single Man"
• Morgan Freeman in "Invictus"
• Jeremy Renner in "The Hurt Locker"

Best Actress:

• Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side"
• Helen Mirren in "The Last Station"
• Carey Mulligan in "An Education"
• Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"

Best Director:

• James Cameron- "Avatar"
• Kathryn Bigelow- "The Hurt Locker"
• Quentin Tarantino- "Inglourious Basterds"
• Lee Daniels- "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• Jason Reitman- "Up in the Air"

Best Picture:

• "Avatar"
• "The Blind Side"
• "District 9"
• "An Education"
• "The Hurt Locker"
• "Inglourious Basterds"
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• "A Serious Man"
• "Up"
• "Up in the Air"  

It's that time of the year. Yes, Oscar season. Next week we'll do the annual guessing game, but for now, let's talk specifics. I've been making it my mission to watch as many of the best picture nominations as I can (and 8 so far makes for a pretty good start). The latest romp down best picture lane has been The Hurt Locker. This movie had one big hurdle to get over for me. It's a war movie. It's not that I don't enjoy a good war movie (like We Were Soldiers), but I find that it can be hard to walk the balance between the gruesomeness of war, actual character development beyond heroism, and just plain violence for the sake of violence. So how does The Hurt Locker do in trying to find the balance?

First, The Hurt Locker is visually stunning. From the opening sequence to the end, there are shots that will make you long to be in the desert. There are cool stylistic shots that don't detract from the overall story and everything is shown with a purpose. Never before has war looked so good.

Never before has war also looked so human. One of the biggest strengths about this film is the depth of all the characters and the relationships between them. The movie may start out as your traditional suspense/action movie, but it gets into much, much more. Watching James (Jeremy Renner) go from cocky EOD to humble and caring human being is a wonderful arc. Here's one great example. Amidst all of the bomb defusing, James develops a growing relationship with one of the local kids who sells pirated DVD's to support his family. They talk, laugh, and play soccer together. This is the type of scene you wouldn't find in your normal war movie.

It is this human element that The Hurt Locker gets so right. War movies are often guilty of having the strong and brave hero or unstoppable force, but in this film, the people are just regular people. Even though James has credentials of defusing over 800 bombs in his life, he is portrayed as someone who is just like anyone else. He's got flaws, he has struggles, but it doesn't stop him from doing his job.

While we're taking about Renner, it should stand to mention that he did a bang up job in this movie. For real, his performance of William James was great. Gritty and realistic, strong yet supportive, deep and complex, it's everything a character should be. But not only does he play it well, but he makes you believe it.

There are a lot of things this movie brings up for discussion. How human can someone actually be in war? When does it get to the point where your humanity detracts from being the best you can be at doing your job in the military? What are the lasting effects of thinking you could die every day? How attached can someone get to somebody else knowing that they could die right before your eyes? The questions could go on and on, but there is definitely enough fodder to chew on.

The Hurt Locker is a smart war movie for this generation. I highly recommend you go check it out. 5 out of 5.

Yeah. Let the Bodies Hit the Floor is not the subtitle for this movie, but if you ask me, that's what it should be called. It's only because someone dies in this movie every 15 minutes. Okay, that might not be true, but it sure feels like it. Seriously. People die in this movie. A lot. But that should come as no surprise right? After all, Inglourious Basterds is a Nazi period movie. Isn't that the staple of this genre?

That very stereotype is the very reason that I put off seeing this movie. I have to admit, I don't have a penchant for holocaust period films. In fact, they always rub me the wrong way. Sure, you might think that sounds harsh, but I have a hard time connecting with them. Maybe I'm too jaded from years of being desensitized from the horrors of the holocaust. Don't get me wrong, it is a terrible thing, but for some reason, films in this period don't click for me.

But Inglourious Basterds is not your typical holocaust film, more or less your typical film for that matter. I should have given Quentin Tarantino more credit than that. Inglourious Basterds takes place in an alternate history. This makes the stakes very real. Anyone can die in this universe, including Hitler himself. The movie, in a nutshell, is about a plot to take down Hitler. But there is a lot more going on in this film than that.

In fact, this movie loves tangents and breaking off from the main plot. Whole chapters are devoted to exploring this alternate history, having nothing to do with the main plot per se. This is not a bad thing, and in fact, it does a great job of helping make the characters rich and dynamic.

With that said, the performances in this movie are kind of hit and miss. It's unfortunate to say that Brad Pitt is the low point of this movie. I don't think he was a good fit for the role that he played and it could have been better served by having someone with less star power play that part. I think it honestly would have made the character stand out more. But what does stand out from this film is Christoph Waltz. For playing a Nazi, he makes the character likable and you find yourself growing attached. I'm rooting for the guy come Oscar season because he really did a bang up job.

It's important to keep in mind that this is a Quentin Tarantino movie and with that comes all of the usual stylistic choices. Some people are driven mad by these things and others love them. I found them to be a bit distracting from the film as a whole. In a movie like Kill Bill, the off of the wall stylistic choices made sense, but in Inglourious Basterds, they seem almost forced. It's like the stylish bits were in there because Quentin is obligated to have them.

The story was very interesting and pretty intense considering that most of the movie is just large pieces of conversation. There's a subtle tension that exists in every conversation and it is something that is highlighted well. This movie is a definite slow burn, but I feel like the slow burn almost wasn't worth it in this case. The pay off didn't really work for me, but I can understand that if you enjoyed the ending, that the rest of the movie would make it feel worth it.

As Oscar season comes around, I can see why people are putting it on their best picture list, but there were still better movies out there this year. It's still a pretty decent watch; it just didn't connect with me. I'm giving it a 4 out of 5.

Sometimes adaptations of plays to film just don't make sense. For some, like Frost/Nixon, it ends up being a wonderful piece of cinema. For others, the transition is less than pleasant. Doubt is not a movie that suffered from the transition, but the whole time you are watching it you can't help but think to yourself, "Did I just get tricked into watching a play in my living room?"

There's something odd about Doubt. Maybe it's the amount of inaction or maybe it's the fact that everything seems so structured, but Doubt has a hard time shaking it's dramatic roots. Every scene seems like it was literally hijacked from the stage and brought onto the screen. This adaptation seems like more of a carbon copy of what the play was.

This isn't entirely a bad thing. Doubt is still a wonderful story that asks some very important questions about life. To be honest I did find it a bit slow at times. However, the acting in this movie is part of what makes it such a compelling watch. Phillip Seymour Hoffman does a fantastic job as a charismatic yet dubious figure while Meryl Streep pulls off the cold and wicked nun role very well. Plus, Amy Adams is extremely convincing as a young and naive novice nun.

One of the greatest aspects of this movie is the fact that the real truth is never revealed in the movie. You don't walk away knowing exactly what happened. Normally, this would be a pretty big downfall for a film, but in Doubt it further accentuates the point. How can you be sure of something and when do you let faith take over? What is the role of doubt in our beliefs and what do you do when there is no evidence to prove your convictions? Is the only way to have knowledge through empirical truth?

This is a movie worth watching, but it is best suited to be discussed with someone immediately after watching. While not the most entertaining watch, it does provide a lot of material to think about. And isn't that half of the battle for a good film? 4 out of 5.