Meryl as Margaret

Check out this trailer from the forthcoming Margaret Thatcher biopic. I swear, there is no one better than Meryl.

The Tree of Life: A Mixed Bag

There are moments during Terrance Malick's "The Tree of Life" when an editor's hard hand would be quite welcome. Long stretches where the principal actors in this drama make no appearance. There are volcanoes and even two dinosaurs. And the point of this meandering?Malick's attempt at contemplating the Divine? Our connection to a planet and universe that is in constant states of change, of evolution? Who the hell cares. The truth is if this 40-minute stretch of nothing (God, it felt longer) were removed, "The Tree of Life" would be a much better film.

I suppose every artist struggles with how to fully indulge in his craft while keeping it accessible. For what good is art if people walk away from the viewing or the reading shaking their heads because the only thing they've witnessed is something that comes across as an artist engaged in the act of auto-fellatio?

Don't get me wrong: there are moments of genius in "The Tree of Life." Jessica Chastain and Bratt Pitt are a wonderfully bruised Mr. and Mrs. O'Brien. Most of what she says is expressed in her visage, open and raw. He does most of his talking in hard barks or with his hands, as when he's lunging across the table in a rage to quiet an insulate child. The film, however, belongs to Hunter McCracken, who plays Young Jack (Sean Penn, not doing much in this movie, is Adult Jack).

When the camera swoops into the interior lives of the O'Briens, "The Tree of Life" is hauntingly brilliant, full of truth and vigor. But then Malick too often moves away from the people in favor of silly CGI graphics and screen shots that look like they were taken out of "Nature" or "National Geographic."

NYT doesn't like 'Thor,' but I'll see it anyway.

The New York Times' review of Thor is so vicious it borders on genius.

Check out these passages:

"Mr. Branagh has not failed to make an interesting, lively, emotionally satisfying superhero movie, because there is no evidence that he (or the gaggle of credited screenwriters, or Paramount, the sponsoring studio) ever intended to make any such thing."

"If you can’t remember what you saw, then there’s no harm in seeing it again. There is no reason to go to this movie, which might be another way of saying there’s no reason not to. Something like that seems to be the logic behind 'Thor,' and as a business plan it’s probably foolproof."

I get the sense this reviewer, A.O. Scott, tends not to like movies like this one, and that a film based on a comic books is rather beneath him. He says in his rebuke of Thor that those who liked Iron Man, for example, thought it was better than it actually was.

I say: Bruh, get over yourself. It's a move based on a comic book! You don't go to see Thor to learn greater truths about the human condition. You watch it to see shit blow up.

Must See: HBO's 'Mildred Pierce'

I've not written much in this space since the Oscars. Partly because the Oscars were so predictable and boring, but also because there's not been much to say. I've not been to the movies in quite some time and apart from Southland, Big Love, and, well, nothing else, there's not been much in terms of serious drama on television.

Thank God for HBO. The cable network will deliver a powerhouse five-part miniseries starring Academy Award-winning actress Kate Winslet (The Reader): Mildred Pierce. The miniseries premieres Sunday at 9 p.m.

If the LA Times' review is true, Winslet has bypassed that leading lady Oscar trend of taking a dud role for the paycheck (Halle Berry does Catwoman after winning an Oscar, Charlize Theron does Aeon Flux? WTF!). Excerpt from the review: "Winslet, grim and unsmiling for almost the entire 5½ hours, is determined to create a woman driven by judgmental internal voices so loud you can almost hear them; her only sources of pleasure are the emotionally sadomasochistic relationship with her daughter and occasional bursts of hot but manic sex with men she doesn't much respect."

Winslet never got enough credit for her work in Revolutionary Road. In that film, she showed us the depths she could travel, the way she could carry pain and frustration and desperation on her visage. I imagine she'll take that craft to a new level in Mildred Pierce.

Oscars....

Perhaps Melissa Leo may not get the Oscar. Perhaps, but I don't believe this.

Colin Firth will win his Oscar. This I know for sure. As will Natalie Portman and Christian Bale.

And, yes, King's Speech will take best picture. No question.

Tonight isn't about surprises of any kind. It's instead about Hollywood and us celebrating a phenominal year of films. A unexpected good year at the movies.

Where a little bit of genre went beyond convention to produce powerful art (Black Swan), and where a familiar face made us forget, for a moment, the name Darcy and appreciate simply the genius of his craft (Firth).

Where story -- narration that reveals the interior lives of complex folk -- seemed to matter more than blockbusters or pretention.

'King's Speech' Leads Oscar Race, Will Likely Take the Prize

The producers of "The King's Speech" should perhaps begin preparing their speeches for the February 27th Oscar telecast. Their movie is the confirmed front runner in what has been something of a horse race between what was one of the year's other favorite films, "Social Network."

At the end of this morning's announcement of nominations for the 83rd Annual Academy Awards, the little British film about stammering King George VI had nabbed 12 nominations, including those for best picture, best director (Tom Hooper), best supporting actress (Helena Bonham Carter), best supporting actor (Geoffrey Rush) and best actor (Colin Firth).

"Social Network" got the Golden Globe and many of the critics awards earlier in the season. But a win for "Speech" at the Producer's Guild last week all but solidified its place as the film to beat come Feb. 27. If history serves as an indicator, however, the likelihood that this British import will be dethroned is slim. In the last 20 years, the Producer's Guild and the Academy have agreed on the best picture selection all but seven times. And since 2007s "No Country for Old Men," they've not wavered.

With that said, I expect not many surprises come Oscar night.

The top prizes will go like this:

Firth should and will win the Oscar for best picture.

Natalie Portman ("Black Swan") should and will win the Oscar for best actress.

Melissa Leo ("The Fighter") will win the Oscar for supporting actress, though this award should perhaps go to her co-star Amy Adams.

And Christian Bale ("The Fighter") should and will win for supporting actor.

The directing award will go to David Fincher for "Social Network."

'King's Speech' on it's way to best picture Oscar?

"King's Speech" nabbed the top prize at the Producers Guild Awards this weekend, turning the tide in a film season that seemed all but assured to crown "Social Network" on Oscar night.

I'm relieved at this. While I enjoyed "Social Network," it lacked a depth of feeling, real people and heart. And what was up with the Asian fetishism!

I believe firmly that "Black Swan" and "The Fighter" were the year's finest films. But "Speech" is also very good -- brilliant acting, writing, directing, cinematography. A meaty film with the snoot factor to boot.