Jake Gittes

David O. Russell - Joy Danny Boyle - Steve Jobs Steven Spielberg - Bridge of Spies Alejandro G. Inarritu - The Revenant Quentin Tarantino - The Hateful Eight Yawn. Though one or two or three of them could easily fall out, who knows at this stage.

Rooney Mara - Carol Jennifer Lawrence - Joy Julianne Moore - Freeheld Charlotte Rampling - 45 Years Meryl Streep - Ricki and the Flash Could see: Brie Larson - Room Emily Blunt - Sicario Naomi Watts - Demolition Marion Cotillard - Macbeth Carey Mulligan - Suffragette Rachel Weisz - The Light Between Oceans

Bradley Cooper - Joy Seth Rogen - Steve Jobs Tom Hardy - The Revenant Mark Rylance - Bridge of Spies Walton Goggins - The Hateful Eight Could easily see: Robert De Niro - Joy Tim Roth - The Hateful Eight Bruce Dern - The Hateful Eight Samuel L. Jackson - The Hateful Eight Ken Watanabe - Sea of Trees

Cate Blanchett - Carol Ellen Page - Freeheld Kate Winslet - Steve Jobs Jennifer Jason Leigh - The Hateful Eight Alicia Vikander - The Light Between Oceans

Probably would've used a fake baby anyway if the real baby messed up more than two takes. Clint ain't got no time for that shit.

A good episode of a cop show starring Kevin Bacon and Laurence Fishburne stuck inside of a dull, portentous, heavy-handed slog filled with forced drama, half-baked motivations, barely-there supporting characters, eyeroll-inducing coincidences, lifeless visuals and INTENSE facial expressions. Not as bad as Million Dollar Baby but not too far from it. Dire enough that I feel like downing a bottle of Jack Daniels all by myself now.

Rewatched this over the weekend. Pretty excellent, though not as brilliant as I remembered it being - it keeps beating you over the head with its main message, and sometimes feels more like a statement than a movie; that's not an inherently bad thing, but the movie felt almost too constructed to me, built entirely around its core idea, and that has a side effect of coming off as artificial. So while I appreciated the commentary on violence itself, the more compelling thing for me was the exploration of how the legends of the Old West were gradually shaped out of tales of completely unheroic drunkards shooting people. It's a theme present in almost every scene but I never felt like it was forced on me, even though English Bob's whole function is to add to that theme and then get out. It pays off in the end, when you realize that Munny, despite what is repeatedly said of him, isn't evil incarnate who "killed women and children and just about everything that walks or crawls", just like that prostitute wasn't mutilated to an absurd extent like everyone believes her to be. He was much more likely just a drunk asshole who was pretty good with a gun and had luck on his side, but time and talk transformed him into a feared legend. The commentary on heroes and villains - Munny certainly isn't the former and Little Bill is not exactly the latter, and the story slyly forces you to confront that while unfolding in an entirely straightforward way - is also well done. Hackman gives the standout performance, especially in the scene where he dares Beauchamp to shoot him. (That whole sequence might be my favorite in the film, and it functions like a brilliant short film). The cinematography and production design are both stunning, and the dialogue feels natural and striking whenever it isn't used to bluntly express the Themes. ("I'll see you in hell, William Munny". - "Yeah". Chills right there.) Overall, it's imperfect but still probably my favorite Eastwood so far behind HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER. That's pretty far from the point of the movie. Yeah, he does attempt to redeem himself, and stopping drinking and killing and staying faithful to his dead wife is as good a way of doing that as any, considering above all when and where the movie is set. Except what the ending clearly says is that he can't redeem himself - he's drawn back to killing like a drunk to a bottle - and in the final scenes, Eastwood underlines both the primal appeal of violence - what draws men to it no matter how far they attempt to get away from it - and its ugliness. In a lot of ways it's a much more complex film than you seem to be giving it credit for. (So is Eastwood himself, for that matter - he's not the guy you can just put into a "conservative" box and move on).

Still unsure what to think about this. The labyrinthine plot doesn't bother me and obviously should be this way, but I was thrown off by how little PTA does cinematically. I wasn't expecting a lush period piece on the level of Boogie Nights, but a lot of the diaogue scenes here seem downright lazy - all boring medium shots, people being framed against simple white walls... I know PTA isn't a lazy filmmaker, and he himself shows what he's capable of in that wonderful flashback with Shasta, so I can only conclude the visual blandness is his way to convey the death of the '60s and counterculture, which the film is essentially about. Even then, there are sizable chunks of the film which simply aren't interesting to watch from a cinematic standpoint, which wasn't a problem with, say, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas to which Inherent Vice is indebted in its core ideas. There's also much less comedy - and specifically visual comedy - in the film than PTA himself has promised, with most of the laughs - and they are more often just chuckles - coming from the interactions' absurdity. All that said, Phoenix, Brolin and Waterston all do first-rate work here, and the soundtrack choices are inspired. More importantly, the whole thing still more or less accomplishes the goal of feeling like one big smoky haze of a movie, which led me to wonder if it was just the dialogue and the performances and the editing, and whether Anderson even needed any more overt eccentricity and visual flourishes to add to the feeling. So that's a dilemma I hope a second viewing will solve. Another dilemma is that while I found all the characters enjoyable and was glad to hang out with them, I recognized by the end that I didn't really care about what happened to any of them, which made me wonder if I already got everything PTA is saying here (that the death of the '60s was basically the result of a vast conspiracy linking everyone to everyone else and turning the cops against the hippies) and a second viewing wouldn't reveal anything new. Anyway, it's a fascinating film, but for now not one of my favorites of 2014 or one of my PTA favorites.

Got the feeling John Williams might just win for Star Wars if the score is at least on the level of what he did on the prequels. He hasn't won in 22 years and he's turning 83 this year.

I didn't think I'd be interested in this, but with Villeneuve on board I am. And he better bring in Roger Deakins to shoot it.

I love you, Sheriff Truman.

Bring back Michael Biehn with no explanation.

One of those films I enjoyed back when they came out but most likely wouldn't now.

FAN-TAS-TIC FOUR FAN-TAS-TIC FOUR FAN-TAS-TIC FOUR FAN-TAS-TIC FOUR

It was pretty weak, but that score would be top 3 material in any year, imo. 2010 was the last year I can remember with an abundance of great scores.

The Hateful Eight soundtrack is bound to have some great stuff as usual for QT. I don't even know about original scores. But hey last year's best score (Under the Skin) I had no idea about before I saw the movie, so I hope to be surprised again this year. Williams going back to SW and Philip Glass doing FF are the only things that interest me as far as blockbusters are concerned.

Rename it Black Dynamite 2, get Michael Jai White back, and I'm on board

Well, that's 140 minutes of your life you'll never get back.

I wouldn't say it needs to be decoded, it's just a confused rant of a movie that can't even decide exactly what it wants to say.

One of the best hangout movies out there, as well a sharp, honest and poignant drama that effortlessly maintains a balance between romanticizing the past and being critical of it and the people who lived through it. Levinson takes his time, but he uses it wisely in order to open up the characters and give all of them their flaws and virtues (although if there was anyone who I felt could have used another scene or two, it was Paul Reiser) and deliver some well-earned surprises like the incredibly joyous dancing scene near the end. And what an ensemble. All the guys rocked it (Rourke being the standout), and Ellen Barkin broke my heart.

Only saw this once when it came out, but I remember Kidman, Eckhart and Teller all giving first-rate performances in challenging roles.

One of my favorites, a wonderful mix of comedy and drama. It says it all that this is an extremely rare romantic film that actually earns the shot of one character running desperately for the other in the last moment. (It helps that Wilder follows it with a great joke - the champagne bottle - and a perfect closing line, and also doesn't have the characters kiss and fall all over each other). Shirley MacLaine in this movie is one of my all-time biggest cinematic crushes.

Laughably overwrought in every way.

You're both wrong because obviously ______ fucking ______ gave the best performance ever in ______ . You can't argue with that.