<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>Roger Ebert&apos;s Journal</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2008-07-19:/ebert//103</id>
    <updated>2010-02-07T01:11:16Z</updated>
    
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Pro 4.261</generator>

<entry>
    <title>I met a character from Dickens</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/02/i_lived_in_dickens_london.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31807</id>

    <published>2010-02-05T23:56:32Z</published>
    <updated>2010-02-07T01:11:16Z</updated>

    <summary>I found a time capsule within which  the eccentricity and charm of an earlier time was still preserved. It was called the Eyrie Mansion. </summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="My Old Gang" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="People" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/street sign-17385.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/street sign-17385.html','popup','width=384,height=369,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/street sign-thumb-220x211-17385.jpg" width="220" height="211" alt="street sign.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Oh, no. No. No. This cannot be. They're tearing down 22 Jermyn Street in London. The whole block is going. Bates' Hat Shop, Trumper's the Barber, Getti the Italian restaurant, the Jermyn Street Theater, Sergio's Cafe, the lot. Jermyn Street was <i>my</i> street in London. <i>My</i> neighborhood. </p>

<p>There, on a corner near the Lower Regent Street end, I found a time capsule within which  the eccentricity and charm of an earlier time was still preserved. It was called the Eyrie Mansion. When I stayed there I considered myself to be living there. I always wanted to live in London, and this was the closest I ever got.</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote> Many years ago I was in London and unhappily staying in a hotel room so small they had to store my empty luggage elsewhere on the premises. I could sit on the bed and rest my forehead against the wall opposite. Fed up, I walked out one fine Sunday morning to find a better hotel, but not an expensive one.  

<p><br />
Nostalgically I returned to Russell Square, where I had gone on my first visit to the great city in 1961, steered by <i>Europe on $5 a Day.</i> At that time I found a room and full English breakfast for £2.50 a night. You might think it a shabby hovel. I was deliriously happy. I stayed up half the night writing a letter to Edna O'Brien, an Irish novelist I had a crush on. '"Here I am in a cheap hotel near Russell Square," I wrote, "writing this letter in the middle of the night."  Those words alone would convince her of my romantic genius. Alas, that long-ago hotel had been replaced by a monstrosity. At a loss about where to look next, I recalled that Suzanne Craig, a Chicago friend of mine, once informed me, "If you like London so much, you should stay at the Eyrie Mansion in Jermyn Street."</p>

<p>	"A haunted house?"</p>

<p>	"No, stupid. Spelled like an eagle's nest. And Jermyn isn't spelled like the country, either."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/eros-17446.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/eros-17446.html','popup','width=600,height=800,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/eros-thumb-280x373-17446.jpg" width="280" height="373" alt="eros.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I took the tube from Russell Square to Piccadilly, and surfaced to find back-packers sprawled on the steps of Eros, still asleep after their Saturday night revels. One block down Regent and right on Jermyn and I found a small sign over the sidewalk above a doorway. It opened upon a marble corridor pointing me to a man who regarded me from eyes in a scarred face. The gatekeeper of the Eyrie. He disappeared and when I drew abreast I found he was now behind a wooden counter protecting an old-fashioned switchboard, a thick Registration ledger, and a wall of pigeon-holes.</p>

<p>	"How may I help you, sir?"</p>

<p>	"Is this...a hotel?"</p>

<p>	"Since 1685, I believe. And you require a room?" He spoke in a Spanish accent. </p>

<p>	"I'd...how much are your rates?"</p>

<p>	He consulted a card tacked to the wall.</p>

<p>	"For you, sir, £35. That includes full English breakfast, parlor and bedroom, own gas fire and maid.  Bath en suite."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hallway-17382.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hallway-17382.html','popup','width=276,height=360,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hallway-thumb-260x339-17382.jpg" width="260" height="339" alt="hallway.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	The rate was a third of what I was paying. I asked to be shown these quarters. He locked the street door. Then we ascended in an open iron-work elevator to an upper floor and I was let into 3-A.  A living room had tall old windows overlooking Jermyn Street. Dark antique furniture: A sideboard, a desk, a chest of drawers, a sofa facing the fireplace, two low easy chairs, tall mirrors above the fire and the sideboard.  He used a wooden match to light the gas under artificial logs.</p>

<p>	A hall led to a bedroom in which space had been found for two single beds, a bedside table between them, an armoire, a chest, a small vanity table and another gas fireplace.  In the bathroom was enthroned the largest bathtub I had ever seen, even in the movies. The fixtures were not modern; the water closet had an overhead tank with a pull-chain.</p>

<p>	"This is larger than I expected," I said. "How many rooms do you have in all?"</p>

<p>	"Sixteen."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/breakfast-17390.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/breakfast-17390.html','popup','width=817,height=1152,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/breakfast-thumb-270x380-17390.jpg" width="270" height="380" alt="breakfast.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Of course I took it. When I'd moved my luggage in, it was still only 10 and I rang down for the full English breakfast. The Spaniard said he would prepare it himself as soon as possible, "because Bob is indisposed." He appeared with two fried eggs, a rasher of bacon, orange juice, four slices of toast in an upright warmer, butter, strawberry jam, a pot of brewed tea and orange juice. I sat at my table, regarded my fire, poured my tea, turned on Radio 3 and read my <i>Sunday Telegraph.</i></p>

<p>	For 25 years I was to come here to Jermyn Street time and again. Now I can never return. Some obscene architectural extrusion will rise upon the sacred land, some eyesore of retail and condos and trendy dining. Piece by piece, this is how a city dies. How many cities can spare a hotel built in 1685, the year James II took the crown?</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/picca-17493.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/picca-17493.html','popup','width=500,height=375,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/picca-thumb-320x240-17493.jpg" width="320" height="240" alt="picca.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span><br />
 </p>

<p>I will barely be able to bring myself to return Jermyn Street, which is, shop for shop, the finest street in London. When I approach it again I will have to enter from Piccadilly by walking down through the Piccadilly Arcade and not from Lower Regent Street. I can still attend a lunchtime concert at St. James, or call in at Turnbull & Asser the haberdashers, Paxton and Whitfield the cheese mongers, Wilton's the restaurant, and Waterstone's the book store...but I cannot and will not ever again walk past 22 Jermyn Street. The address itself will be dead. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/paxton-17393.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/paxton-17393.html','popup','width=639,height=428,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/paxton-thumb-300x200-17393.jpg" width="300" height="200" alt="paxton.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	That first morning I walked down Regent to St. James' Park, strolled around the ponds, came up by Prince Charles' residence, climbed St. James Street and returned the full length of Jermyn. I ordered tea. It consisted of tomato, cucumber and butter sandwiches, which the English are unreasonably fond of; ham and butter sandwiches, which I am unreasonably fond of with Colman's English mustard; and cookies -- or, excuse me,  biscuits. The tea again was freshly brewed. I never saw a tea bag on the premises. I'd ordered as always Lapsang Souchong, which has the aroma of a freshly-tarred road at 100 yards. I find this aroma indescribably stirring. When I smell it I am walking through the  twilight in Cape Town to visit my friend Brigid Erin Bates.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/tea 22-17469.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/tea 22-17469.html','popup','width=613,height=894,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/tea 22-thumb-250x364-17469.jpg" width="250" height="364" alt="tea 22.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
I had just settled in my easy chair when a key turned in the lock and a nattily-dressed man in his 60s let himself in. He held a bottle of Teachers' scotch under his arm. He walked to the sideboard, took a glass, poured a shot, and while filling it with soda from the siphon, asked me, "Fancy a spot?"</p>

<p>	"I'm afraid I don't drink," I said.</p>

<p>	"Oh, my."</p>

<p>	This man sat on my sofa, lit a cigarette, and said, "I'm Henry."</p>

<p>	"Am I...in your room?"</p>

<p>	"Oh, no, no, old boy! I'm only the owner. I dropped in to say hello."</p>

<p>	This was Henry Togna Sr. He appears in a Dickens novel I haven't yet read. I'm sure of it. He appeared in my room almost every afternoon when I stayed at the Eyrie Mansion. It was not difficult to learn his story.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/henry &amp; doddy-17396.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/henry &amp; doddy-17396.html','popup','width=314,height=512,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/henry &amp; doddy-thumb-250x407-17396.jpg" width="250" height="407" alt="henry &amp; doddy.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Henry and his wife Doddy lived in the top-floor flat. He may have been the only man to live all of his life within a block of Piccadilly Circus. The Mansion was originally purchased in 1915 by his parents, who came from Italy, and Doddy's parents, who were English. The two children grew up together, married, and fathered Henry Jr., "who keeps his irons in a lot of fires." He asked me how I learned of the Eyrie Mansion. "Oh, yes! Suzanne! A lovely girl!" He discovered I worked for the Chicago Sun-Times. "You're must be joking. Tom Buck  stays here. He's from the Tribune, you know." He told me that the Spaghetti House served a sole meuniere not to be equaled.</p>

<p>	I was usually in London three times a year: In midwinter, in May after Cannes, and in summer. Henry was  naturally confiding, and cheerfully indiscreet. That first day he lamented that Bob had gone missing when I wanted my breakfast. "Bob is a great trouble to me," he said. "He gets drunk every eighth day. I have implored him to make out a seven-day schedule and stick to it, but no. He will not be content unless he is throwing us off."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/building shot-17399.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/building shot-17399.html','popup','width=375,height=560,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/building shot-thumb-260x388-17399.jpg" width="260" height="388" alt="building shot.JPG" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	"I was well taken care of by the man who checked me in," I said.</p>

<p>	"Poor fellow. He was a famous jockey in Spain. His face was burned in a stable fire while he tried to help his horses. He was one of those handsome Spanish boys. He was in a movie once by Bunuel. A film critic like yourself must have heard of <i>him.</i>"</p>

<p>	"Oh, I have," I said. "I wonder which film?"</p>

<p>	"You'll never get that out of him," Henry said. "Nor will he tell you his real name. He says he's hiding out here, working overnights, when there's so little traffic because we lock the street door at midnight. He doesn't want anyone in Spain to learn where he's gone."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/turnbull drawing-17450.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/turnbull drawing-17450.html','popup','width=378,height=323,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/turnbull drawing-thumb-300x256-17450.jpg" width="300" height="256" alt="turnbull drawing.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	I thought of Jermyn Street as Ampersand Street. On Jermyn Street you will find Turnbull & Asser, where Saul Bellow bought his shirts and Gene Siskel bought his boxer shorts. You will find Paxton & Whitfield, with its window stacked high with cheeses. Ian Nairn, in his <i>Nairn's London,</i> lists only one shop in London -- and this is the shop. You will find Fortnum & Mason's, where you can lunch in the soda fountain or plunge into the food hall, stacked to the ceiling with anchovies, rare coffees, Oxford marmalade, Scottish shortbreads, caviar, Westphalian ham, and tins of inedible imported biscuits. Down the street a bit are Sims, Reed & Fogg, the antiquarian booksellers. and of course Hilditch & Key, Harvie & Hudson, Russell & Bromley, Crockett & Jones, New & Lingwood -- all shirt sellers. In the UK the street is synonymous with shirts.</p>

<p>	There are shops without ampersands as well. Until it was replaced  by Waterstone's the Booksellers, there was Simpson's Piccadilly, where they held a sale every January and marked down everything but the umbrellas. Dunhill's, where they never have a sale on anything. Church's English Shoes. Daks, the Burberry store, which always has its impeccably restored 1920s delivery truck parked at the curb. Floris the perfumers. Davidoff the tobacconist, where Churchill and James Bond stored their Cubans in the locked humidor. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bates cat-17402.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bates cat-17402.html','popup','width=575,height=1024,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bates cat-thumb-260x463-17402.jpg" width="260" height="463" alt="bates cat.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Next door to the hotel, there is Bates the Hatters, with a big top hat hanging over the sidewalk. This was one place where you knew for sure you could find a bowler, a deerstalker or a collapsible opera topper.  They have had the same cat for 50 years (although it has been stuffed and with a  cigar in its mouth for most of that time). Next to Bates, Trumper's the Men's Hairdressers. I make it a practice to get my hair cut in every city where possible. Near the Eyrie I went first to Georgio's, a one-chair Greek barbershop in a mews off Duke Street. One day I followed the Archbishop of Canterbury into his chair. In the basement of Simpson's, I had my hair cut next to the former prime minister Edward Heath. Jermyn is that kind of street. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/trumpers-17405.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/trumpers-17405.html','popup','width=384,height=500,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/trumpers-thumb-270x351-17405.jpg" width="270" height="351" alt="trumpers.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Finally I graduated to Trumpers, a magnificent shop of brass and leather, wood and mirrors, and the aroma of hair tonics with exotic spices. An aged retainer knelt at my feet unbidden to shine my shoes.  He discovered I was from Chicago. </p>

<p>"Chicago!" he said. "Do you know Barbra Streisand, sir?" </p>

<p>I said I did not. </p>

<p>"Do you like the way she sings? I do!" </p>

<p>I said I did as well. </p>

<p>"Can you sing like her? Could you? Do you think you would? "</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/harris-17408.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/harris-17408.html','popup','width=426,height=640,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/harris-thumb-270x405-17408.jpg" width="270" height="405" alt="harris.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	A few steps down from Jermyn on St. James is D. R. Harris the Chemist, the oldest pharmacy in London, by appointment to H. R. H. Charles. Miss Brown has been there for some years, and I have always wanted to ask her for tea. There I always buy a pot of their Arlington shaving cream, Wiberg's Pine Bath Essence, Eucryl Strong Mint Tooth Powder, and a big transparent bar of Pear's soap. I remain suspicious of D. R. Harris' famous Pick-Me-Up, an elixir still stirred up from the 1850 recipe. </p>

<p>Long ago I read a book called <i>The Toys of a Lifetime,</i>by Arnold Gingrich, the founder of <i>Esquire. </i> In it he writes of his acquired tastes in clothing, automobiles, furniture, music, books, gloves, ties, aftershaves, and on and on. He spent a great deal of time on the ritual of shaving. All I ever used was lime Barbasol foam from a can and a Gillette blade. </p>

<p>But some old memory came stealing forward in Trumper's and Harris's. In their windows were splendid displays of razors, brushes and creams. Not a foam in sight. They sold traditional hard shaving soaps, which my father always used, favoring Mennen's. And tubes and pots of soft cremes. "You put just a little dab on your hand, wet it and apply it," Miss Brown explained. "All that foam glides the blade too far off the skin."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/   DR Harris Arlington sc tub-17496.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/   DR Harris Arlington sc tub-17496.html','popup','width=600,height=465,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/   DR Harris Arlington sc tub-thumb-300x232-17496.jpg" width="300" height="232" alt="   DR Harris Arlington sc tub.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
There were so many flavors to choose from. Rose, lavender, limes, hazelwood, almond, and Harris's signature Arlington. I bought a pot and shaved myself in the bright green pine water in the tub of the Mansion, with Radio 3 floating in from the living room. Now my life had a toy worthy of Arnold Gingrich.</p>

<p> Miss Brown had spoken the truth. I'd never in my life had a closer shave. One pot lasted me for months.  It also came in tubes for traveling. This was the beginning of my life as a toiletries fetishist. I came home with Harris' Aftershave Milk. A proper styptic pencil. A pot of their shampoo which would do me for weeks. Their Scalp Tonic. Their Arlington bar soaps--large, larger, and OMG. Their bone toothbrushes. Their Mason & Pearson hair brushes. </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/red-lion-17473.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/red-lion-17473.html','popup','width=263,height=350,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/red-lion-thumb-250x332-17473.jpg" width="250" height="332" alt="red-lion.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
A block from the Eyrie is the Red Lion, reckoned by Nairn to be the last pub in London he could do without, with the best pub interior, crystal and cut glass everywhere, thrown back on itself by the mirrored walls.  If you turn off Jermyn and stroll down Duke or Old Bond Street, you will be in the heart of a district that has harbored art galleries since time immemorial--Spink's are down that way, and Chris Beedles the watercolour and illustration expert, and Peter Nahum, and the Appleby Bros.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermyn-st-in-the-rain-17411.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermyn-st-in-the-rain-17411.html','popup','width=375,height=500,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermyn-st-in-the-rain-thumb-270x360-17411.jpg" width="270" height="360" alt="jermyn-st-in-the-rain.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I especially liked walking down Jermyn Street during cold and rainy January days. In the early dusk the lights from the shop windows reflected from the pavement. If the weather grew too foul, I could step into the Piccadilly Arcade, which runs from Jermyn St. up to Piccadilly. Nearby there was always a welcome at St. James Piccadilly, a Christopher Wren church which has the classical music concerts and usually has a jumble sale underway in its courtyard. The Wren at St. James was a coffee shop with excellent soups and breads, baked potatoes, and  chocolate cake. It is a most wholesome place, almost next door to  Tramp's, the infamous private club.	</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/Wilton's-17414.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/Wilton's-17414.html','popup','width=1728,height=1112,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/Wilton's-thumb-320x205-17414.jpg" width="320" height="205" alt="Wilton's.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Wilton's was the most elegant place on the street to have lunch. If you were alone, you could sit at the counter and watch them see how thinly they could slice the Parma ham. On my first visit I ordered cold turkey and peaches. Yes. Cheap food and drink were to be found at Sergio's, a hole-in-the-wall in Eagle Court, which served a perfect cappuccino with cinnamon sprinkled on top. Jules' Bar was a popular place for Sloane Rangers and Hooray Henrys, who ordered expensive champagnes with their plates of baked beans on toast or bangers and mash. The bar at the Cavendish Hotel was dark and discreet, as it should be, since the original Cavendish heard the indiscretions of Rosa Lewis, the Duchess of Duke Street.</p>

<p>	"Did you know the Duchess?" I asked Henry one day. Chaz and I had been honored by an invitation to have tea with Henry and Doddy, whose top floor flat had a flowery veranda commanding a view all the way down to Westminster. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/dushess-17417.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/dushess-17417.html','popup','width=402,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/dushess-thumb-280x334-17417.jpg" width="280" height="334" alt="dushess.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	"Everyone knew the Duchess," Henry said. "She was to be seen every day in St. James Square, walking her dogs, dressed in exquisite Edwardian fashions. Pity about her old Cavendish.The Germans got it with a bomb. During the war, it was well known that the Cavendish was the one place in London where you could find a girl or a drink any hour of the night.	</p>

<p>	"Henry!" Doddy said. "You make it sound like a brothel!"</p>

<p>	"Sex for cash, m'dear. That's m'definition."</p>

<p>	Henry was an enthusiast on ribald matters. One day when I was single, he poured himself a drink and said, "Roger, my boy, have I got the girl for you! Have you in your comings and goings seen the elegant brunette staying in 1-A, who is usually dressed in red? Rita Hayworth hair? High heels?"</p>

<p>	"I don't believe I have," I said.</p>

<p>	"Our Countess from Argentina," he said. "I want you to ask her out," he said. "Theater, a nice dinner...she's rich as Croesus, you know. You could do worse."</p>

<p>	"Is she...looking for someone?"</p>

<p>	"She must be. She comes here twice a year, always alone, never any company. What she needs is a young man to take her out, show her a good time. Never know what it might lead to. She has masses of time on her hands. She hardly leaves 1-A except to go to Harley Street for her shock treatments."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/london-evening-standard-to-become-free-$7024614$300-17420.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/london-evening-standard-to-become-free-$7024614$300-17420.html','popup','width=300,height=300,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/london-evening-standard-to-become-free-$7024614$300-thumb-270x270-17420.jpg" width="270" height="270" alt="london-evening-standard-to-become-free-$7024614$300.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	Sometimes in walking about the area I would happen upon Henry, always dressed to befit Jermyn Street, who knew everyone of any interest, from the maitre 'd at Wiltons to the man with the Evening Standard stand behind St. James Piccadilly. I never saw Henry in a pub, however, and despite the bottle of Teachers' under his arm I never saw him the tipsy. </p>

<p>	One day he invited me to lunch. We walked over to a cozy, chic French restaurant in a byway near Leicester Square. Customers waiting in line were ignored as we were seated immediately. We were shown to our banquette by a handsome French woman of a certain age, whose hand, I observed, lingered longer on his shoulder than one might have expected. </p>

<p>	Henry saw me noticing, and his eyes twinkled. He said nothing, but his eyebrows lifted in the most minute degree and if you hadn't been looking for it, you would have missed the almost imperceptible nod of his head.</p>

<p>	"Henry!" I said.</p>

<p>	"My dear boy" he said, "if you don't flush out the pipes, they'll run brown."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermynpainter-17423.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermynpainter-17423.html','popup','width=665,height=516,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/jermynpainter-thumb-340x263-17423.jpg" width="340" height="263" alt="jermynpainter.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Henry was much concerned about the future of the Mansion. "Our landlady is the Queen," he told me. "The Crown Estate agents have always tried to keep the lease terms reasonable, but the price of property is making the most alarming advances. I've raised my prices as much as I dare.  Henry Junior wants to take over and make this a luxury hotel. Well, it's in the blood. But it frightens me. What kinds of loans will he have to take out? How will he make the payments?"</p>

<p>	He brought Henry Junior around to meet me. This was a handsome, pleasant man, friendly, confiding. He said he hoped to keep the charm of the Eyrie Mansion. "But at the prices I'll be forced to charge the public won't stand for this," he said, regarding the carpets  frayed at the edges and the furniture somewhat nicked, and staring balefully at the gas fireplace.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/silhiuette-17426.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/silhiuette-17426.html','popup','width=1166,height=800,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/silhiuette-thumb-300x205-17426.jpg" width="300" height="205" alt="silhiuette.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	As it happened, the gas fire was one of my favorite features at the Eyrie. In jet-lagged winter mornings before dawn I'd awaken to a flat chilly as I liked it, pull on warm clothes, and venture out into the crisp night to walk up to the newsagent on Piccadilly. I'd buy the <i>Telegraph, Independent, Guardian</i> and <i>Times,</i> and a large cup of hot coffee from an all-night shop around the corner. With these I would return to the mansion, tune in Radio 3, sit in my low easy chair before the fire, and dream wistfully that such was my life. </p>

<p>The fire was never left to burn when unneeded; the maids saw to that. But it held promise of warmth after a brisk walk. Fires, I decided, were a <i>source</i> of heat, not merely, like central heating, its <i>presence. </i> There must be something deep within our racial memory that is pleased by being able to look at what is making us warm. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hyde park-17429.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hyde park-17429.html','popup','width=550,height=415,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hyde park-thumb-300x226-17429.jpg" width="300" height="226" alt="hyde park.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
One winter's day I set out to walk across Hyde Park from Kensington Gardens to Hyde Park Corner.  It was raining, but that was fine with me; I had my Simpson's umbrella. What I didn't know was that the gates to the park were locked at dusk. This I discovered on a notice <i>inside</i> the gate I'd intended to use. I could see the traffic hurrying past up Serpentine road from the direction of the Royal Albert Memorial. There were a lot of taxis. </p>

<p>Unfortunately, an iron fence topped with spikes stood between me and the road. It began raining harder. I scouted and found a low tree branch that might just allow me to stand atop the railing. That meant climbing a hill slippery with wet grass. I failed twice, and became smeared with mud. Digging in the point of my umbrella, I finally made my way up the hill and onto the limb and balanced on the fence, but it was a good leap down to the sidewalk and I could easily imagine myself with a sprained ankle. Or worse: Impaled on the fence.</p>

<p>	Pedestrians hurried past, apparently not seeing me. I tried calling for help. I was ignored. Well, if you were hurrying through the park in the rain and saw a fat man with a soaked coat, smeared with mud, balanced on  a fence with a filthy umbrella, what would you do?</p>

<p>	"Hey, look, it's Roger Ebert!" an American kid said. He was with a group of friends. "No way! Is that really you?"</p>

<p>	"Yes it is," I said. If I had been Prince Charles I would have answered to "Roger Ebert."</p>

<p>	"Far <i>out</i> dude! What are you doing up there?"</p>

<p>	"Trying to get down," I observed.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bath-17490.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bath-17490.html','popup','width=400,height=288,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/bath-thumb-300x216-17490.jpg" width="300" height="216" alt="bath.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	They helped me down and asked for my autograph, which was gladly supplied. I opened my umbrella, hailed a cab, and was at 22 Jermyn Street in ten minutes. That was  one of the occasions when I lighted the gas fire and treasured it beyond all reason. After warming up, I filled the big tub for a bath. It was deep, and as long as I was tall. I tinted it a bright green with Wilberg's Pine Bath Essence, and inhaled warm pine and reflected that you are never warmer than when you have been cold. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/rogerbates-17376.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/rogerbates-17376.html','popup','width=850,height=1280,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/rogerbates-thumb-250x376-17376.jpg" width="250" height="376" alt="rogerbates.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Word came in 1990 that Henry Junior had taken over operations and closed the hotel for renovations. In his announcement, he wrote, "I agreed to buy the hotel from my father, famous for his wonderful eccentricity." Chaz and I stopped in to inspect. He was filled with enthusiasm. He was fitting it out elegantly with new rugs and draperies, sofas and chairs, beds, the lot. Of course he discontinued the gas fires. I was pleased to see he was keeping the old furniture, purchased  in 1915 by his grandparents. "After we had it refinished," he said, "it turned out to be very good stuff. You couldn't touch it today."</p>

<p>Henry Junior said the workmen had sorted through the memories of three generations. In the basement, he said, he discovered a cache of naughty French postcards from the 1930s. Inside a walled-over hall closet on the second floor he found his mother's small hoarded supply of sugar from the days of rationing in World War Two. Writing of the basement just now, I recall that never during all those years did I ever figure out where the hotel's kitchen was. </p>

<p>	The Eyrie Mansion was renamed 22 Jermyn Street. Well, "Eyrie Mansion" was possibly not an ideal name for a hotel. Chaz and I stayed there many times. I liked it, she adored it. When I said I missed the gas fire that you lit with a match, she gave me one of those looks I got when I said I would rather drive a 1957 Studebaker than any newer car. Or eat in a diner than a trendy restaurant. Or wear jeans. You know those looks.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/pelican-17432.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/pelican-17432.html','popup','width=1669,height=1158,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/pelican-thumb-300x208-17432.jpg" width="300" height="208" alt="pelican.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	As the luxurious 22 Jermyn Street, the hotel prospered. Croissants and cappuccino were now served as an alternative to Full English Breakfast. There'd be a flower on the tray. Clients included movie stars and politicians, who valued its privacy and its absence of a lobby. Doddy and Henry Senior would have been proud. But in Autumn 2009 Henry Junior wrote to us: "Sadly the lease has expired and the greater part of the city block in which the hotel is located is to be redeveloped by the Crown Estate as a project named St James's Gateway, over the next 2 or 3 years. Like much else in London, it is planned that this very comprehensive and handsome project will be completed in time for the Olympic Games in 2012." Just what Olympic guests will be looking for in London. One more god-damned comprehensive and handsome project. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/st patssoho-17435.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/st patssoho-17435.html','popup','width=336,height=448,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/st patssoho-thumb-270x360-17435.jpg" width="270" height="360" alt="st patssoho.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
In the mid-1990s, after Cannes, Chaz and I were staying at Champney's health farm in Tring. One morning the <i>Telegraph</i> carried news of Henry Senior's death. I took an early train to London and arrived in time for the funeral at St. Patrick's Catholic Church in Soho Square, where Henry had served as an usher for decades. So much was made of Henry Senior's devotion to the Church that I could imagine his eyes twinkling. In Catholic churches they don't customarily ask friends of the departed to come forward and share a few words. It's just as well. Had I been called upon, I have no idea how I would have begun, or how long it would have taken me to finish. And I didn't really even know Henry that well. </p>

<p>Just now I went looking for a quote by Charles Dickens to close with. Nothing would do. I think perhaps only an entire character will do. Perhaps Mr. Pickwick, with a touch of Mr. Micawber and a dash of David Copperfield's jolly friend Mr. Dick.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/the family-17438.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/the family-17438.html','popup','width=365,height=512,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/the family-thumb-290x406-17438.jpg" width="290" height="406" alt="the family.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span><CENTER><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b>The hotel's web site remains online, and Henry Junior says he will continue the <a href="http://www.22jermyn.com/"><i>newsletter</a> which keeps the regulars informed.</i> </b></blockquote></blockquote><br />
•<br />
<b>Peter Owen's <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter-owen/sets/72157604356093598/">set of Jermyn Street shops</a> on flickr. </b><br />
<CENTER><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>A shaky-cam walk down Jermyn Street guided by Kwai Chi, who seems absorbed by the prices of shirts. Bates' Hat Shop and 22 Jermyn Street are at 4:08. If I could talk on this video, you wouldn't be able to shut me up. </b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/USPbAh8TqZY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/USPbAh8TqZY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>The market in the courtyard of St. James' Piccadilly</b> <i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tvNuZD7RbeA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tvNuZD7RbeA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<CENTER><br />
<b><i> I wave from the window of 3-A.</b> </i><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/me in window-17466.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/me in window-17466.html','popup','width=903,height=1280,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/me in window-thumb-280x396-17466.jpg" width="280" height="396" alt="me in window.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><b><i>A letter from Henry Togna, Junior</b> </i></p>

<p></CENTER></p>

<p><b><i>Dearest Chaz,</p>

<p><br />
You and Roger are often on my mind, never more so than today which is the  final day in the life of 22 Jermyn Street. As you know, starting  in 1915, my parents and grandparents lived and worked there. I took  over from them and re-opened 22 on 1 June 1990. I will never forget Roger  arriving at the hotel during renovation when it was a building site so that he could check out the <br />
bathtubs to make sure that they would be up-to-standard!<br />
 <br />
I knew when I took over that the hotel's horizon was not unlimited and that  the lease ended in 2008. For some years, I negotiated with the freeholder, The Crown Estate, in the hope of achieving an extension and even sought to redevelop the property myself, sadly to no avail. The whole city block is to be torn down, although some facades will be retained, to provide shops and offices with luxury apartments on the top floor. The truth is that the fabric of all the  buildings in the block is tired and in many cases does not match current safety  standards. The other truth is that the size of 22 was never really viable and  what with one thing and another we have had a difficult time in recent years, as have hotels worldwide. Nevertheless, we continued to receive many awards and  accolades and I know that mother and father would have been, and <br />
indeed were, so proud of what we achieved. <br />
 <br />
I have to say that The Crown Estate dealt with the whole thing in  gentlemanly style allowing us the last year rent free and providing some financial compensation.<br />
 <br />
My staff, many of whom have been with me for over 15 years, have remained  faithful to the end and we have managed to place all of them in good positions in other hotels. As for me, I shall restock, and move on to other things. I have  a substantial interest in a vintage couture company, and play around with a  restaurant and some real estate so I will always be busy - and need to be, I  have a very expensive life style!<br />
  <br />
I send you both my warmest wishes,<br />
 <br />
Henry (the junior one!) <CENTER><CENTER><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hemrythe rugger-17441.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hemrythe rugger-17441.html','popup','width=330,height=512,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/02/hemrythe rugger-thumb-280x434-17441.jpg" width="280" height="434" alt="hemrythe rugger.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
</b> </b> </b> </i></i></i></b> </i><br />
<SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/234431d5-37db-4690-b05e-e6fe79ea7e73"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F234431d5-37db-4690-b05e-e6fe79ea7e73&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT></p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	<br />
	<br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Of the feel of theaters and audiences,  and eight films from Sundance</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/of_theaters_and_audiences_and.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31605</id>

    <published>2010-01-31T05:43:03Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-31T23:26:25Z</updated>

    <summary>I saw my final film of Sundance 2010 here in Chicago. It was my best Sundance experience, and I want to tell you why. The film was &quot;Jack Goes Boating,&quot; the directorial debut of Philip Seymour Hoffman. It played here...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack-17250.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack-17250.html','popup','width=280,height=298,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack-thumb-240x255-17250.jpg" width="240" height="255" alt="jack.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>I saw my final film of Sundance 2010 here in Chicago. It was my best Sundance experience, and I want to tell you why. The film was "Jack Goes Boating," the directorial debut of Philip Seymour Hoffman. It played here in the Music Box, as part of the "Sundance USA" outreach program, which has enlisted eight art theaters around the country to play Sundance entries while the festival is still underway.</p>

<p>	The Music Box is the largest surviving first run movie palace in Chicago. It is deeper than it is wide, and has an arching ceiling where illusory clouds float and stars twinkle. Many shows are preceded by music on the organ. </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>That's all very nice, but doesn't explain why this particular screening was so enjoyable. Every one of the 750 seats was filled. These people were not festival goers, nor were they all critics, bloggers or distributors. They were movie lovers who ventured out at night in the cruel Chicago winds with the temperature standing at 14F, and paid cash for their tickets because they wanted to see Hoffman's new movie. 

<p><br />
The screening felt...different. "Jack Goes Boating" is not a comedy but it has a great many funny moments. The audience laughed a lot. The warm acoustics of the room curved the laughter back and enfolded us. In acoustic terms, we became an audience. In spaces that are wider than deep, such as Sundance's Eccles and the Lumiere at Cannes, one gets a sensation of separation; at Cannes, curiously, much of the laughter seems to center on the front right.  At a narrower theater like the Music Box, you feel joined together.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music-17253.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music-17253.html','popup','width=545,height=396,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music-thumb-290x210-17253.jpg" width="290" height="210" alt="music.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p></p>

<p>	There is also the matter of <i>how</i> people laugh: Are they responding, or informing? At the Music Box, the audience seemed to respond as an organic whole. At most festivals and all industry screenings, they seem made more of individual voices essentially saying: "I'm instructing you that that was funny." </p>

<p>	Then there is the question of who is in the audience. The average age at the Music Box probably skewed to 16-35. It was self-selected: These people were interested enough in Sundance and Philip Seymour Hoffman to leave home in frigid cold. At many screenings, particularly the "sneak previews" at which critics are invited to join an audience of radio station listeners who got free tickets, the audience often doesn't know or care about the movie, and they respond as in terms of peer communication rather than shared experience.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music2-17265.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music2-17265.html','popup','width=500,height=333,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/music2-thumb-290x193-17265.jpg" width="290" height="193" alt="music2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	In short, what I felt in my bones at the Music Box was the experience a working movie critic rarely shares, the sensation of seeing a movie in a room filled with people who are there of their own will, sympathize with movies, and respond genuinely. Although the movie won favorable reviews from the trades at Sundance (Variety, Hollywood Reporter, Screen International), my guess is that the audience reaction was better at the Music Box than at Park City. Since reps of the movie would have been present at both screenings, they could make their own guess, although prudence suggests they won't tell us.</p>

<p>	Now onward to good movies I saw at Sundance 2010. (I'm giving the others a pass, since why knock indie efforts before they open?) Alphabetically:</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/valentine-17256.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/valentine-17256.html','popup','width=418,height=312,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/valentine-thumb-290x216-17256.jpg" width="290" height="216" alt="valentine.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Blue Valentine.</b> How do we fall in love? How do we lose that early enchantment? Derek Cianfrance's uses the powers of two fine actors, Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling, to chart the before, during and after a marriage. They meet in a sweet way, while both are visiting relatives in an old folks' home. They're filled with optimism and promise. But he seems to lack all initiative, and retreats inward while she remains more open. The reappearance of her old boyfriend, not a nice man, creates psychological difficulties -- and a wounding issue of trust. The film cuts between past and present with different  visual styles; we see two people who might still be happy if they could only talk to one another.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/CaneToad_800x683_cropped-17259.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/CaneToad_800x683_cropped-17259.html','popup','width=800,height=683,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/CaneToad_800x683_cropped-thumb-290x247-17259.jpg" width="290" height="247" alt="CaneToad_800x683_cropped.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Cane Toads: The Conquest</b> Remember the first cane toads movie from 1988? It told the saga of toads unwisely imported from Hawaii to Australia to attack destructive beetles. The toads flourished in the new environment, multiplying to millions, infesting the Northern Territory and sometimes carpeting highways so thickly they made driving unsafe. </p>

<p>	Now director Mark Lewis has updated the story in 3-D. A decade later, there are more toads than ever; they swim rivers, penetrate all man-made barriers, and allegedly number more than a billion. It's essentially the same story as in 1988, with the addition of testimony by colorful locals and a good clear 3-D picture (which doesn't seem necessary). The only element missing from the earlier film is the popular recycling of toad secretions into a smokable drug. No doubt this intriguing use was sidestepped to get a G rating for the 3-D family audience.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cyrus-17262.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cyrus-17262.html','popup','width=534,height=344,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cyrus-thumb-290x186-17262.jpg" width="290" height="186" alt="cyrus.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Cyrus </b> This film by the Duplass brothers, Jay and Mark, was one of the most popular this year. Starting as a full-bore comedy and then exploring some darker consequences, it benefits from the casting of John C. Reilly and Marisa Tomei as two shy lovers, and particularly by Jonah Hill as her assertive and sneaky 21-year-old son. It also includes Catherine Keener, but then every film benefits from casting her. Reilly is a socially inept but nice, sincere divorced guy who meets the long-single Marisa Tomei at a party. She comes home with him, they click, and then in a unexpected way he meets her son Cyrus, who she wasn't quite ready to tell him about. Cyrus is overweight, smart, so confident he's scary, and very possessive of his mom.</p>

<p>	Tomei  has the pivotal role here, because she must balance two deep emotions and play fair, and Cyrus does all he can to prevent that. This is the kind of comedy where we recognize elements of real life and laugh partly in relief that most of us have escaped them. I won't reveal more. Marisa Tomei has always struck me as one of those actresses who is particularly good at conveying warm affection, which must be pretty hard to fake. It's invaluable here.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack 2-17269.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack 2-17269.html','popup','width=533,height=421,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/jack 2-thumb-290x229-17269.jpg" width="290" height="229" alt="jack 2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Jack Goes Boating </b> opens with two friends who are New York limo drivers. Jack (Philip Seymour Hoffman) is a reclusive bachelor, and Clyde (John Ortiz) and his wife Lucy (Daphne Rubin-Vega) are just about his only friends. He has a paralyzing shyness around women, so Lucy fixes him up with her friend Connie (Amy Ryan). Lucy and Connie work in phone sales for a funeral parlor. The first date ends promisingly, with Jack  asking for and receiving "a little good night kiss." Their next big date involves Jack cooking dinner for them all at Clyde and Lucy's apartment, and it goes about as badly as possible --  through no fault of theirs.</p>

<p>	Hoffman, Ortiz and Vega-Rubin played these roles in the original play by Bob Glaudini, which they produced at their off-Broadway theater, LAByrinth. Hoffman didn't intend for this to be his filmmaking debut, but it turned out that way, and he made adjustments to open it up and tune it down, as theater must usually be when faced with the intimacy of film. The work is endearing about Jack and Connie, but its complexity involves Clyde and Lucy, who have had, as they both note, to "work out a lot of things" during their marriage. The film's achievement is finding a balance between its good humor and its unhappy truths. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rivers-17272.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rivers-17272.html','popup','width=526,height=412,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rivers-thumb-290x227-17272.jpg" width="290" height="227" alt="rivers.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work</b>  If ever a movie has an accurate title, this is the movie. Joan Rivers gave the filmmakers access to her life for a year, she was frank, open and honest, and the result is one of the most truthful documentaries about show business I've seen. Also maybe the funniest. Rivers has inevitably become identified with her red carpet appearances, but this film contains not one red carpet shot and only a few passing mentions. It focuses on the standup comedian, who works ceaselessly, and remains at the top of her form. </p>

<p>Rivers is 75, something she repeats several times, and at 67 myself I know it sounds condescending to say she hasn't lost a beat, but she <i>hasn't.</i> She remains one of the most transgressive and fearless of comedians, and one of the quickest, fastest and most merciless. The doc shows a life force of formidable energy. In one stretch she closes a show in Toronto, flies overnight to Palm Springs, does a gig, flies overnight immediately back to Minneapolis, and performs another one. She's upfront about plastic surgery, her husband Edgar, her daughter Melissa, and how after she left as Johnny Carson's permanent guest host he never spoke to her again and she was blackballed by NBC until last year. In the Q&A session Rivers gave her opinion of the Leno/Conan/NBC matter: "Fuck 'em all." Urgent to MSNBC: Feature this woman as a guest commentator and crawl under your desks. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/runaways-17275.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/runaways-17275.html','popup','width=322,height=434,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/runaways-thumb-290x390-17275.jpg" width="290" height="390" alt="runaways.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>The Runaways </b> A somewhat fictionalized version of the life and times of the 1975-77 teenage girl rock band best known for Joan Jett (Kristen Stewart) and Cherie Currie (Dakota Fanning). No members were over 16 when they were packaged as "jailbait rock" by snaky producer Kim Fowley (Michael Shannon). They dressed like hookers and dominatrixes, they idolized the Sex Pistols, but they were also insecure and immature young girls. Currie almost went down in flames, and the movie is based on her autobiography, <i>Neon Angel. </i> </p>

<p>Joan Jett still tours today, and is an intact survivor. The movie reproduces the Runaways' actual music, which is  no better that you might expect, but the acting is very convincing.  Kristen Stewart proves once again that she's a rising star, and Dakota Fanning is such a fine actress that I, for one, almost believed I'd always heard her using the f-word. As for Michael Shannon, is he the most unheralded force in acting today, or what?</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Twelve_movie_image_Emma_Roberts-17278.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Twelve_movie_image_Emma_Roberts-17278.html','popup','width=600,height=399,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Twelve_movie_image_Emma_Roberts-thumb-290x192-17278.jpg" width="290" height="192" alt="Twelve_movie_image_Emma_Roberts.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Twelve</b>  is a "Less than Zero" for 2010, a savage portrait of a crowd of stupid rich kids on the Upper East Side, and how they spend their parents' money to create perhaps irreversible damage to their lives. Holden Caulfield would have been thrown into catatonia after five minutes with them.  Chace Crawford is very good as the alleged hero, White Mike, who doesn't smoke or drink and dropped out of private school to devote himself full-time to  marijuana sales. Emma Roberts plays Molly, an essentially nice girl he falls for, and Esti Ginzburg is the Popular Blonde who tells a younger kid (Rory Culkin) that if makes his parents' apartment available for her birthday party, she'll sleep with him. </p>

<p>The title comes from a trendy new drug White Mike doesn't deal in, but he gets some from another dealer (50 Cent) to supply for party night. The film is very well acted, and dark, dark, dark. The director is Joel Schumacher, assured and fearless on a small budget and short shooting schedule which seems to add spontaneity. Schumacher is not fashionable with Sundance types, and I suspect this will emerge from the festival with reviews that don't concede its power. But it will perform.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rileys-17281.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rileys-17281.html','popup','width=510,height=375,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rileys-thumb-290x213-17281.jpg" width="290" height="213" alt="rileys.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
 	<b>Welcome to the Rileys </b> was one of the buzz champs of Sundance 2010. The discovery once again is Kristen Stewart, who after this year's festival can be considered completely rehabilitated after the "Twilight" films. The lead  is James Gandolfini, as an Indianapolis plumbing contractor who goes to New Orleans on a business trip and meets (quite innocently) a runaway lap dancer who <i>may</i> be 16. At home, his wife (Melissa Leo) hasn't been able to leave the house after their own daughter's death, and Gandolfini decides on the spot to sell his business, stay in New Orleans, and rescue this angry and damaged girl.</p>

<p>	That sounds like unlikely melodrama? So it is. But Gandolfini, Stewart and Leo inhabit it with persuasive performances, and director Jake Scott uses French Quarter locations that add another level of atmosphere. Gandolfini does something here he often does, as in John Turturro's "Romance & Cigarettes" (2005): He demonstrates that although he may not be conventionally handsome, when he smiles his face bathes you in the urge to like him. Kristen Stewart here is tougher even than her punk rocker in "The Runaways." Who knew she had these notes? I'm discovering an important new actress.</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br />
<CENTER><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>"Cyrus" trailer</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0G0bYpMQ-fI&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0G0bYpMQ-fI&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Philip Seymour Hoffman does Red Carpet interviews for "Jack Goes Boating," and is asked, "You been to Sundance  before?" and keeps a straight face while replying.</b> </i><br />
 <br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ulRT-7oeXUQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ulRT-7oeXUQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Joan Rivers unloads at Sundance</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hRIW8P5wFMc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hRIW8P5wFMc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>A scene from "The Runaways" with Kristen Stewart, Dakota Fanning and Michael Shannon</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WzvG2BFbc5E&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WzvG2BFbc5E&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b> <i>A scene from "Welcome to the Rileys"</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zH1tGQ-FGhU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zH1tGQ-FGhU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b>A clip from <a href="http://www.bluevalentinemovie.com/home.html">"Blue Valentine"</a>. </b><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('fb605bf2-ce48-485b-bfd3-4b281b0820f5');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/our-foreign-correspondents-rebert">Our Foreign Correspondents</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript><br />
•<br />
	</b> </b> </b> </i></i></i></i></p>

<p>	</p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Smash his camera, but not immediately</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/smash_his_camera_but_not_immed.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31414</id>

    <published>2010-01-25T16:39:23Z</published>
    <updated>2010-02-02T01:16:54Z</updated>

    <summary>He is a viper, a parasite, a stalker, a vermin. He is also, I have decided, a national treasure. Ron Galella, the best known of all paparazzi, lost a lawsuit to Jackie Kennedy Onassis and five teeth to Marlon Brando,...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="People" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6-17087.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6-17087.html','popup','width=490,height=560,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6-thumb-240x274-17087.jpg" width="240" height="274" alt="6.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>He is a viper, a parasite, a stalker, a vermin. He is also, I have decided, a national treasure. Ron Galella, the best known of all paparazzi, lost a lawsuit to Jackie Kennedy Onassis and five teeth to Marlon Brando, but he also captured many of the iconic photographs of his era. At 77, he is still active, making the drive from his New Jersey home and his pet bunny rabbits through the Lincoln Tunnel to Manhattan, the prime grazing land of his prey.</p>

<p>	I had an idea, as many of us do, about Gallela and the species of paparazzi. It was a hypocritical idea. I disapproved of him and enjoyed his work. Yes, he comes  close to violating the rights of public people, and sometimes crosses the line. He certainly crossed the line with Jackie's children. </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>But he sold his photographs to publications which we bought, we looked at them with enjoyment and curiosity, and his career was made possible by our human nature. These are conclusions I've arrived at after seeing Leon Gast's "Smash His Camera," a new documentary shown here at Sundance. It shows Gallela triumphant, installed with his devoted Betty in his Jersey mini-mansion with a large Italian garden for the bunnies. A friend says, "You look at his house, and you think--Sopranos!" 

<p><br />
In his basement archives are the prints and negatives of more than three million of his photographs. He has published coffee table books filled with them. He's had several gallery shows. Collectors pay premium prices for signed prints of his work. He is the go-to man if you want shots of Sinatra, Michael Jackson, Capote, Liz and Dick, Nicholson, Mick Jagger, Elvis. You know that shot of the startled Duke of Windsor in the back of a limo, and the shapely legs of the Duchess? Gallela.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ron_galella-17084.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ron_galella-17084.html','popup','width=800,height=600,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ron_galella-thumb-300x225-17084.jpg" width="300" height="225" alt="ron_galella.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	"A great photograph," Andy Warhol said, "shows the famous doing something unfamous. Ron Galella is my favorite photographer." He hid in bushes and behind trees. Driving like a madman, he outraced celebrities to their destinations. He bribed doormen, chauffeurs, head waiters, security guards. He lurked in parking garages. He knew the back ways into ballrooms. He forged credentials. He chased his prey for blocks on foot. Year after year, he outworked, outran and outsmarted his competition, and he ran with a ferocious pack. Even now when he is wealthy, he hasn't stopped standing in the cold to get his shot.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/10/4-12866.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/10/4-12866.html','popup','width=344,height=560,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/10/4-thumb-280x455-12866.jpg" width="280" height="455" alt="4.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	That's what I respond to. His life force. In his passion for his work, he is a genuine man. Consider his obsession with Jackie, his favorite subject. His favorite out of three million photographs is the one of Jackie striding across a Manhattan street, smiling, her hair tossed around her face by the wind. It may indeed be the best photograph of her ever taken, because it is not posed, not self-aware. It reflects her spirit. "Look at that smile," Galella says. "That's my <i>Mona Lisa."</i></p>

<p>	"I think at the time Jackie became my girlfriend," Galella muses. "I wasn't married, I didn't have a girl friend..." Galella is a big and burly man, and I suspect if he had seen someone endangering Jackie, he would have hurled himself forward in disregard of his own life. In the famous court case, Jackie testified she "didn't know" if she could be considered famous. For Galella, her celebrity was catnip: Galella's attorneys presented evidence that the two most famous woman in the world were Jackie and...the Queen.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/RonGallela,JackieO-17091.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/RonGallela,JackieO-17091.html','popup','width=1000,height=654,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/RonGallela,JackieO-thumb-330x215-17091.jpg" width="330" height="215" alt="RonGallela,JackieO.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	You couldn't keep this guy down. The court ordered him to keep 75 yards from Jackie. The distance was later lowered to 25 feet. He tipped a pal to be outside the Beverly Hills Hotel when he knew Jackie would be there. The pal took the photo above of him holding a tape measure. I know. I expect lots of readers to tell me he is deranged and I am deluded. But you gotta hand it to the guy.</p>

<p>Look how he handled the famous incident with Marlon Brando. Sure, he was stalking him, as is a paparazzi's nature. Brando socked him in the jaw so hard he lost five teeth. He went to an emergency room to be treated, and turned up later with his jaw wired, still shooting. On the next occasion he wanted to photograph Brando, he turned up wearing a football helmet. And made sure they were photographed together.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/marlonbrando1974-718155-17131.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/marlonbrando1974-718155-17131.html','popup','width=400,height=306,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/marlonbrando1974-718155-thumb-310x237-17131.jpg" width="310" height="237" alt="marlonbrando1974-718155.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I think he loves celebrities. First, they earn his living for him. I am unaware of a single Galella photograph taken as pure art, and the film and a web search reveal none. For Ron, the subject <i>was</i> the photograph. I can't speak as a stalked celebrity, but is there something a little touching about a guy who will travel halfway around the world and stand all night in the rain to take your picture? Or lock himself into a warehouse overlooking the Thames for a weekend, with food and toilet paper, to shoot Liz and Dick's yacht when they arrived on board?</p>

<p>	At his Sundance press conference, Robert Redford was asked about "Smash His Camera." Redford of course had a long-running feud with the relentless Galella. He said he hadn't seen the film, but he would tell a Galella story, "because it's one where I win." He began a tale of shooting "Three Days of the Condor" on location outside the New York Times building, and how to elude Galella he entered one end of the building, raced through its second floor to the other end, slipped into his trailer, disguised his stand-in as a double, and had him run to his car and be driven away. He was able to enjoy the sight of Galella hurling himself onto the trunk of the limo to shoot through its back window. Touche! Still, you gotta hand it got the guy.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/0_438_550-17094.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/0_438_550-17094.html','popup','width=438,height=550,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/0_438_550-thumb-280x351-17094.jpg" width="280" height="351" alt="0_438_550.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I said he captured the icons of an era. That era is over. The film has a curiously touching scene of an apparently bright young woman looking at the enlargements on Galella's photos at a New York art gallery. She wonders who Sophia Loren is. Doesn't recognize Bianca Jagger. Thinks maybe that might be...Robert Kennedy? We are spared the possibility she wouldn't recognize Sinatra, Katharine Hepburn, Warren Beatty, Steve McQueen, Truman Capote. </p>

<p>	Hey, those people are <i>famous!</i> They were to us, anyway.  What Galella shares in common with his celebrities is that they inhabited the same moment in time, and he took it very seriously indeed.  I hesitate to suggest this, but I suspect Jackie would be pleased by that photo of her in full stride. What's not to love?<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b></i>"Smash His Camera" won the Best Documentary award at Sundance 2010.</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<b><i>Ron and Betty Galella read this entry, and sent me <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/pages-for-twitter/i-didnt-notice-that-was-ron-ga.html"><i>these photos.</i></a>. </b><br />
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>"I'm Ron Galella, paparazzo superstar."</b> <i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_SDQZH4lWRE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_SDQZH4lWRE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Ron Galella remembers the Studio 54 disco era</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zxhZY8UcnT0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zxhZY8UcnT0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Ron Galella on Andy Warhol</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VudzvMUNdao&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VudzvMUNdao&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
</i></i></i></i></p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>A Superwoman for Kenya, but America  is still waiting for Superman</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/a_superwoman_for_kenya_but_ame.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31400</id>

    <published>2010-01-24T22:05:35Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-25T14:47:58Z</updated>

    <summary>Sometimes two films set up an uncanny resonance with one another. I saw two documentaries back to back. One filled me with hope and the other washed me in despair. They were both about the education of primary school children....</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/superman_warner_bros_won-17048.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/superman_warner_bros_won-17048.html','popup','width=346,height=346,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/superman_warner_bros_won-thumb-240x240-17048.jpg" width="240" height="240" alt="superman_warner_bros_won.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Sometimes two films set up an uncanny resonance with one another. I saw two documentaries back to back. One filled me with hope and the other washed me in despair. They were both about the education of primary school children. </p>

<p>	<b>"A Small Act"</b>  centers on the life story of Chris Mburu, who as a small boy living in a mud house in a Kenyan village had his primary and secondary education paid for by a Swedish woman. This cost her $15 a month. They had never met. He went on to the University of Nairobi, graduated from Harvard Law School, and is today a United Nations Human Rights Commissioner.</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>	<b>"Waiting for Superman"</b>  studies the failing American educational system. Oh, yes, it is failing. We spend more money per student than any other nation in the world, but the test scores of our students have fallen from near the top to near the bottom among developed nations. Our scientific and medical institutions employ so many Asians for a clear reason: They must be recruited. There are not enough qualified American students.

<p>Both films are powerful. Seen together, they are devastating. They both end in the same <br />
way, with a competition among young students to allow them to continue their education. </p>

<p>	In Kenya, they take a test. A high enough score will win them a scholarship from a foundation established by Chris Mburu. Without that, their families cannot afford education, and their life prospects will change. <br />
	<br />
	In America, they hope to have their names chosen in a lottery.  If they win, they will be accepted by a desirable magnet or charter school. Without that, they will have to attend the public schools available to them. Local educators agree about these schools: They are often bad schools, known within the school system itself as Dropout Factories. Students do not learn, their test scores drop year after year, only a very few find their way to the college level. This is a national phenomenon in the United States.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/phone call-17057.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/phone call-17057.html','popup','width=517,height=245,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/phone call-thumb-290x137-17057.jpg" width="290" height="137" alt="phone call.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Both movies are blunt about the reasons some students succeed and others fail. It has <i>nothing</i> to do with their intelligence. In Kenya, it is a matter of poverty. Most families want their children to attend high school, seeing that as the key to success in life. They lack the money, but Recently, Kenya has been able to make primary education free.</p>

<p>	In the United States, it is a matter of teaching. "Waiting for Superman" argues that the greatest enemies of American primary and secondary education are the teachers' unions. Yes. This is not an anti-labor film. It was made by Davis Guggenheim, whose last documentary was Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth." Among those at Sundance in support of it was Microsoft's Bill Gates, who appears in it. Liberals.</p>

<p>	There are countless dedicated public school teachers in our nation. Guggenheim made a doc in 1999 focusing on them. But educators and the teachers themselves acknowledge that schools have teachers who are not merely incompetent, but even refuse to teach. Protected by the tenure guarantees in their union contracts, they <i>cannot</i> be fired. In some schools, their rooms are referred to as Classrooms of Death. A student assigned to them <i>will</i> fail. Principals know this, and every year engage in something variously known as the Lemon Dance or the Turkey Trot, transferring bad teachers to other schools, and praying that the new teachers they get may be better. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Michelle-Rhee-17054.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Michelle-Rhee-17054.html','popup','width=400,height=529,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Michelle-Rhee-thumb-220x290-17054.jpg" width="220" height="290" alt="Michelle-Rhee.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Tenure is a sacred concept in higher education, attained after years and rigorous peer review. In primary and high schools, it comes automatically after as few as two years. Tenured teachers have a job for life. They cannot be fired for proven incompetence. The American Federation of Teachers and other unions fiercely protect their jobs. </p>

<p>	The film focuses on Michelle Rhee, the reformer who became Chancellor of the public schools in the District of Columbia, which are the worst in the nation. She wanted to award bonuses to teachers who were producing better students. The unions stood firm: The pay scale remained fixed, and performance could not affect it. Rhee devised a rather brilliant plan and offered it to the teachers. They could (a) accept the current wages, which are capped in the mid-50s, or (b) vote for a plan in which teachers with better performance would earn as much as twice that much. Money itself, you see, is not the issue. Rhee's plan was hailed as a masterstroke. How did the District's teachers vote? The American Federation of Teachers <i>refused to put the plan to a vote.</i> </p>

<p>[ Miss Rhee is now in the headlines because of allegations about her fiancee, which have absolutely nothing to do with her ideas for reform. Test scores in D.C. have responded positively to changes she's made. </p>

<p>	Decades of research and test data indicate that the primary factor determining a school performance is not its budget, physical plant, curriculum, student population or the income level of its district. It is teaching. The most powerful opponents to better teaching are the teachers' unions. I am a lifelong supporter of unions. But "Waiting for Superman" makes this an inescapable conclusion. A union that protects incompetent and even dangerous teachers is an obscenity.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/classphoto-17051.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/classphoto-17051.html','popup','width=604,height=421,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/classphoto-thumb-300x209-17051.jpg" width="300" height="209" alt="classphoto.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	What about the teaching in Kenya? Teachers are  by definition an elite, having somehow fought through the system and emerged as college graduates. The schools we see are not physically impressive; the one focused on in the film is a very basic brick structure with no amenities and crowded classrooms with simple board benches and desks. A gym? Don't make me laugh.</p>

<p>	Education focuses on reading (in English) and math, with some history and geography. The students are impressed by their ability to be in school at all. Their parents sacrifice to send them; child labor could add to the family income. At the end of primary school, they take tests to qualify for secondary education <i>if they can afford it.</i> The film shows some of the test questions. To me, they look difficult for kids their age. Our schools push students through the system who are functionally illiterate.</p>

<p>	The fact is that the next African or Indian taxi driver you meet has quite possibly benefited from a better education than the average American high school graduate. A great many of them, who had the enterprise and determination to immigrate here, are college graduates. I have noticed during two years of taking cabs that an African or Indian taxi  driver will <i>invariably</i> have the radio tuned to NPR. Now I understand why. Let's face it. NPR is the only radio source in America that intelligently considers national and world issues in depth. </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/hilde&amp;chris-17060.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/hilde&amp;chris-17060.html','popup','width=679,height=148,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/hilde&amp;chris-thumb-550x119-17060.jpg" width="550" height="119" alt="hilde&amp;chris.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>The films both tell extraordinary stories. "A Simple Act" show Chris Mburu seeking the name of the anonymous Swedish woman who "made my life possible." She is Hilde Back. Chris in gratitude started a foundation named the Hilde Back Foundation, to fund scholarships for poor village children. He had never met her. She is now 85 years old, a German Jew who was sent to Sweden as a child. Her family died in the Holocaust. She never married, has lived in the same apartment for 35 years, was a school-teacher. </p>

<p><br />
	She is flown to Kenya, serenaded by the choir from Mburu's village, feasted, thanked, gowned in traditional robes. She says that her $15 was an insignificant sum to her, but she kept it up because she thought even a small act was worth performing. After the screening of "A Small Act" at Sundance, in the most extraordinary surprise I've seen here, the film's director, Jennifer Arnold, introduced Chris Mburu <i>and Hilde Back.</i> She is a tiny woman, but robust and filled with energy. </p>

<p>She was asked if, since she never had children, she thought of Chris as a son. We see in the film that they stay in close touch. "But I <i>have</i> had children," she replied. "I was a teacher. I had many, many children." She was the kind of teacher who makes a difference, not the warden in a Classroom of Death.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/all four-17069.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/all four-17069.html','popup','width=588,height=412,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/all four-thumb-300x210-17069.jpg" width="300" height="210" alt="all four.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Appearing with Arnold, Back and Mburu was his younger cousin, Jane Muigai. She plays a major role in the film. Chris jokes that she has been following him all his life: "I went to high school. She went to high school. I attended the University of Nairobi. She attended the University of Nairobi. I graduated from Harvard Law School. She graduated from Harvard Law School. I went to work with the United Nations. She went to work for the United Nations."</p>

<p>	Looking at these two confident professionals, we rememb the village they grew up in, and the mud house of Chris's family. In the film, we follow three Kenyan students who hope to win high scores and continue in school. One says she would miss her family at a boarding school, but would enjoy being able to study by electric light. In this village the students study by the light of a single oil flame.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/nnhs-17063.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/nnhs-17063.html','popup','width=400,height=281,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/nnhs-thumb-300x210-17063.jpg" width="300" height="210" alt="nnhs.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Contrast that, as "Waiting for Superman" does, with the schools in wealthy suburbs that have pools, tennis courts, physical education facilities, extensive sports programs, closed-circuit TV stations, parking for student cars, and so on. The statistics find no relationship between such luxurious schools and test scores. A sprawling Los Angeles high school campus is contrasted with a charter school in an industrial area where more than 90 percent of the student are accepted to colleges. The same is true of Chicago's Providence St. Mel's, drawing its students the very poorest part of Chicago's West Side.</p>

<p>	Both of these docs will be opening, and I will review them separately. Just let me draw a few depressing conclusions.</p>

<p>	"Waiting for Superman" makes a compelling case for the apparent fact that American students from all ethnic and income groups are not receiving competitive educations. Yes, I know there are good schools and heroic teachers. But look at the statistics. I know little about math, but I learned enough to win a state scholarship. About reading and writing I know more, and it's my observation that today's high school graduates are badly served. The studies isolate a primary reason for that: Bad teaching, in systems that protect bad teachers and therefore discourage good ones.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/caroline-17066.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/caroline-17066.html','popup','width=312,height=213,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/caroline-thumb-300x204-17066.jpg" width="300" height="204" alt="caroline.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Some time ago I caught a lot of flak for suggesting that if you think "Transformers 2" is one of the best films of all time, you are "not sufficiently evolved." I have no quarrel with anyone who <i>likes</i> the film. But if you think it's a great film, you have not been prepared to evaluate and compare works of art, and to examine your own opinions.</p>

<p>	I know some of my old classmates hang round here from time to time, and I dare to make this statement: An eighth grade graduate of the St. Mary's Grade School of my youth knew more than a typical high school student does today. A typical graduate of the Urbana High School of my youth knew more than some college graduates do today. Anyone who grades essays at the college level today observes that many of their students are semi-literate. </p>

<p>	The fact is, American education is failing. Even in a bad economy there are good jobs in Silicon Valley. Bill Gates says it's not so much that he <i>wants</i> to recruit foreign workers as that he has to. The fault can be largely laid at the feet of bad teachers and their unions. That's a conclusion I suspect good teachers would be the first to agree with.<br />
•<br />
•<br />
•</blockquote><br />
<b><i>Trailer for "A Small Act"</b> </i></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nMuxVALiz-w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nMuxVALiz-w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i> Bill Gates at Sundance</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D1rugFQz_tA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D1rugFQz_tA&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Davis Guggenheim of "Waiting for Superman"</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Psx6TKDr46Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Psx6TKDr46Y&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('fb605bf2-ce48-485b-bfd3-4b281b0820f5');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/our-foreign-correspondents-rebert">Our Foreign Correspondents</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript><br />
•<br />
•</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	<br />
	</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
	<br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Sundance and five Sundance-style movies</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/sundance_does_everything_re-_b.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31341</id>

    <published>2010-01-22T06:23:01Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-23T23:56:15Z</updated>

    <summary>Scroll down for my earlier entries. The first five Sundance entries I&apos;ve seen are the kinds of film the festival exists to showcase. It is possible that many of them won&apos;t ever open in most of the places you readers...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/59215101-17020.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/59215101-17020.html','popup','width=960,height=1280,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/59215101-thumb-240x320-17020.jpg" width="240" height="320" alt="59215101.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span><i>Scroll down for my earlier entries.</i></p>

<p>The first five Sundance entries I've seen are the kinds of film the festival exists to showcase. It is possible that many of them won't ever open in most of the places you readers live, but you've impressed me with your resourcefulness in finding them anyway (and no, I don't mean piracy). You guys demonstrate that if you want to find a movie badly enough, you often can.</p>

<p>One of them, "Homewrecker," is for rent right now via YouTube, in keeping with the festival's Reinvention/Rebirth/Renewal and its embrace of new distribution channels such as the net and regional art cinemas.</p>

<p>	That one and "Armless" are playing in the new Sundance section named NEXT, which specializes in movies with "low to no budgets." The guidelines specify budgets below $500,000, and both of these look closer to half a million than to "no." </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>The one I've seen that could play your town is Nicole Holofcener's <b>"Please Give," </b>  opening April 23. This is another of her lovingly observant studies in human nature, with women as usual in the foreground. Her focus is often the affluent--not the <i>rich</i> rich, but prospering urban professionals. Her heroine here, Kate (the peerless Catherine Keener), runs a mid-range "antique" furniture store, with a stock acquired largely from the children of aged widows. If the kids don't know that mom's old dining room table will sell for $5,000, that's their fault.

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/pleasegive-17023.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/pleasegive-17023.html','popup','width=539,height=403,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/pleasegive-thumb-290x216-17023.jpg" width="290" height="216" alt="pleasegive.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Mary's husband and business partner is Alex (Oliver Platt). They speak the same language. Their unhappy 15-year-old daughter Abby (Sarah Steele) is pudgy and spotty and smart, but not smart enough to deal with adolescence, as who is? They live next door to a 91-year-old woman named Andra (Ann Morgan Guilbert, herself only 81), and have an option to buy her apartment. </p>

<p>	They're eager for her to die so they can break down some walls, but in guilt invite her and her granddaughters Mary and Rebecca (Amanda Peet and Rebecca Hall) to dinner. Andra is a hostile, whiny, perpetually wronged full-time victim. Mary is like her grandma. Rebecca is more like Kate. From these beginnings and an urban facial and tanning spa Holofcener creates a funny and not uncritical comedy.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/armless-17026.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/armless-17026.html','popup','width=657,height=429,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/armless-thumb-300x195-17026.jpg" width="300" height="195" alt="armless.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>"Armless," </b>  by the Pennsylvania filmmaker Habib Azar, is well and memorably titled. (It's not one of those titles like "Extraordinary Measures" you can hardly link to a film). It stars the sad-faced Daniel London as John, a man who desperately wants to have his arms amputated. There are such people. On the internet they are mostly known as "amputee wannabes," and not, thank God, "amputee done-its." In a chat room he finds the name of a doctor (Matt Walton), who reportedly will perform the illegal operation. Leaving a farewell message to his wife (Janel Moloney), he goes to New York to find happiness.</p>

<p>	Whether the doctor will perform the operation I leave to you, and John, to discover. Why he has such a low-rent office may be explained by the budgets of NEXT category; his receptionist (Zoe Lister Jones) barely has enough room on her desk for the magazine she won't look up from. Why John wants to be armless is explained by the usual psychobabble ("I am an armed man with an armless man trapped inside.") It's not a wonder his film didn't find studio financing; the screening was attended by what looked like busload of Azar's backers, wearing matching red snow jackets and stocking caps, "who all invested a couple of hundred." I would say they got more than their money's worth. Based on the play by Kyle Jarrow; not a comedy only for wannabes.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/home-17029.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/home-17029.html','popup','width=313,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/home-thumb-200x306-17029.jpg" width="200" height="306" alt="home.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>"Homewrecker," </b>  by the brothers Brad and Todd Barnes, is a comedy about two flywheels who meet through a New York locksmith service. Anslem Richardson plays Mike, the nicest, most honest and sincere ex-com you'd ever want to meet. He's sent on a lock picking call from Margo (Ana Reeder), and doesn't suspect she wants to break into her boyfriend's apartment. Margo is a piece of work. In an inspired performance, Reeder gives us a cute, comely, terminally ditzy basket of insecurity, who involves the Mike in a series of adventures that are both unlikely and sort of inevitable.</p>

<p>	The funniest scene comes after Margo convinces Mike to walk into an art district bistro, sit next to her boyfriend Charles (Stephen Rannazzisi), chat him up, and find out if he's also dating another woman. This Mike very reluctantly does (he finds it impossible to out talk Margo). His conversation with Charles is all the funnier because, if you agree it could take place at all, probably sounds more or less than the real thing would. The film's flaw, not fatal, is that Mike is too trusting.  Perhaps anyone who gets involved with Margo is by definition too trusting.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/shock-17032.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/shock-17032.html','popup','width=986,height=712,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/shock-thumb-290x209-17032.jpg" width="290" height="209" alt="shock.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>"The Shock Doctrine," </b>  a documentary directed by Mat Whitecross and Michael Winterbottom, illustrates Naomi Klein's belief that most of the economic problems and foreign policy disasters by the United States in several recent decades were the fault of the bizarre theories of the University of Chicago's famed economist Milton Friedman and his  worshippers, universally known as "the Chicago Boys." These fanatics for heartless corporate capitalism include Donald Rumsfeld, who actually wanted to privatize the U.S. military. To Fiedman's acolytes can be traced military coups in Chile and Argentina, Britain's Falkland war, our invasion of Iraq, the stock market collapse and other evils. His principles have led to CEOs making obscenely inflated amounts of money, the deregulation of banks and, in short, the destruction of all that ordinary decent people would like to believe about the economy. Two of his followers, for example, looted the Chicago Sun-Times, and one of them insists he did nothing wrong.</p>

<p>	This is according to Naomi Klein, except the Sun-Times part, which is mine. We see her giving a series of lectures, which the film illustrates with unsorted and sometimes not very clear newsreel footage. Surely there is a counterargument, but "The Shock Doctrine" isn't interested. The smart viewer will sample this film cafeteria style. Her indictment of Milton Friedman strikes me, however, as plausible and largely true. The category of Chicago Boys includes the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and apparently a majority of the Supreme Court as it voted to give corporations, even foreign corporations, unlimited freedom to spend their stockholder's money on influencing U.S. elections.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/howl_movie_image_james_franco_01-17035.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/howl_movie_image_james_franco_01-17035.html','popup','width=600,height=399,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/howl_movie_image_james_franco_01-thumb-290x192-17035.jpg" width="290" height="192" alt="howl_movie_image_james_franco_01.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	The festival's opening film was <b>"Howl," </b>  a Sundance institute baby, part documentary, part dramatic, part animated, directed by Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman. The film's focus is on the landmark 1955 poem by Allen Ginsberg, which became the anthem of the beat Generation. ("I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked..."). The film was an opening salvo in a new openness about homosexuality, drugs and social rebellion, written by a socially insecure poet. It was the first of many famous books published by Lawrence Ferlinghetti and his City Lights Bookstore in San Francisco, and is still his best-seller.</p>

<p>	The film stars James Franco as a naive, very young Ginsberg (he admits to delaying publication because "I didn't want my daddy to read it"). Todd Rotondi plays the iconic Jack Kerouac, Jon Prescott is the charismatic Neal Cassidy, Aaron Tveit plays Ginsberg's partner for life Peter Orlovsky. Much of the film involves performance of dialog from the "Howl" obscenity trial, with Andrew Rogers as an unspeaking Ferlinghetti,  Treat Williams as an expert defense witness, Jeff Daniels testifying for the prosecution, and David Straithairn solemn as Ginsberg's defense attorney.</p>

<p>	I found "Howl" intensely interesting for its subject matter and treatment if the poem, but wonder why it holds back from dramatic effects. It's rather flat, objective, dispassionate. Trial scenes are ideal for drama, but these seem more like transcripts. Still, the recreation of the times and milieu feels exact.</p>

<p>	Three more movies later today. It's like trying to see a years worth of films in a week.<br />
•<br />
•<br />
Movies, videos, stills, schedues and filmmaker interviews at the <b><a href="http://festival.sundance.org/2010/<br />
">Sundance web site</a>. </b><br />
•<br />
•<br />
</blockquote><b><i>"White Plastic Flower" by Jamie Stuart, a wonderful short <br />
about the darker side of Sundance. </b></i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gw3WiFLdgiw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gw3WiFLdgiw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><blockquote><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Below: Entries for Jan. 22 and 21:</b> </i><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford-downplays-Sundance-concerns-16973.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford-downplays-Sundance-concerns-16973.html','popup','width=300,height=440,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford-downplays-Sundance-concerns-thumb-240x352-16973.jpg" width="240" height="352" alt="Redford-downplays-Sundance-concerns.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: center; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>There's something I left out of my first post from Sundance. I thought it might come across wrong. Something else happened at the press conference with Robert Redford and John Cooper that meant a great deal to me. After the event was over and everybody was standing up in the aisle and pulling on their goose down jackets, I looked up and saw Redford making his way through the crowd. He wanted to say hello to me.</p>

<p>	He said he wanted to welcome me back to Sundance after the three years I missed. "You were here at the start," he said. "You've always been a help to us." Well, it's true. But in fact the story says more about Redford than it does about me. </p>

<p>I was here when Sundance was known as the U.S. Film and Video Festival. It's not<br />
remembered that there was actually some resentment when Redford reinvented the festival. In opening that first Sundance, he said he was an independent, too. </p>

<p>That inspired some raised eyebrows. Redford had for years been one of the biggest movie stars in the world. Yes, he had the "independent spirit" in the films he directed. But he didn't have indie budgets.</p>

<p><br />
	So what did he do? He put his money where his mouth was, and in the first five years I believe it was very much his own money. His instinct was to embrace the indie community, not move away from it. You didn't see him inviting all his famous friends to town. You never heard about him throwing some fabulous private party that hardly anyone got invited to. In fact, you never heard about a single Redford party at all, except for his annual Filmmaker's Brunch at the Sundance Resort. He wasn't Big Foot. He moved around town almost by stealth. He wasn't always there on stage introducing visiting stars and filmmakers and posing for photos with them. People perhaps don't reflect on how many things Redford <i>doesn't</i> do here.</p>

<p>	What he had already done five years earlier was found the Sundance Institute, a hands-on program linking young indie filmmakers with mentors. It had screenplay, acting, directing and producing workshops. It helped the funding for some projects. Have you ever really looked at the films the Institute was instrumental in making happen?</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford_Sundance-16976.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford_Sundance-16976.html','popup','width=400,height=733,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Redford_Sundance-thumb-250x458-16976.jpg" width="250" height="458" alt="Redford_Sundance.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	At the dawn of his career, Robert Redford had been a struggling unknown with no connections. But it was a brief dawn before a long day. He was very big. What could he do about that? He put his image and power at work for something worth doing. He did the same thing for environmental issues. He was an admirable man.</p>

<p>	Even to this day, some people take him too much for granted. They're blinded by *Robert Redford* He has never been that kind of star. He has exhibited that most rare attribute of movie stars, modesty. </p>

<p>	The festival opened this year with a film developed at the Sundance Institute, "Howl," about Allen Ginsberg, his famous poem, and the obscenity trial it inspired. In his opening night remarks, Redford mentioned looking for jazz one night in San Francisco, and stumbling by accident into the City Lights Bookstore, where there was a poetry reading by such Beats as Ginsberg, Gary Snider and Lawrence Ferlinghetti. This would have been before the Beat Generation made the cover of Life magazine.</p>

<p>	John Cooper, the festival director,  followed Redford onstage, and noted he'd neglected to say he took the bus to San Francisco on that occasion. He would have been a teenager. He was living at home in Santa Monica. That tells me all I need to know about a curious young man open to new possibilities. I believe <i>that</i> Redford, and not the famous Redford, who founded the Institute and made this festival happen.</p>

<p>	As this 20th year of Sundance opens, let it be said: Robert Redford has done more for indie films than any other human being. <br />
•<br />
•<br />
The web site of the <b><a href="http://www.sundance.org/default.aspx?sec=m&id=1">Sundance Institute</a>. </b><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b>Note: Instead of posting a different blog entry every day from Sundance, I will update this one from the top. Older posts will be pushed down. Newer videos will likewise push older ones down. The headline will change. There will be one comment thread. I think it makes more sense that way.</b> <br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b>Posted Thursday, January 22:</b> <br />
•<br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Sundance_Film_Festival-sm-16929.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Sundance_Film_Festival-sm-16929.html','popup','width=200,height=230,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Sundance_Film_Festival-sm-thumb-240x276-16929.jpg" width="240" height="276" alt="Sundance_Film_Festival-sm.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>For an instant I dreamed that the 2010 Sundance Film Festival had been dedicated to me. The cover of the official program book displayed only two letters in red on black: <b><i>RE</b> </i> These were not, however, my initials, but the theme of the festival.</p>

<p>	Reborn. Rebellion. Rebirth. Rebel. Renewed. Rebooted. Redford. All the <i>re</i> words. The screen before every film informs us: <i>This is the recharged fight against the establishment of the expected. This is the rebirth of the battle for brave new ideas.</i></p>

<p>	I got the feeling at his Thursday press conference that Robert Redford, the festival's founder, became fed up with the reimaging of the festival as a sort of yuppie tech-head geek consumerist trade show and party animal convention. The bloggers had taken to writing more about swag bags than auteurs.</p>

<p>The Ambush Marketers, Redford called them. The corporations eager to trade on the Sundance image to promote their booze, sunglasses, cell phones,  fashions and gizmos. "They took over half of Main Street with their stores," he said, "and rented every available house at 3 or 4 times the price. But now with the economy worse these people aren't coming."</p>

<p><br />
	Maybe even Paris Hilton won't come. She was arguably the  most publicized celebrity at the festival in 2008 and 2009, although she had no discernible reason for being here. The dear girl did make a real wardrobe statement, however, especially with her Snow Bunny outfit.  In a succinct statement that should be displayed as a watermark across her photos, Redford said, "Paris Hilton doesn't have anything to do with anything."</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/paris_hilton450x450-16932.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/paris_hilton450x450-16932.html','popup','width=450,height=450,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/paris_hilton450x450-thumb-280x280-16932.jpg" width="280" height="280" alt="paris_hilton450x450.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Redford and the new festival director John Cooper, who has taken over from Geoff Gilmore, talked about returning to the festival's roots as a haven for indie films. They're also open to new media distribution and have added a special section of films costing less than $500,000, sometimes a lot less. There's speculation in the indie community at large that self-distribution may be the way to go, with a reliance on the possibilities of the internet. As one of the audience questions pointed out, 2009 set a new record in total box office, and was also  year of continued declines in indie fortunes.</p>

<p>	Cooper talked of two new notions this year: A partnership with YouTube to make five 2010 festival films available as Video on Demand,  and a showcase for Sundance titles at leading art theaters around the country (in Chicago, the Music Box). The Sundance Selects VOD continues to expand. What this means, essentially, is that Sundance itself has gone into the distribution business in partnership with filmmakers. Makes sense. The Sundance name is a valuable trademark. Makes VOD customers feel cool.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/zz2c754400-550x446-16936.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/zz2c754400-550x446-16936.html','popup','width=550,height=446,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/zz2c754400-550x446-thumb-290x235-16936.jpg" width="290" height="235" alt="zz2c754400-550x446.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	One figure that was dropped at the press conference was sort of amazing: This year's festival has 1,600 volunteers. They come from all over. They are invariably friendly and helpful, as film festival volunteers almost invariably are. But 1,600? I wonder if the total audience was that large in the first years. I've been coming to Park City since <i>before</i> the festival's roots. I was on the jury when this was called the U.S. Film and Video Festival, and it was small enough that the Awards Banquet was held in a meeting room of the Holiday Inn. It was only vaguely defined and not prospering when Redford stepped in and took it over. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/IMG_0195.jpg"><img alt="IMG_0195.jpg" src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/IMG_0195-thumb-200x255-16939.jpg" width="200" height="255" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Its positioning in January is interesting. Toronto, in September, is ideally positioned for Oscar contenders. Sundance happens between the Golden Globes and the Oscars and has little to do with either, although sometimes a film launched here will climb to glory, as "Precious" did last year. It's like Fashion Week for the new year's indie releases. Increasingly, the festival has embraced documentaries and foreign films. It even has its own store front on Main Street that's friendly to little, little, little films, like you might make on your iPhone. </p>

<p>	When you're here it's easy to lose sight of the real world of "Avatar" and "Sherlock Holmes." The town is jammed. The screenings are packed. The Park Record observes that parking has become as hard to find as tickets. It's said that financing has dried up. That audiences don't hunger for intelligent films. And yet all these films got made. They will all get seen. The word will go forth from this time and place that some of them were wonderful. And in all but a few cases, the market won't care. Average American moviegoers cheerfully buy tickets to movies they expect will be junk. But confront them with something that might be great and they start looking all alarmed. <br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><b><i>The 2010 Sundance web site is much expanded and improved, <br />
and offers trailers of most of the films.</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pRMdDK0bK2A&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pRMdDK0bK2A&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•</p>

<p><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('502fed1c-392e-46ca-9f0e-ade724d131dc');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/rogerebertcom-movie-reviews">rogerebert.com :: Movie reviews,</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript></p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p>	<br />
 </p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>&quot;Caché:&quot;  A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/a_riddle_wrapped_in_a_mystery.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31204</id>

    <published>2010-01-19T04:36:59Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-19T14:44:12Z</updated>

    <summary>What if there&apos;s not an answer? What if Michael Haneke&apos;s &quot;Cache&quot; is a puzzle with only flawed solutions? What if life is like that? What if that makes it a better film? I imagine many viewers will be asking such...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Specific films" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/enigma780-16791.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/enigma780-16791.html','popup','width=780,height=780,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/enigma780-thumb-240x240-16791.jpg" width="240" height="240" alt="enigma780.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>What if there's not an answer? What if Michael Haneke's "Cache" is a puzzle with only flawed solutions? What if life is like that? What if that makes it a better film? I imagine many viewers will be asking such questions in a few years, now that Martin Scorsese has optioned it for an American version. We can ask them  now.  </p>

<p>There's only one way to discuss such matters, and that's by going into detail about the film itself. I hesitate to employ the hackneyed word "spoiler" here, because no one in his right mind should read this without experiencing the film. I won't even bother with a plot synopsis. You've seen it.</p>

<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>The mystery, of course, involves the identity of the person or persons sending the videos which disrupt the bourgeois routine of a Parisian family. The interim solution by many viewers seems to be that Pierrot, the evasive and distant son, is their source. This despite the fact that the movie also places suspicion on Majid, the childhood victim of Georges, and on Majid's own son.]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>They would all have a motive. As Majid tells Georges, his life and his education were forever changed by Georges' actions as a five-year-old boy. Georges felt threatened by his parent's decision to adopt the Algerian orphan, and lied in telling them the boy was spitting up blood -- an alarming signal of tuberculosis. In a wretched scene, observed in long shot from (presumably) Georges' POV, social workers drag Majid away from the only home he's known.

<p><br />
	Only Majid would know that happened -- and Georges, who isn't talking. Therefore, only Majid's knowledge could have informed the childish drawings of the cartoon figure with blood spurting from its mouth and neck. The three people who could have drawn them are Pierrot, Majid, and Majid's son. This son is not given a name in the film, so let's refer to him by the actor's name, Walid.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/house-16782.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/house-16782.html','popup','width=1400,height=783,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/house-thumb-325x181-16782.jpg" width="325" height="181" alt="house.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	That's clear enough. What muddies the water is the film's last shot, showing  Pierrot leaving his school and meeting Majid's son, several years older, on the steps. These two people should not know one another. Many viewers, seeing them meet, come to the conclusion that the two sons did it together. Yet we have no idea whether this is the latest of several meetings, or a first meeting, sought by "Walid" after the death of his father. It's true they shouldn't know each other. But what does it prove that they do?</p>

<p>	Haneke, in an interview, is amused that about half the audience fails to even notice the two sons on the steps. His doctor friend, the first person he showed the movie to, missed it. He can't be blamed. Given basic rules of composition, our attention is focused on a point in foreground just to the right of center--a woman with her back turned, waiting for school to be let out, dressed in slightly lighter colors. Walid enters from right and moves diagonally up the stairs to join Pierrot in left background. The composition is a subtle achievement: Most of us notice them, but Haneke does nothing obvious to draw attention to them.</p>

<p>	Why and how do these two know one another? Pierrot at the end of the film should not know anything at all about Majid and Walid. Walid had to have learned about Georges from his father. So he would have been the one to seek out the younger boy. But when? Recently, after the suicide of his father? Some time ago? If back then, to what purpose? To plan the scheme, presumably. Walid would have found a disturbed adolescent alienated from his parents. Georges in particular is shown as critical and cool toward his son. Pierrot might have been open to a suggested collaboration.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ai&amp;j-16795.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ai&amp;j-16795.html','popup','width=1400,height=787,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/ai&amp;j-thumb-325x182-16795.jpg" width="325" height="182" alt="ai&amp;j.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	How did they hit upon the notion of sending anonymous videos, if they did? We will never know. But Walid must have sent them, with or without Pierrot. His access to Majid's apartment proves that. On the school stairs, Majid and Walid  have a conversation with body language that is suggestive--but of what? I believe but can't prove it indicates this is not their first meeting. What is important in Haneke's use of the shot is: <i>These two know one another.</i> That's what we can say for sure.</p>

<p>	All right, now. We have two characters with motives, and together they would have the means to make the videos. It is likely that Walid physically placed the cameras(s). Pierrot is under closer supervision. We cannot be sure of his whereabouts at every time in the movie (even his parents are not). My guess is that Haneke deliberately kept some uncertainty. In any event, Wajid is free at any time to drop packages, ring doorbells, and make anonymous telephone calls. Pierrot is free much of the time to help. Pierrot is not, however, strictly speaking, necessary. </p>

<p>	Other questions arise. Where is the first camera hidden? Georges appears in one video to be looking directly at it. Haneke elsewhere in the film gives us a good look at where it must have been. Somewhere on the side of  that building, perhaps hidden in some plantings. That would imply access to the building, but let's not even go there. The point is, we can clearly see that a camera could apparently <i>not</i> be hidden there. It couldn't? Well, a camera was. Case closed. And it must have required an electrical outlet, since it had to run for long periods. We can eliminate the possibility that it's motion-sensitive, because it runs when there's no motion.</p>

<p>	The point, I think, is not how the family was watched, but <i>that</i> it was watched. Our difficulty in figuring out how is not Haneke's problem.</p>

<p><br />
 <span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/2a&amp;j-16785.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/2a&amp;j-16785.html','popup','width=1400,height=781,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/2a&amp;j-thumb-325x181-16785.jpg" width="325" height="181" alt="2a&amp;j.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	The childish drawings. Who made them? Could be Walid, Pierrot, or, not to rule him out, Majid. Their style is deliberately that of a child of five. Their subject is designed to evoke a traumatic event at that age, which could be linked, too, to Georges' memory of Majid chopping off the rooster's head. I saw chickens beheaded in my grandmother's garage at that age, and can vividly remember it now. In the 1940s you might bring home a live chicken from a cousin's farm and kill it for dinner, especially with postwar rationing. </p>

<p>	Now, then. Certainly Walid. Probably Pierrot working with him. Probably not Majid; his protestation of innocence completely convinced me. How did you feel? We come to the smoking gun I referred to in my review at "around" the 20:39 point in the DVD. I was thinking specifically of the boy with blood in his mouth, and the shots on either side are also crucial. As the critic Michael  Mirasol writes in his discussion of the film, a preceding shot "refers to the spot where Georges' house is being recorded (the film's opening shot). It has to be a POV, but from whose? </p>

<p>"The film tricks us (as it did me) with the next brief shot of a boy with a bleeding mouth. If you watch carefully, the camera pans across the room to the bleeding boy by the window. This is not Georges' adult home, it's from his childhood home. The living room in this sequence is the same as the same sequence later in the film where Georges is leaving his mother's house. The boy I believe is Majid, from Georges' childhood memories.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-16089.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-16089.html','popup','width=647,height=361,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-thumb-325x181-16089.jpg" width="325" height="181" alt="son.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	He continues: "Think about it. Shot #3 I believe is from Pierrot's POV, looking at the spot where he can record his videos. The shot involving the bleeding boy reveals why Georges must have wanted Majid to be taken away. As a boy, he must have discovered Majid bleeding, and being young, did not understand what his condition meant, leading to the film's disturbing revelations."</p>

<p>	Well, yes and no. To begin with, there is no evidence of who the POV shot belongs to, although Mirasol and many other viewers assume it is Pierrot's. In my mind it's very unlikely that Pierrot <i>took</i> the videos, although I'm convinced he knew about them. But the shots around 20:39 establish a connection between the tapes and the childhood experience of Majid. What is the origin of the shot of the bleeding boy? Majid's memory? George's memory? Pierrot's visualization of something told him by Walid? We cannot be sure. Haneke specifically avoids making us sure.</p>

<p>	So. We have a good idea of what happened on the farm in the childhoods of Majid and Georges. We know the videos exist. We know making them must have involved Walid and probably Pierrot. We cannot be sure of the method, but the method is beside the point. Does the "smoking gun" at 20:39 establish a connection between Majid's childhood and the present story? Yes, but we cannot be exactly sure whose memories are involved. How in fact do we know it's not Majid's own, and has nothing to do with the POV shot immediately before?</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/majid-16798.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/majid-16798.html','popup','width=1400,height=788,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/majid-thumb-325x182-16798.jpg" width="325" height="182" alt="majid.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p> <br />
	It functions, in any event, as apparent proof that Georges didn't make up the TB story from thin air. Majid did cough blood. But wait. How do we know that? The shot is of a past event, and all past events in the film are seen only from Georges' POV. Therefore, it must be Georges' memory, or his memory of a visualization inspired by his story -- because how likely is it that Majid and he were in the same bathroom in the middle of the night? We  have no objective evidence that Majid ever had TB. And the POV from the window could also be Georges', trying to discover where a camera was concealed so he didn't see it.</p>

<p>	Let's pull back to consider the whole film. Much of it involves the relationship between Georges (Daniel Auteuil) and his wife Anne (Juliette Binoche). The tapes breed discord in their marriage. Anne suspects Georges, rightly, of concealing things from her. He cannot trust her with her his childhood memories. He doesn't want them himself. The film recalls an incident during the Algerian War when the bodies of hundreds of Algerian immigrants were found floating in the Seine. Among them may have been Majid's parents, who went to Paris to join a demonstration and were never seen again.  This tragedy has been all but erased from the French public's memory. It doesn't want them.</p>

<p>	But those things happened. The past is always with us, just as it is always with Majid and Georges, whose lives have been so certainly shaped by the past. And the message of the tapes is not so much that someone is watching, but that someone <i>sees. </i> Who this is, and how and why it is, will change with the generations. But the sight will remain.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/POV shot-16804.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/POV shot-16804.html','popup','width=504,height=258,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/POV shot-thumb-350x179-16804.jpg" width="350" height="179" alt="POV shot.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	In his interview on the DVD, Haneke seems almost jovial as he mentions various theories about his film and how the film seems to deflate them. You can never be sure, he says -- in life, as well. Bad things happen and have bad consequences. It is impossible to sift back through history to account for them. The laying of blame may be clear, but the evidence trail is not. "Cache" resists a simple solution. There are still other possibilities. One, however bizarre it may seem, is that Georges himself is somehow responsible for the tapes. I think that's hardly possible, but it can't entirely be ruled out. </p>

<p>	An unwritten code of film is that when it is important to know who did something, it must be a character in the film, unless that character can be clearly eliminated.  I'll rule out Georges. That leaves almost certainly Walid, probably Pierrot, and to a very uncertain degree Majid. The only other possibility is -- none of the above, but someone <i>none</i> of the characters is aware of. In the real world, that would be possible. The film itself would necessarily be unaware of this observer, and could see only the consequences. The chances of that are vanishingly slight, but with Michael ("You can never know")   Haneke, it can't be completely ruled out. Consider his current success with "The White Ribbon." "The children did it," I hear. How can anyone be sure of that?</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cuntry-16807.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cuntry-16807.html','popup','width=1400,height=787,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cuntry-thumb-325x182-16807.jpg" width="325" height="182" alt="cuntry.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	What was Haneke's purpose with "Cache?" I suspect it was to inspire just such questions as we're having. We saw the film. It has no fancy footwork. The shots and editing are clear. With all of our training from other movies, we assume they will add up and yield to our analysis. They add up all too well, but produce no certain solution. If I told you "Walid" (Majid's son) is the only person I know <i>for sure</i> was involved, you will no doubt inform me why I am wrong. Majid's son has not been  been fingered as the guilty one in any reviews I know about. Most people assume it was Pierrot, or the two working together. I believe I've ruled out Pierrot as a solo act.</p>

<p>	Once I read your comments I'll know for sure, but right now I fear I've made an error in my reasoning, and that the film has no provable solution at all. As Haneke says, no matter what you come up with, there's a flaw. And yet nothing in this film is impossible. These are the people, it happened to them. These are the events, they took place. No explanation is satisfactory.</p>

<p>	In life, there are situations like that. For me, the murder of John F. Kennedy is one. All of the explanations of that assassination are excellent at one thing: Pointing out the errors in all the other explanations. The brilliance of Oliver Stone's "JFK" is how it caters to our conviction that the true story has never been told -- no, not even by Stone. What Haneke has done, here and in other films, is demolish our faith in rational analysis. It would be fascinating to see him take on Sherlock Holmes. </p>

<p>	Scorsese has his work cut out for him in making his film. It will not be a "remake"  any more than Werner Herzog's "Bad Lieutenant" is. It will be a Scorsese film. Assuming he retains the broad outline, he can (a) solve the mystery, or (b) leave the mystery hanging, as I believe Haneke does. Can you get away with that in a Hollywood film, with Leonardo DiCaprio already attached as Georges? Will the mass American movie going public let him get way with it? If anyone can, maybe Scorsese can. He'll try to be clever enough to conceal that he got away with it.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
Here is my<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100113/REVIEWS08/100119986">Great Movies</a> </b>review of "Cache."</p>

<p>Michael Mirasol's <b> <a href="http://www.michaelmirasol.com/flipcritic/2010/01/caches-smoking-gun.html">blog entry</a> </b>on the film.</p>

<p><i>[ The image at the top is from Micharl Bach's website <b><a href="http://www.michaelbach.de/ot/mot_enigma/index.html<br />
">Optical Illusions & Visual Phenomena </a>. </b> He suggests: "Stare at the centre of the figure for a while. Some 'scintillating' activity will build up in the violet and blue annuli. Some observers also report a circular rotation within these regions; things will begin to "run around in circles." ] </i><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/5bf06686-5d91-4737-bd58-da4742140e3b"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F5bf06686-5d91-4737-bd58-da4742140e3b&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Making out is its own reward</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/making_out_is_its_own_reward.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.31024</id>

    <published>2010-01-13T05:48:19Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-17T01:13:24Z</updated>

    <summary>Fifty years ago, a brief letter to the editor of a student newspaper led to a national furor over academic freedom. When it broke in 1959, the Leo Koch Case dominated front pages and newscasts. It remained a story for...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="My Life and Times" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/1--16607.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/1--16607.html','popup','width=538,height=534,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/1--thumb-240x238-16607.jpg" width="240" height="238" alt="1-.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Fifty years ago, a brief letter to the editor of a student newspaper led to a national furor over academic freedom. When it broke in 1959, the Leo Koch Case dominated front pages and newscasts. It remained a story for three years. Today it is so thoroughly forgotten that not even Wikipedia, which knows everything, has heard of it. </p>

<p>I was on the campus the whole time and later edited the same campus paper, but I don't want to write about the case. I want to write about what was said in the letter.</p>

<p>	It was published in the autumn of 1960. Let me take you back on a trip through time. That was a Puritan era by today's standards.</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>Most universities took aggressive steps to prevent sex among undergraduates. Students weren't allowed to live in their own apartments. In women's dormitories, a strict curfew was enforced, and too many "late minutes" in a semester would get you hauled up before a Disciplinary Committee. It was assumed that by locking down the women, you would prevent sex; gay sex was off the radar.

<p><br />
	Police patrolled lovers' lanes and shone spotlights into suspicious cars. If actual sex was observed, arrests were made. University Police checked local motel parking lots for license plates registered to students. If a couple returned to a woman's dorm early, they could share a sofa in the lounge, a brightly-lighted room monitored by matrons who enforced the Three Foot Rule. This wasn't as bad as it sounds. It didn't mean boy and girl had to be separated by three feet, but it did mean that three of their four feet had to be on the floor, if you follow me. </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Koch spectator2-16632.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Koch spectator2-16632.html','popup','width=857,height=1280,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Koch spectator2-thumb-300x448-16632.jpg" width="300" height="448" alt="Koch spectator2.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span></form><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote></p>

<p>Where were these rules enforced? Not only at small religious schools, but at big state and private universities. Your old dad here was a freshman at the University of Illinois, where car crashes were blamed on speeding toward women's dorms at Curfew. In that climate, an assistant professor of biology named Leo Koch sent the following letter to The Daily Illini:</p>

<p>	<blockquote><i>With modern contraceptives and medical advice readily available at the nearest drugstore, or at least a family physician, there is no valid reason why sexual intercourse should not be condoned among those sufficiently mature to engage in it without social consequences and without violating their own codes of morality and ethics. A mutually satisfactory sexual experience would eliminate the need for many hours of frustrating petting and lead to happier and longer lasting marriages among our young men and women.</blockquote> </i></p>

<p>	Yes. That's what he wrote. </p>

<p>Reading it again, I was shocked at how innocuous it seems in 2010. There was an immediate uproar. Outraged citizens' groups and the Chicago Tribune called for the university to take action, President David Dodds Henry directed Koch's dean to relieve the biologist "immediately" of his duties. The American Association of University Professors, while not siding with Koch's views, said he had a right to express them and noted he had been summarily fired without a hearing. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/D'Lish-16613.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/D'Lish-16613.html','popup','width=561,height=365,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/D'Lish-thumb-260x169-16613.jpg" width="260" height="169" alt="D'Lish.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	The AAUP imposed censure on the university, which lasted until 1964. At that point Illinois redeemed itself by <i>not</i> dismissing the Classics professor Revilo P. Oliver after he wrote an article for the John Birch Society magazine charging that John F. Kennedy was a communist agent murdered by other communists because he "was about to turn American." Less than a year after JFK's death, Oliver added: "So long as there are Americans, his memory will be cherished with execration and loathing."</p>

<p>	The university took the position that Oliver's article was protected speech under the First Amendment. That must have been small comfort to Leo Koch, who remained so infamous that when he found a job in 1964 as a science instructor at the progressive Camp Summerlane, near Brevard, N.C., rumors of nudism and free love swept the area and the campers were attacked in a violent night raid by <i>both</i> townspeople and state troopers. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/200199629-001-16617.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/200199629-001-16617.html','popup','width=508,height=336,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/200199629-001-thumb-260x171-16617.jpg" width="260" height="171" alt="200199629-001.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	That was then and this is now. I grew up in that atmosphere. I had been working on The News-Gazette in Champaign-Urbana since 1958, and don't remember hearing  anyone defend Koch's letter -- not even Joe Black, a melancholy, hard-drinking  reporter who wrote Beatnik poetry. Universities followed the principle of <i>in loco parentis,</i> believing they acted "in the place of parents." Today's co-ed and gay dorms were not remotely envisioned. </p>

<p>	As a result sex became problematical in everyday student life. The expectation was that you might get nowhere -- or if you did, you could be disciplined, arrested, or expelled. That is not to say we were chaste. Speaking only from my own experience, I had an increasingly active sex life on campus, culminating at a National Student Congress at the University of Minnesota in 1964 when I experienced the joy of intercourse with a female undergraduate for the first time. I was not a virgin, but those details are off-topic. I had adventures in 1965 at the University of Cape Town, but it was not until the early winter of 1966, when I was in graduate school, that I experienced intercourse with a student in Champaign-Urbana for the first time, at 23.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rockinfree-16637.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rockinfree-16637.html','popup','width=473,height=376,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/rockinfree-thumb-260x206-16637.jpg" width="260" height="206" alt="rockinfree.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Was I behind the curve? At the time I bitterly thought so. Nothing has changed my opinion. At my advanced age, I thought I must be one of the last to get on board. This was after the introduction of The Pill and the legalization of pornography and during the run-up to the Summer of Love and considered myself the most ill-served young man of my generation. I knew many couples who were living together. Others were "going to Chicago for the weekend," wherever Chicago might happen to be. I was a member of the Capitol Crowd, the graduate students who drank in a beloved Green St. bar and eatery. We were the local bohemians, such as the town possessed, and the bar was equidistant from an art theater and the Turk's Head Coffee House, where students declaimed their poetry. The Capitol's atmosphere was relaxed. One Friday night an assistant journalism professor took off his clothes and madly ran around. On Monday morning, he met his class. The incident, as they say, "didn't get back to anyone."</p>

<p>	It was one night in the Capitol that I saw for the first time one man kiss another one full on the lips. This took place among guys we knew at the next table over. I clearly recall that we all fell silent, our eyes evaded one another, and none of we bold bohemians could utter a single word. Something like a mild electric shock ran through my body. No, I didn't "discover I was gay." I discovered that other people surely were. Until then homosexuality had been witnessed by me only in novels, poetry, vague scenes in films, and rumor. I knew lots of "queers," by which I meant "effeminate," but my imagination stopped more or less with them laughing about the same things.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/FeastofFools-TwoMenKissing859-16623.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/FeastofFools-TwoMenKissing859-16623.html','popup','width=639,height=451,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/FeastofFools-TwoMenKissing859-thumb-260x183-16623.jpg" width="260" height="183" alt="FeastofFools-TwoMenKissing859.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Was I hopelessly naive and backward? Certainly so. But those were different times. I have written before that to my knowledge all of the women in the Urbana High School Class of 1960 were virgins on graduation day, except <i>perhaps </i>for one who was dating a university student. I realize in writing that this probably cannot be true, but you might be amazed by how close to the truth it was in 1960. I don't think I'll call for a show of hands at our reunion this summer.</p>

<p>	Yet I said I had an active sex life. It is true. What did we do? We made out. In the words of the good professor, we Petted, although I never heard anyone use that word. As the editor with the key, the privacy of the photo library at The Daily Illini was a godsend. On the desk of the editor's office I did some intense proof reading. As a townie I drove a car, and on the front seat of that old Ford I experienced indescribable delights, made all the more exciting because they were restrained. We kissed. We fondled breasts. My hands strayed to the netherlands. My own movables were subject to trespass. Orgasms in the case of both parties were far from unheard of, although (a) you had to know the girl pretty well, and (b) you both might pretend they were unintended. Eventually I might progress to the point where "Oops!" became a word of delight, but that took a while. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6_t-2-16626.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6_t-2-16626.html','popup','width=397,height=300,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/6_t-2-thumb-260x196-16626.jpg" width="260" height="196" alt="6_t-2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Part of the game was to get...right...up...almost...to the Oops! Point. If you helplessly hurtled past it, well, as Dean of Men Fred Turner used to warn us, <i>Always remember boys! A stiff prick has no conscience.</i> Anyway, so he was widely quoted. I never heard him say it. I never met anyone who did. It was always someone else who had heard him. I learn that the phrase may not have been strictly original with Dean Turner, and in Roman times was expressed: <i>Penis erects non compos mentis.</i></p>

<p>	Like many old farts my age, I don't know what to make of the sexual habits of younger generations. I hear about Hooking Up. The term is widely in use, and refers to the exchange of physical pleasure, not necessarily intercourse, between two people who may not be going together or in fact may not have been introduced and indeed may not be strictly sober. Let me assure you that Hooking Up was discovered long before it was named.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/5_wg-3lg-16629.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/5_wg-3lg-16629.html','popup','width=493,height=375,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/5_wg-3lg-thumb-270x205-16629.jpg" width="270" height="205" alt="5_wg-3lg.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I also hear about "sexting," and even dates via the internet. This strikes me as  sad. Many teenagers today seem to live as hermits, connecting electronically. Sure, we were accused of "living on the telephone," but it was to <i>plan</i> or <i>recall</i> or <i>speculate </i>or <i>fantasize</i> or <i>gossip</i> about what had/would/might occur in real life among physical people. I learn young people don't "date" so much anymore. They "go places in a group of friends." Jeez, haven't these kids ever heard of ditching your friends in order to...whatever?</p>

<p>	I believe that with the sexual freedom and sophistication of these times, the emphasis centers too much on orgasm. Birth control eliminated a prime motivation for abstinence. The good professor was right. Making out became less "necessary." Hell, it was never necessary to begin with. It was fun, most especially between two people who enjoyed playing together.  I believe that many of us have a strong, if not fully articulated, desire for extended periods of making out. No, I am <i>not </i>referring to "foreplay." Making out need not be "fore" anything. It is its own reward. Some of the truest words I've ever written are: </p>

<p><i>It is more erotic to wonder if you're about to be kissed than it is  to be kissed.</i><br />
</blockquote><CENTER><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Tips on Kissing</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/W20rVgUj3AI&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/W20rVgUj3AI&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>How to make out</b> <i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cBCxfN7ek3s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cBCxfN7ek3s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>How to make your move in a movie theater. <br />
<b>Three steps, 100% guaranteed</b>  </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xMcI5eMs1JY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xMcI5eMs1JY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x006699&color2=0x54abd6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<b><i>Advice from an expert make out artist. <br />
<b>(Q: Should you chew gum while making out?)</b> </i><br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Kjek3zi19Cs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Kjek3zi19Cs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
</b> </b> <i>[ The Champaign-Urbana Spectator was a weekly paper I edited in 1962. If we'd had sense enough to give it away, we might have been on to something. ]</i><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
</CENTER><br />
<SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/a2b86c9d-400a-4c66-a662-fcc0db7ba1c6"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2Fa2b86c9d-400a-4c66-a662-fcc0db7ba1c6&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT><br />
•<br />
<a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><br />
<script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p><br />
<a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/television/submit" onclick="window.location = 'http://www.reddit.com/r/television/submit?url=' + encodeURIComponent(window.location); return false"> <img src="http://www.reddit.com/static/spreddit7.gif" alt="submit to reddit" border="0" /> </a></b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </i></i></i></i></i></p>

<p><!-- AddThis Button BEGIN --><br />
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style"><br />
<a href="http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&amp;username=rjebert" class="addthis_button_compact">Share</a><br />
<span class="addthis_separator">|</span><br />
<a class="addthis_button_facebook"></a><br />
<a class="addthis_button_myspace"></a><br />
<a class="addthis_button_google"></a><br />
<a class="addthis_button_twitter"></a><br />
</div><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://s7.addthis.com/js/250/addthis_widget.js#username=rjebert"></script><br />
<!-- AddThis Button END --></p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Nil by mouth</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/01/nil_by_mouth.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2010:/ebert//103.30836</id>

    <published>2010-01-07T05:38:25Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-17T01:12:50Z</updated>

    <summary>I mentioned that I can no longer eat or drink. A reader wrote: &quot;That sounds so sad. Do you miss it?&quot; Not so much really. Not anymore. Understand that I was never told that after surgery I might lose the...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="My Life and Times" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Popular entries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;w-16339.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;w-16339.html','popup','width=576,height=572,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;w-thumb-240x238-16339.jpg" width="240" height="238" alt="a&amp;w.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>I mentioned that I can no longer eat or drink. A reader wrote: "That sounds so sad. Do you miss it?" Not so much really. Not anymore. Understand that I was never told that after surgery I might lose the ability to eat, drink and speak. Eating and drinking were not mentioned, and it was said that after surgery I might actually be able to go back to work on television. </p>

<p>Success in such surgery is not unheard of.  It didn't happen that way. The second surgery was also intended to restore my speaking ability. It seemed to hold together for awhile, but then, in surgeon-speak, also "fell apart."</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>A third surgery was attempted, using a different approach. It seemed to work, and in a mirror I saw myself looking familiar again. But after a little more than a week, that surgery failed, too. Blood vessels intended to attach the transplanted tissue lost function, probably because they had been weakened by radiation. A fourth surgery has been proposed, but I flatly reject the idea. To paraphrase a line from "Adaptation's" orchid collector: "Done with surgery."

<p><br />
During that whole period I was Nil by Mouth. Nobody said as much in so many words, but it gradually became clear that it wouldn't ever be right again. There wasn't some soul-dropping moment for that realization. It just...developed. I never felt hungry, I never felt thirsty, I wasn't angry because the doctors had done their best. But I went through a period of obsession about food and drink. I came up with the crazy idea of getting some Coke through my g-tube. My doctors said, sure, a little, why not? For once the sugar and a little sodium wouldn't hurt. I even got some tea, and a little coffee, before deciding that caffeine addiction was something I didn't need.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cocacola_bottle_opener-16342.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cocacola_bottle_opener-16342.html','popup','width=359,height=350,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/cocacola_bottle_opener-thumb-200x194-16342.jpg" width="200" height="194" alt="cocacola_bottle_opener.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
I dreamed. I was reading Cormac McCarthy's <i>Suttree,</i> and there's a passage where the hero, lazing on his river boat on a hot summer day, pulls up a string from the water with a bottle of orange soda attached to it and drinks. I <i>tasted</i> that pop so clearly I can taste it today. Later he's served a beer in a frosted mug. I don't drink beer, but the frosted mug evoked for me a long-buried memory of my father and I driving in his old Plymouth to the A&W Root Beer stand (gravel driveways, carhop service, window trays) and his voice saying "...and a five-cent beer for the boy." The smoke from his Lucky Strike in the car. The heavy summer heat.</p>

<p>	For nights I would wake up already focused on that small but heavy glass mug with the ice sliding from it, and the first sip of root beer. I took that sip over and over. The ice slid down across my fingers again and again. But never again.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;wKayCrain-thumb-300x231-9011-16359.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;wKayCrain-thumb-300x231-9011-16359.html','popup','width=300,height=231,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/a&amp;wKayCrain-thumb-300x231-9011-thumb-265x204-16359.jpg" width="265" height="204" alt="a&amp;wKayCrain-thumb-300x231-9011.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	One day in the hospital my brother-in-law Johnny Hammel and his wife Eunice came to visit. They are two of my favorite people. They're Jehovah's Witnesses, and know I'm not. I mention that because they interpreted my story in terms of their faith. I described my fantasies about root beer. I could smell it, taste it, feel it. I desired it. I said I'd remembered so clearly that day with my father for the first time in 60 years.</p>

<p>	"You never thought about it before?" Johnny asked.</p>

<p>	"Not once."</p>

<p>	"Could be, when the Lord took away your drinking, he gave you back that memory."</p>

<p>	Whether my higher power was the Lord or Cormac McCarthy, those were the words I needed to hear. And from that time I began to replace what I had lost with what I remembered. If I think I want an orange soda right now, it is after all only a desire. People have those all the time. For that matter, when I had the chance, when was the last time I  held one of those tall Nehi glass bottles? I doubt I ever had one from a can.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/trinity-college-dublin-16362.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/trinity-college-dublin-16362.html','popup','width=550,height=404,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/trinity-college-dublin-thumb-250x183-16362.jpg" width="250" height="183" alt="trinity-college-dublin.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	I've found memories now come welling up almost alarmingly. It's all still in there, every bit. I saw "Leap Year," with its scenes in Dublin, and recognized the street where I stayed in the Shelbourne Hotel, even though the hotel wasn't shown. That started me on Trinity College nearby, where I remembered that McHugh and I saw the Book of Kells in its glass case. And then I remembered us walking out the back gate of Trinity and finding a pub where we were to join two of his brothers. And meeting Kitty Kelly sitting inside the pub, who became famous in our stories as the only whore in Dublin with her own coach. </p>

<p>	"Are you two students?" McHugh's younger brother Eugene asked them innocently.</p>

<p>	"I'm a working girl meself," the first said.</p>

<p>	"Her name is Kitty Kelly," her friend volunteered. "I'm her coach."</p>

<p>	I walked into that movie with the Book of Kells and Kitty Kelly's coach and Eugene McHugh far from my mind. The story itself had long since fallen from our repertoire.  But it's all in there.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/guerard-16367.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/guerard-16367.html','popup','width=640,height=427,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/guerard-thumb-260x173-16367.jpg" width="260" height="173" alt="guerard.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	When it comes to food, I don't have a gourmet's memory. I remember the kinds of foods I was raised to love. Chaz and I stayed once at Les Pres d'Eugenie, the inn of the famous Michel Guerard in Eugénie-les-Bains. We had certainly the best meal I have ever been served. I remember that,  the room, the people at the other tables and our view in the photo, but I can no longer remember what I ate. It isn't hard-wired into my memory. </p>

<p>Yet I could if I wanted to right now close my eyes and re-experience an entire meal at Steak 'n Shake, bite by bite in proper sequence, because I always ordered the same items and ate them according to the same ritual. It is there for me.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Steak n Shake Combo-16370.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Steak n Shake Combo-16370.html','popup','width=1200,height=939,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/Steak n Shake Combo-thumb-260x203-16370.jpg" width="260" height="203" alt="Steak n Shake Combo.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Another surprising area for sharp memory is the taste and texture of cheap candy. Not imported chocolates, but Red Hots, Good and Plenty, Milk Duds, Paydays, Chuckles. I dreamed I got a box of Chuckles with five licorice squares, and in my dream I exalted: "Finally!" With Necco wafers, there again, the licorice were the best. The peculiar off-purple wafers were space-wasters. As a general rule in candy, if anything is black, red or green, in that order, I like it.</p>

<p>	This got carried so far one day I found myself googling White Hen-style candy with the mad idea of writing an entire blog entry on the subject. During visits to a Cracker Barrel I would buy paper bags filled with licorice, root beer, horehound and  cinnamon drops. Searching for Black Jack gum, I found whole web sites devoted licorice in its many forms. I even discovered and downloaded a photo of a basket that seemed assembled from my memory, and it is below.</p>

<p>	</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/wallys_mayberry_ccbs-16373.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/wallys_mayberry_ccbs-16373.html','popup','width=500,height=500,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/wallys_mayberry_ccbs-thumb-260x260-16373.jpg" width="260" height="260" alt="wallys_mayberry_ccbs.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
But the last thing I want to start here is a discussion of such age old-old practices of pouring Kool-Aid into a bottle of RC Cola to turn it into a weapon. Let me return to the original question: Isn't it sad to be unable eat or drink? Not as sad as you might imagine. I save an enormous amount of time. I have control of my weight. Everything agrees with me. And so on.</p>

<p>	What I miss is the society. Lunch and dinner are the two occasions when we most easily meet with friends and family. They're the first way we experience places far from home. Where we sit to regard the passing parade. How we learn indirectly of other cultures. When we feel good together. Meals are when we get a lot of our talking done -- probably most of our recreational talking. That's what I miss. Because I can't speak that's's another turn of the blade. I can sit at a table and vicariously enjoy the conversation, which is why I enjoy pals like my friend McHugh so much, because he rarely notices if anyone else isn't speaking. But to attend a "business dinner" is a species of torture. I'm no good at business anyway, but at least if I'm being bad at it at Joe's Stone Crab there are consolations. </p>

<p>	When we drive around town  I never look at a trendy new restaurant and wish I could eat there. I peer into little storefront places, diners, ethnic places, and then I feel envy. After a movie we'll drive past a formica restaurant with only two tables occupied, and I'll wish I could be at one of them, having ordered something familiar and and reading a book. I never felt alone in a situation like that. I was a soloist.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/france-16376.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/france-16376.html','popup','width=720,height=715,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/france-thumb-225x223-16376.jpg" width="225" height="223" alt="france.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
When  I moved north to Lincoln Park and the Dudak's's house, Glenna Syse, the Sun-Times drama critic, told me about Frances Deli on Clark Street. "They make you eat your vegetables," she told me. There were maybe a dozen tables inside, and you selected from the day's dishes like roast chicken, lamb stew, lake perch and, yes, the veggies, although one of them was rice pudding. You want roast chicken, here's your roast chicken.  It was so simple it almost made you grin. You didn't even have to ask for the bed of dressing on which it slumbered.</p>

<p>	Frances has moved into a bigger space across the street but nothing much else has changed. Nobody will look at you funny if you bring in the Sunday paper and spread it out. And breakfast? Talk about the breakfast. If a place doesn't advertise "Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner" and serve tuna melts, right away you figure they're covering up for something.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/36299606_603f1582df-16379.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/36299606_603f1582df-16379.html','popup','width=480,height=321,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/36299606_603f1582df-thumb-240x160-16379.jpg" width="240" height="160" alt="36299606_603f1582df.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	There's a place called the Old-Timer's Restaurant across the street from the Lake Street screening room in Chicago. I love that place. No fuss, no muss, friendly, the owner stands behind the cash register and chats with everybody going in and out. I've ordered breakfast at lunch time there. "You're still serving breakfast? I asked. "Hey, an egg's an egg."</p>

<p>I came across this sentence in its web review, and it perfectly describes the kind of place I like:  " A Greek-style chow joint replete with '70s wood paneling, periwinkle padded booths, a chatty wait staff and the warble of regulars at the bar. Basically, if you've ever had it at any place that starts with Grandma's, Uncle's or any sort of Greek place name, you can find it here." Yes. If a restaurant doesn't serve tuna melts, right away you have to make allowances.</p>

<p>	So that's what's sad about not eating. The loss of dining, not the loss of food. It may be personal, but for, unless I'm alone, it doesn't involve dinner if it doesn't involve talking. The food and drink I can do without easily. The jokes, gossip, laughs, arguments and shared memories I miss. Sentences beginning with the words, "Remember that time?" I ran in crowds where anyone was likely to break out in a poetry recitation at any time. Me too. But not me anymore. So yes, it's sad. Maybe that's why I enjoy this blog. You don't realize it, but we're at dinner right now.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/DSC_0107_1-16385.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/DSC_0107_1-16385.html','popup','width=1280,height=851,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2010/01/DSC_0107_1-thumb-350x232-16385.jpg" width="350" height="232" alt="DSC_0107_1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('08c28691-773b-412e-a453-773f04f06841');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/rogerebertcom-movie-reviews-essays-and--rebert">rogerebert.com :: Movie reviews, essays and the M</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript></p>

<p><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.reddit.com/buttonlite.js?i=1"></script></p>

<p></p>

<p><a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The best films of the decade</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_best_films_of_the_decade.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30635</id>

    <published>2009-12-30T21:53:59Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-02T16:18:42Z</updated>

    <summary>&quot;Synecdoche, New York&quot; is the best film of the decade. It intends no less than to evoke the strategies we use to live our lives. After beginning my first viewing in confusion, I began to glimpse its purpose and by...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best film lists--and worst" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch hoiffman-16066.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch hoiffman-16066.html','popup','width=435,height=490,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch hoiffman-thumb-240x270-16066.jpg" width="240" height="270" alt="synch hoiffman.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>"Synecdoche, New York" </a> </b>is the best film of the decade. It intends no less than to evoke the strategies we use to live our lives. After beginning my first viewing in confusion, I began to glimpse its purpose and by the end was eager to see it again, then once again, and I am not finished. Charlie Kaufman understands how I live my life, and I suppose his own, and I suspect most of us. Faced with the bewildering demands of time, space, emotion, morality, lust, greed, hope, dreams, dreads and faiths, we build compartments in our minds. It is a way of seeming sane.</p>

<p>	The mind is a concern in all his screenplays, but in "Synecdoche" (2008), his first film as a director, he makes it his subject, and what huge ambition that demonstrates. He's like a </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>novelist who wants to get it all into the first book in case he never publishes another. Those who felt the film was disorganized or incoherent might benefit from seeing it again. It isn't about a narrative, although it pretends to be. It's about a <i>method, </i>the method by which we organize our lives and define our realities.

<p>Very few people live their lives on one stage, in one persona, wearing one costume. We play different characters. We know this and accept it. In childhood we begin as always the same person but quickly we develop strategies for our families, our friends, our schools. In adolescence these strategies are not well controlled. Sexually, teenagers behave one way with some dates and a different way with others. We find those whose have a persona that matches one of our own, and that defines how we interact with that person. If you aren't an aggressor and are sober, there are girls (or boys) you do it with and others you don't, and you don't want those people to discover what goes on away from them.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch6-16069.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch6-16069.html','popup','width=887,height=527,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch6-thumb-350x207-16069.jpg" width="350" height="207" alt="synch6.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	But already "Synecdoche" has me thinking in terms of the film's insight. That is its power. Let me stand back and consider it as a movie. It's about a theater director named Caden Cotard (Philip Seymour Hoffman), who begins with a successful regional production, is given a MacArthur genius grant, and moves with a troupe of actors into a New York warehouse. Here they develop a play that grows and grows, and he devises a set representing their various rooms and lives. The film begins as apparently realistic, but as the set expands it shades off into -- complexity? fantasy? chaos? </p>

<p>	In the earlier scenes, he was married to Adele (Catherine Keener). She leaves, and he marries Claire (Michelle Williams), who to some degree is intended to literally replace the first wife, as many second spouses are. Why do some people marry those who resemble their exes? They're casting for the same role.  Caden has hired an actor named Daniel London (Tom Noonan) to star in the play, as a character somewhat like himself. Many writers and directors create fiction from themselves, and are often advised to.</p>

<p>	What happens in the film isn't supposed to happen in life. The membrane between fact and fiction becomes permeable, and the separate lives intermingle. Caden hardly seems to know whose life he's living; his characters develop minds of their own. How many authors have you heard say their dialogue involves "just writing down what the characters would say?"</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch4-16072.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch4-16072.html','popup','width=596,height=616,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/synch4-thumb-300x310-16072.jpg" width="300" height="310" alt="synch4.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Living within different personas is something many people do. How can a governor think to have a mistress in Argentina? An investment counselor think to steal all the money entrusted to him? A famous athlete be revealed as a sybarite? A family man be discovered to have two families? I suspect such people, and to some degree many of us, find no more difficulty in occupying those different scenarios that we might find eating meat some days and on others calling ourselves vegetarian.</p>

<p>	"Synecdoche" is accomplished in all the technical areas, including its astonishing set. The acting requires great talent to create characters who are always in their own reality, however much it shifts. Philip Seymour Hoffman's character experiences a deterioration of body, as we all do, finds it more difficult to see outside himself, as we all do, and becomes less sure of who "himself' is, as sooner or later we all do. He shows us this process with a precise evolution.</p>

<p>	Kaufman has made the most perceptive film I can recall about how we live in the world. This is his debut as a director, but his most important contribution is the screenplay. Make no mistake: He sweated blood over this screenplay. Somebody had to know what was happening on all those levels, and that had to be the writer. Of course he directed it. Who else could have comprehended it?</p>

<p>My <b><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/o_synecdoche_my_synecdoche.html">blog entry</a> about the film and Charlie Kaufman </b></p>

<p>¶</p>

<p>	The other top films of the decade follow. Titles link to my reviews.</p>

<p>¶</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-9805.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-9805.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-thumb-350x233-9805.jpg" width="350" height="233" alt="hurt.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090708/REVIEWS/907089997">2. "The Hurt Locker" (2009).</a> </b> A film that concerns not the war but the warrior. It's set in Iraq, and by nature we identify with the hero, James (Jeremy Renner). But it focuses not on the enemy but on the bomb disposal expert himself, who risks his life hundreds of times when the slightest mistake would mean maiming or death. "War is a drug," the opening titles tell us. The man's comrades are angry with him for the chances he takes. He considers bomb disposal a battle of the wits between himself and the designer. Yes, but the designer is not there if a bomb explodes. He is. Yet he volunteers.</p>

<p>	The others in his group are professional soldiers. They're good at their jobs, faithful to their mission, and prudently follow military procedure. James's behavior is an affront to them, mocking their caution. That is Bigelow's most effective device: Instead of objectifying the enemy, she internalizes the fear. The anxiety of the the men about James is infectious. They fear, and we fear. They grow restless and resentful, and it enhances his danger.</p>

<p>	Apart from this psychological process, Katherine Bigelow's film has a masterful command of editing, tempo, character and photography. Using no stunts and CGI, she creates a convincing portrayal of the conditions a man like James faces. She builds with classical tools. She evokes suspense, dread, identification. She asks if a man like James <i>requires</i> such a fearsome job. The film is a triumph of theme and execution, and very nearly flawless.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mon-16077.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mon-16077.html','popup','width=1198,height=885,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mon-thumb-350x258-16077.jpg" width="350" height="258" alt="mon.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040101/REVIEWS/40310032/1023">3. "Monster" (2004).</a> </b> An Egyptian film critic told me in disbelief that this film made him sympathize with a  serial killer. I knew what he meant. We are enjoined to love not the sin but the sinner. Patty Jenkins' film is based on the life of Aileen Wuornos, a damaged woman who committed seven murders. It doesn't excuse the murders. It asks that we witness the woman's final desperate attempt to be a better person than her fate intended.</p>

<p>	Charlize Theron's performance in the role is one of the great performances in the history of the cinema. She transforms herself into a character with an uncanny resonance to the real Aileen Wuornos -- but mere impersonation isn't as difficult as <i>embodying</i> another person.  Aileen, abused all of her life, knows she is doing evil but is driven to it by her deep need to provide for another person, her lover Selby (Christina Ricci), as she was never provided for herself. This doesn't justify murder in her mind, but she believes it's necessary. We disagree. But we're asked to empathize with her ruined soul, and because of Theron and Jenkins, we find that possible. She becomes pitiful, not hateful.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/juno-16080.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/juno-16080.html','popup','width=838,height=735,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/juno-thumb-350x306-16080.jpg" width="350" height="306" alt="juno.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071213/REVIEWS/712130303"> 4. "Juno" (2007).</a> </b> One of a kind, a film that delighted me from beginning to end, never stepping wrong with its saucy young heroine who faces an unexpected pregnancy with forthright boldness. To be sure, life doesn't always provide parents and an adoptive mother  for the  baby as comforting as Juno's. But Jason Reitman's second feature doesn't set out to be realistic; it's a fable about how the sad realities of teen pregnancy might be transformed in a good-hearted world. Ellen Page creates a character to be long cherished, a smart, articulate,  16-year-old who keeps a brave front and yet deeply feels what she's going through.</p>

<p>	Juno's dialog is so nimble and funny that some said no real person thinks that fast and talks that well. Real people may not. Juno does. The original screenplay by Diablo Cody is pitch-perfect comedy writing, assuming the audience is as intelligent as Juno. Have you noticed how many stupid people are presented as normal, especially in mainstream comedies? I was surprised how much I laughed during "Juno," and then surprised how much I cared, especially during a luminous scene when the woman who will adopt her baby (Jennifer Garner) solemnly places her hand on Juno's pregnant belly and the two exchange a look so beautiful that if I'd known it was coming I don't know if I could have looked.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/me-16083.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/me-16083.html','popup','width=1194,height=888,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/me-thumb-350x260-16083.jpg" width="350" height="260" alt="me.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050623/REVIEWS/50524002/1023">5. "Me and You and Everyone We Know" (2005). </a></b> Another extraordinary film centered on a woman. Is it possible that women in the movies embody emotion more readily than men, who tend more toward external action? Women as wildly different as Aileen Wuornos, Juno and Christine, the heroine of Miranda July's film, are tuned to inner channels that drive them with feeling, not plots. This first feature shows a certainty about the tone it wants to strike, which is of  fragile magic. We don't learn a lot about Christine -- more, actually, about Richard (John Hawkes), the awkward shoe salesman she likes -- but the story's not about her life, it's about how love, for her, requires someone who speaks your rare emotional language, a language of whimsy and daring, of playful mind games and bold challenges. </p>

<p>	Imagine Christine and Richard as they walk down the street. Still strangers She suggests that the block they are walking down is their lives. And now, she says, they're halfway down the street and halfway through their lives. Before long they will be at the end. It's impossible to suggest how poetic this scene is; when it's over, you think, that was a perfect scene, and no other scene can ever be like it. And we are all on the sidewalk. July's film fits no genre, fulfills no expectations,  creates its own rules, and seeks only to share a strange, lovable mind with us.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/chop-16086.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/chop-16086.html','popup','width=1400,height=928,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/chop-thumb-350x232-16086.jpg" width="350" height="232" alt="chop.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080320/REVIEWS/241908904">6. "Chop Shop" (2008). </a> </b> Here is the third world, thriving under the flight path to LaGuardia. Ale (Alejandro Polanco), a 12-year-old boy, works for the owner of an auto repair shop in an area few New Yorkers know about: Willets Point,  square blocks of auto and tire shops that hustle for business. He's an  orphan, dreaming of being reunited with his 16-year-old sister. He steals a little, cons a little, sells pirated DVDs, and mostly works hard. He lives in a room knocked together in the crawl space of the shop. He's not educated, but is bright, resourceful, and happy.</p>

<p>	Poised on the edge of adolescence, he senses changes coming. His sister (Isamar Gonzales) moves in with him, and he proudly tries to support her--to be the man in the family they lost. Director Ramin Bahrani observed Willets Point for a year and worked with two non-actors to achieve remarkably fluent and convincing performances. His film is a vibrant modern equivalent of the Italian Neorealist classics like "Shoeshine." It stays resolutely within its story, never making the mistake of drawing conclusions. It's riveting, entertaining, unforgettable. Bahrani, an Iranian-American born in Winston-Salem, N.C., has made three films (including "Man Push CArt" and "Goodbye Solo") and all three have made my Best Ten lists. In my opinion, he's the new director of the decade. </p>

<p>My <b><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/03/the_new_great_american_directo.html">blog entry </a>about Ramin Bahrani. </b></p>

<p> <br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-16089.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-16089.html','popup','width=1237,height=698,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/son-thumb-350x197-16089.jpg" width="350" height="197" alt="son.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030221/REVIEWS/302210306/1023">7. "The Son" (2002). </a> </b>In a career filled with great films, "Le Fils" by Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne is stunning. It focuses intensely on two characters: Olivier (Olivier Gourmet), a Belgian carpenter, and Francis (Morgan Marinne), a young apprentice that a social worker wants to place with him.  Olivier refuses. The moment they leave, Olivier scurries after them like a feral animal, spies on them through a door opening and leaps onto a metal cabinet to look through a high window. Then he says he will take the boy.</p>

<p>	That's all I choose to say. What connects them is revealed so carefully and deliberately that any hint would diminish the experience. Once again, as with all the films on this list, writing and acting are crucial. Yes, they're well directed, but you know, there are a lot of fine directors.  There's a scene here where Francis and Olivier are working in a lumber warehouse, shifting and loading heavy planks. We know enough by then to invest the scene with meaning. The Dardennes achieve their effect primarily through <i>sound:</i> the raw, harsh sound of one plank upon another. I can think of many ways to film such a scene, none better.</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/25-14067.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/25-14067.html','popup','width=1111,height=744,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/25-thumb-350x234-14067.jpg" width="350" height="234" alt="25.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030110/REVIEWS/301100301/1023">8. "The 25th Hour" (2003).</a> </b>A film about the last 24 hours of freedom for Monty Brogan (Edward Norton), a convicted drug dealer. He lives in a heightened state. He focuses on the remaining important things: His lover, his father, his best friends. Spike Lee, working with David Benioff's adaptation of his own novel, gives adequate screen time to all the people in Monty's life, so that we see him as part of an ending world. Their lives will continue but, his friends agree, they will never see Monty again, Not the Monty they know.</p>

<p>	The film avoid crime-movie cliches. It's about the time remaining. Lee reflects Monty's acute awareness of this with scenes of startling inventiveness, one an angry monolog delivered to a mirror, another a shared fantasy as his father (Brian Cox) drives him to prison. Too many movies now require their expensive stars to be onscreen in almost every frame. "The 25th Hour" is enriched by supporting performances, notably by Philip Seymour Hoffman as a pudgy English teacher, not accustomed to drinking, who makes a devastating mistake involving appearance and reality. Spike Lee writes eloquently with his camera in strategies that are anything but conventional.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/amost-16093.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/amost-16093.html','popup','width=467,height=503,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/amost-thumb-350x376-16093.jpg" width="350" height="376" alt="amost.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20000915/REVIEWS/9150301/1023">9. "Almost Famous" (2000). </a> </b> The story of a 15-year-old kid (Patrick Fugit), smart and terrifyingly earnest, who through luck and pluck gets assigned by Rolling Stone magazine to do a profile of a rising rock band. The magazine has no idea he's 15. Clutching his pencil and his notebook like talismans, phoning a veteran critic for advice, he plunges into the experience that will make and shape him. It's as if Huckleberry Finn came back to life in the 1970s, and instead of taking a raft down the Mississippi, got on the bus with the band. I was hugging myself as I watched it: This is my story. Well, except in the details.</p>

<p>	Cameron Crowe, the writer-director, was inspired by his own experiences, here transformed by an ability to step outside the first person and clearly see the hero's mother (Francis McDormand), a band groupie (Kate Hudson), the lead singer (Jason Lee) and the veteran journalist (Philip Seymour Hoffman, again). This is a coming of age story with the feel of plausible experience, because when you're 15 even the most implausible things seem likely if they're happening to you. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/wini-16096.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/wini-16096.html','popup','width=1400,height=940,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/wini-thumb-350x235-16096.jpg" width="350" height="235" alt="wini.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b> <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080626/REVIEWS/644918381">10.  "My Winnipeg" (2008).</a> </b>If I said "Almost Famous" was my life, would you believe "My Winnipeg" tells the history of my home town? All except for the details -- which, for that matter, don't particularly pertain to Winnipeg, either. Guy Maddin's films are like a silent movie dreaming it can speak. No frame of his work could be mistaken for anyone else's. He combines documentary, lurid melodrama, newsreels, feverish fantasies and tortured typography into a form that appears to contain urgent information. His sound tracks are sometimes clear narration, sometimes soap opera, sometimes snatches that seem heard over a radio from long ago and far away. The effect is hypnotic.</p>

<p>	The city fathers of Winnipeg asked Maddin, their famous local filmmaker, to direct a documentary on their city. God knows what they thought of it. Now they can reassure the taxpayers it's one of the best films of the decade. There are perhaps sights, sounds and even facts in "My Winnipeg" that are accurate, but how can you be sure when some of the most sensible elements are false and the most incredible are true? This is the story of everyone's home town; we piece it together in childhood and in some sense continue to regard it as true even when it isn't. His beliefs about secret parallel taxi companies operating along invisible alleys are as reasonable as my own beliefs about the Bone Yard in Urbana-Champaign -- which is after all only a drainage ditch, but you can't tell me that.</p>

<p>	Those eleven, and these ten, alphabetically:<center></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/adapt-16099.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/adapt-16099.html','popup','width=979,height=590,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/adapt-thumb-250x150-16099.jpg" width="250" height="150" alt="adapt.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Spike Jonze's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20021220/REVIEWS/212200302/1023">"Adaptation" (2002)</a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-11198.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-11198.html','popup','width=1385,height=850,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-thumb-250x153-11198.jpg" width="250" height="153" alt="bad.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Werner Herzog's  <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091118/REVIEWS/911189997">"The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call, New Orleans" (2009)</a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/city-16103.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/city-16103.html','popup','width=978,height=565,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/city-thumb-250x144-16103.jpg" width="250" height="144" alt="city.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Fernando Meirelles' <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030124/REVIEWS/301240301/1023">"City of God" (2002)</a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ crash-16106.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ crash-16106.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ crash-thumb-250x166-16106.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt=" crash.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Paul Haggis's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050505/REVIEWS/50502001">"Crash" (2004) </a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/bill-16118.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/bill-16118.html','popup','width=1396,height=557,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/bill-thumb-300x119-16118.jpg" width="300" height="119" alt="bill.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Quentin Tarantinio's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20031010/REVIEWS/310100304/1023">"Kill Bill Vols.1 and 2" (2003 + 2004) </a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/minor-16109.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/minor-16109.html','popup','width=979,height=655,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/minor-thumb-250x167-16109.jpg" width="250" height="167" alt="minor.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Steven Spielberg's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20020621/REVIEWS/206210304/1023">"Minority Report (2002) </a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/country-16121.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/country-16121.html','popup','width=1400,height=930,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/country-thumb-250x166-16121.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="country.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>The Coen Brothers' <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071108/REVIEWS/711080304"> "No Country for Old Men" (2007)</a> <b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/pan-16112.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/pan-16112.html','popup','width=1400,height=939,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/pan-thumb-250x167-16112.jpg" width="250" height="167" alt="pan.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Guillermo del Toro's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061228/REVIEWS/61228001/1023">"Pan's Labyrinth" (2006) </a> </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent-16115.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent-16115.html','popup','width=1400,height=585,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent-thumb-300x125-16115.jpg" width="300" height="125" alt="silent.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Carlos Reygadas' <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090318/REVIEWS/903189985/-1/REVIEWS01">"Silent Light" (2009), </a>. </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/waking-16124.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/waking-16124.html','popup','width=400,height=233,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/waking-thumb-250x145-16124.jpg" width="250" height="145" alt="waking.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Richard Linklater's <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20011019/REVIEWS/110190306/1023">"Waking Life" (2001)</a></b></b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </b> </center></p>

<p>	And this reflection: All of these films are on this list for the same reason: The direct emotional impact they made on me. They have many other qualities, of course. But these evoked the emotion of Elevation, which I wrote about a year or so ago. Elevation is, scientists say, an actual emotion,  not a woo-woo theory. I believe that, because some films over the years have evoked from me a physical as well as an intellectual or emotional response. </p>

<p>	In choosing the list, I decided to bypass films that may have qualified for their historical, artistic, popular or "objective" importance. No lists have deep significance, but even less lists composed to satisfy an imaginary jury of fellow critics. My jury resides within. I know how I feel.</p>

<p>	Almost the first day I started writing reviews, I found  a  sentence in a book by Robert Warshow that I pinned on the wall above my desk. I have quoted it so frequently that some readers must be weary of it, but it helps me stay grounded. It says:</p>

<p>	<i>A man goes to the movies. A critic must be honest enough to admit he is that man.</i></p>

<p>That doesn't make one person right and another wrong. All it means is that you know how they really felt, not how they thought they should feel. </p>

<p><br />
¶</p>

<p><i>[ These titles from the list are available to Stream Instantly in HD via Netflix, as part of all plans: "Chop Shop," "Pan's Labyrinth," "Silent Light," "The Son," "Synecdoche, New York."  Several other VOD titles are noted below in the Amazon box. ] </i></p>

<p><br />
<SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/538057eb-e4e1-412f-bde5-4a098f887174"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F538057eb-e4e1-412f-bde5-4a098f887174&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT></p>

<p><br />
<a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><br />
<script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p><br />
<a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/submit" onclick="window.location = 'http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/submit?url=' + encodeURIComponent(window.location); return false"> <img src="http://www.reddit.com/static/spreddit7.gif" alt="submit to reddit" border="0" /> </a></p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The best foreign films of 2009</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_best_foreign_films_of_2009.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30577</id>

    <published>2009-12-27T23:57:51Z</published>
    <updated>2009-12-31T01:50:01Z</updated>

    <summary>Look at it this way. We have the chance to see virtually every American film that&apos;s released, and many of the English language films in general. But with the crisis in U.S. distribution, the only foreign-language films are those someone...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best film lists--and worst" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco1-15895.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco1-15895.html','popup','width=567,height=378,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco1-thumb-300x200-15895.jpg" width="300" height="200" alt="coco1.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Look at it this way. We have the chance to see virtually every American film that's released, and many of the English language films in general. But with the crisis in U.S. distribution, the only foreign-language films are those someone paid hard cash for, and risked opening here. "You always like those foreign films," I'm told, often by someone making it sound like a failing. Not always, but often. They tend to involve characters of intelligence and complexity. If </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>they're about people of subnormal intelligence, they're <i>about</i> that, or acknowledge it. In most of the world, people want to hurry into adulthood, not clinging to adolescence.

<p><br />
Have you noticed how many American mainstream films are about stupid people who are presented as normal? One opened recently: "Did You Hear About the Morgans?" No one in that film has an interesting thought as they stumble from one plot point to the next. I prefer characters who are articulate. Foreign films tend to be about people like that. Many American films are, too; in release now, for example, "Up in the Air," "A Single Man," "Crazy Heart," "Me and Orson Welles," "Mammoth," "Invictus."</p>

<p>	My list of the year's best foreign films contains 15 titles. Why? Because that's how many I put on the list. Five others were on my earlier lists. Altogether now, adding my lists of documentaries and animated films, I have 50 "best films." Does that mean I'm getting soft? No, it means I reviewed 284 films in 2009, and these 17% were the best. Why do people insist that critics stick to a magic number? Manohla Dargis listed her top 10 films. Including ties, her list came to 19 movies. That's the spirit.</p>

<p>	These were very good:</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/broken-15934.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/broken-15934.html','popup','width=1400,height=928,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/broken-thumb-350x232-15934.jpg" width="350" height="232" alt="broken.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>Broken Embraces.</b> Pedro Almodovar's "Broken Embraces" is a voluptuary of a film, drunk on primary colors, caressing Penelope Cruz, using the devices of a Hitchcock to distract us with surfaces while the sinister uncoils beneath. Involves a blind man who lost his great love in a car crash and years later learns the truth of her death, and how another man destroyed his last film. Penelope Cruz, Almodovar's constant Muse for over a decade, plays a prostitute who was with the blind man's producer when she fell in love with him-true love, and doomed. Dripping with primary colors, especially red, this is the year's most sumptuous film.</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/class-15899.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/class-15899.html','popup','width=1598,height=423,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/class-thumb-450x119-15899.jpg" width="450" height="119" alt="class.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
	<b>The Class </b> is about the power struggle between a teacher who wants to do good, and students who disagree about what "good" is.  In a lower-income melting pot neighborhood in Paris, a school year begins with high hopes. The students' intelligence may be one of their problems: They can see clearly that the purpose of the class is to make them model citizens in a society that has little use for them. The director, Laurent Cantet, worked for a year with François Bégaudeau, as the teacher, and the young actors who play students to achieve an uncanny spontaneity and realism.  Winner of the Palme d'Or at Cannes 2008,.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco2-15902.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco2-15902.html','popup','width=567,height=378,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/coco2-thumb-350x233-15902.jpg" width="350" height="233" alt="coco2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Coco Before Chanel</b>  begins with an abandoned orphan girl (Audrey Tautou), watches her grow into a music hall chanteuse, and then sidestep prostitution by becoming a mistress. From behind the clouds of her cigarettes she regards the world with realism and stubborn ambition. She becomes the most influential fashion icon of the 20th century. An unsentimental approach to Chanel's life. Less of a biopic, more of a drama. It's not about rags to riches but about survival of the fittest. Coco likes a rich playboy, but signed aboard for money, status and entre, not merely romance. She isn't a brazen temptress but a capitalist, who collects on her investment. Directed by Anne Fontaine.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/gomorrah-15905.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/gomorrah-15905.html','popup','width=1400,height=900,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/gomorrah-thumb-350x225-15905.jpg" width="350" height="225" alt="gomorrah.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Gomorrah.</b>  Remorseless drama about the  foot soldiers of the Camorra, the crime syndicate based in Naples which is larger than the Mafia but less known. The recruits know De Palma's "Scarface" by heart. Living a life surrounded by drugs and women is a bargain they're willing to make even if it means death. It almost always does. An implacable algebra tightens the noose on day laborers, who kill each other for peanuts while invisible millionaires grow richer.  Grimy and pitiless; the grand prize winner at Cannes 2008. Directed by Matteo Garrone.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/lorna-10590.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/lorna-10590.html','popup','width=1400,height=930,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/lorna-thumb-350x232-10590.jpg" width="350" height="232" alt="lorna.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Lorna's Silence</b> The story by the Dardenne brothers, among the best living filmmakers, involves a young woman from Albania, now resident in Belgium thanks to a marriage-for-sale deal with a pathetic drug addict. The vermin who has arranged the marriage now plans to kill the addict to benefit a Russian will pay her to marry him so he can obtain a passport she will be free to marry her lover. Sounds like it may be about plot, but it's about personalities, as intensely-observed as always with the Dardennes. In a way, everyone knows what has to happen.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mun-15911.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mun-15911.html','popup','width=1400,height=850,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/mun-thumb-350x212-15911.jpg" width="350" height="212" alt="mun.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Munyurangabo</b> considers the genocide in Rwanda through the lives of two teenagers. They aren't symbols, simply boys who have been surviving on their own in a big city, but are not toughened, and essentially good. They embark on a cross-country journey for purposes that eventually become sadly clear. Directed by Lee Isaac Chung, 30, a first generation Korean-American who grew up in a small farm in rural Arkansas. it was shot on location in Rwanda in two weeks, involved only local actors, and is in every frame a beautiful and powerful film--a masterpiece. Invited to Ebertfest 2010.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/o'hor-8712.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/o'hor-8712.html','popup','width=1400,height=1065,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/o'hor-thumb-350x266-8712.jpg" width="350" height="266" alt="o'hor.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>O'Horton </b> Bittersweet deadpan whimsy about a retiring Norwegian railroad engineer named Odd Horten.  He sets his life by the railroad timetable and is baffled by retirement. Left on his own, he finds himself being driven by a blind man, sitting through a farewell party thrown by his fellow engineers (who sing him the <i>choo-choo-choo woo-woo-woo</i> song), and climbing a scaffold into the wrong apartment. Like Monsieur Hulot, he can always count on the consolation of his pipe. Directed by Bent Hamer. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/paris-11560.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/paris-11560.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/paris-thumb-350x233-11560.jpg" width="350" height="233" alt="paris.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Paris </b> is about a group of Parisians. Their lives are not interlocking but parallel. Cedric Klapisch, the writer-director, creates a symphonic tribute to the city he loves, with each character a movement. A dying dancer, his sister (Juliette Binoche), a historian of the city with a creepy romantic obsession, an architect, a street vendor, a prejudiced bakery owner. At the end, one of the characters happens to glimpse some of the others through  taxi window: anonymous Parisians, getting on with their lives.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/police-15916.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/police-15916.html','popup','width=1344,height=900,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/police-thumb-350x234-15916.jpg" width="350" height="234" alt="police.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Police, adjective</b>  a young Romanian cop is assigned to tail a suspected 16-year-old pot smoker. The kid is guilty, but the cop, having just witnessed the freedom in Prague on his honeymoon, doesn't want to arrest him and ruin his life with eight to 15 years in prison. This leads, not to the routine action ending of many American pictures, but to a curiously suspenseful argument with his captain over the dictionary definitions of the words "conscience" and "justice." A good example of the emerging Romanian cinema. Won both the Un Certain Regard jury prize and the Critics' Prize at Cannes 2009.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/revache-15919.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/revache-15919.html','popup','width=1400,height=928,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/revache-thumb-350x232-15919.jpg" width="350" height="232" alt="revache.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Revanche</b>  Tamara is a prostitute from the Ukraine, Alex is an ex-con who works as a bouncer in her Vienna brothel. They're having a secret affair, and lack the nerve to challenge the reprehensible pimp who rules their world. Alex plots an "easy" bank robbery, and brings her along in the getaway car. It goes wrong. He hides on the farm of his proud old grandfather, who lives alone, mourns his wife, feeds his friends the cows. Alex meets Susanne, a friendly neighbor's wife, and loneliness confronts with tragic coincidence. A 2009 Oscar nominee. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/seraphine-15922.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/seraphine-15922.html','popup','width=946,height=1400,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/seraphine-thumb-300x443-15922.jpg" width="300" height="443" alt="seraphine.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Seraphine  </b> is built upon one of the year's most acclaimed performances, by Yolande Moreau. She is a bulky, work-worn house cleaner who fiercely scrubs the floor, then she slips away from work to steal turpentine from the church votive candles, blood from the butcher and clay from the fields. These she combines with other elements to mix the paints she uses at night, covering panels with fruits and flowers that seem to regard us in alarm. Inspired by the true story of a woman whose work is now in many museums. Came from France as the year's most honored film, winner of seven Cesars from the French Academy, including best film and best actress. 	</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/still-walking-15927.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/still-walking-15927.html','popup','width=1819,height=995,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/still-walking-thumb-350x191-15927.jpg" width="350" height="191" alt="still-walking.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>Still Walking. </b> Twelve years ago, the eldest son, doted on by his parents, drowned while saving a life. Every year the family gathers in his memory; the second son hates this because his father blames him for not being the one who died. The guest of honor is the pudgy, squirmy loser whose life was saved. This annual rite, we realize, is an ordeal for everyone except the bitter father, and probably him, too.  Written and directed  by the great Hirokazu Kore-eda, in some ways the heir to Ozu. Winner for best director, 2009 Asian Film Awards.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/summer-10008.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/summer-10008.html','popup','width=1400,height=934,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/summer-thumb-350x233-10008.jpg" width="350" height="233" alt="summer.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Summer Hours.</b> begins on Helene's 75th birthday. She's joined in the French countryside by her three children and their families. Much of the talk is about how far two of the them had to travel, and they're eager to be going home. Helene understands this. She understands a great deal.  The film builds its emotional power by stealth, indirectly, refusing to be a tear-jerker, always realistic, and yet respectful of how sad it is to see your life disappear. Written and directed by Olivier Assayas, with Juliette Binoche and Charles Berling.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tokyo-8726.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tokyo-8726.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tokyo-thumb-350x233-8726.jpg" width="350" height="233" alt="tokyo.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Tokyo Sonata</b>  About a family so locked into their lives they scarcely know one another. The autocratic father is fired and says nothing. He leaves "for the office" every day, and lingers with other jobless men. His son secretly takes piano lessons his father has forbidden. His wife observes much and is silent. Then the director, Kiyoshi Kurosawa, derails our expectations with two totally unexpected scenes, the second of spellbinding beauty which somehow resolves this story with masterful indirection. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tulpan-8730.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tulpan-8730.html','popup','width=1400,height=788,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/tulpan-thumb-350x197-8730.jpg" width="350" height="197" alt="tulpan.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Tulpan </b> shows such an unfamiliar world it might as well be Mars. The horizon is a straight line against the sky in every direction. There are no landmarks, no signs, no roads. We are among the modern yurt dwellers of Kazakhstan. A young sailor has come home to live with his sister and her family. They negotiate with a poker-faced man and his hostile wife for the hand of their daughter. Humor involving a veterinarian on a motorcycle and a fresh cucumber salesman. Also a great silence and desolation, which we sense they love. Doesn't there have to come a time in everyone's life when they should see a deadpan comedy about the yurt dwellers of Kazakhstan? Won the Un Certain Regard award at Cannes 2008.</p>

<p>	<i> [ Notes: In addition to these films, on my earlier best films lists for 2009 I named "Departures," "Everlasting Moments," "Silent Light," "You, the Living" and "The White Ribbon." Below, all of the trailers from IFC Films represent films that are streaming online, some of them free. ] </i></blockquote></blockquote></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bvDFPjx-uBU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bvDFPjx-uBU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QmwUVwsAEGE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QmwUVwsAEGE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R9RSKKOh4Ts&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R9RSKKOh4Ts&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7I5fbUuho-I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7I5fbUuho-I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MX2Bid-L88s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MX2Bid-L88s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-MphVdYO7Mw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-MphVdYO7Mw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HpK_qugNHCM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HpK_qugNHCM&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JydJw6zF38s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JydJw6zF38s&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3SpcEtU1f1w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3SpcEtU1f1w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jix_N0x4X1w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jix_N0x4X1w&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OsXvSNWG4-I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OsXvSNWG4-I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/naT9O8X13Ko&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/naT9O8X13Ko&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p></p>

<p><SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/85c1d815-df28-4ecb-8208-41c770b75c14"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F85c1d815-df28-4ecb-8208-41c770b75c14&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><br />
<script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	<br />
	</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The ten best animated films of 2009</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_best_animated_films_of_200.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30548</id>

    <published>2009-12-25T04:14:40Z</published>
    <updated>2009-12-26T23:21:41Z</updated>

    <summary>True, the once neglected art of animation has undergone a rebirth in both artistry and popularity. Yet having escaped one blind alley, it seems headed into another one: The dumbing-down of stories out of preference for meaningless nonstop action. Classic...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best film lists--and worst" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sita2-15827.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sita2-15827.html','popup','width=705,height=742,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sita2-thumb-240x252-15827.jpg" width="240" height="252" alt="sita2.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>True, the once neglected art  of animation has undergone a rebirth in both artistry and popularity. Yet having escaped one  blind alley, it seems headed into another one: The dumbing-down of stories out of preference for meaningless nonstop action. Classic animated features were models of three-act stories: Recall "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" or "The Lion King." The characters were embedded in stories that made sense and involved making decisions based on values. Now too many stories end in brain-numbing battles, often starring heroes the age of the younger audience members. Here is no food for growth and for the imagination, just brainless kinetic behavior.<br />
</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>
	The year saw more animated films intended instead for adults, and a film like "Waltz with Bashir" used the freedom of the form to show matters unthinkable in a live action feature. Several of these films were true crossovers, truly freed from the demographic vise. Audiences, having grown up with animation, no longer make the mistake of thinking of it as a medium for children.

<p><br />
	The other problem came for me with the widely-heard prediction that all<i></i> animated features in the future would be in 3-D. I hope not. The illusion of dimension in 2-D is usually <i>more </i>convincing than in 3-D, because that's how our eyes read information. Artificial focal lengths throw us off. Above all, films that project images toward the audience are disturbing. Few directors show discipline in using dimensions; at year's end, James Cameron indeed demonstrated an understanding of the medium with "Avatar," which in a majority of its CGI scenes was as much an animated film as "Snow White."</p>

<p>	The year's 10 best were all good films, but not in all cases deserving four or even three and a half stars. Still, tradition enforces a list of ten, and these were the ten: </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/christmas-15824.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/christmas-15824.html','popup','width=1400,height=589,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/christmas-thumb-400x168-15824.jpg" width="400" height="168" alt="christmas.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>A Christmas Carol. </b> Robert Zemeckis,  whose "Polar Express" and "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" were delightful, creates a fantastical vision of the familiar Dickens tale. The Ghosts of Christmas have never seemed more haunting, and Ebenezer Scrooge never thinner, more stooped, more bitter. Zemeckis places these characters in a London that twists and stretches its setting to reflect the macabre mood. The visual imagination involved is remarkable.<b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091104/REVIEWS/911059995">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/cora1-15830.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/cora1-15830.html','popup','width=1400,height=844,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/cora1-thumb-400x241-15830.jpg" width="400" height="241" alt="cora1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Coraline.</b>  By Henry Selick, who made "The Nightmare Before Christmas" and again combines his mastery of stop-motion and other animation with 3-D. Coraline is not a nice little girl and is rude to her parents, but once she enters that mysterious little door in the wall, she finds herself in a world that teaches her to envy her own. A distinctive visual style and great imagination combine with the deliberate oddness of the animation to create an eerie effect. The story is unusually pointed: You see what can happen to rude little children.<b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090204/REVIEWS/902049989/1023">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/fantasticmrfox3-15833.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/fantasticmrfox3-15833.html','popup','width=500,height=269,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/fantasticmrfox3-thumb-400x215-15833.jpg" width="400" height="215" alt="fantasticmrfox3.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>The Fantastic Mr. Fox.</b>  In an age of limitless computer-generated images, the next of the year's best animated features also uses the stop-action method that reaches back to "King Kong and before. Wes Anderson's landscapes and structures are picture-booky. Yet the extraordinary faces of his animals are almost disturbingly human (for animals, of course), and you feel as if Mr. Fox's fur is strokeable.  The film tells a fable about a reformed chicken thief leading a war with the farmers. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091124/REVIEWS/911249995">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/sita-8720.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/sita-8720.html','popup','width=1400,height=788,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/sita-thumb-400x225-8720.jpg" width="400" height="225" alt="sita.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Sita Sings the Blues.</b> Animated features are an expensive, high-stakes medium, but a visionary named Nina Paley staged an end run around the big guys with this enchanting feature made at home on her own computer. She combines the epic Indian tale of Ramayana with the 1920's jazz vocals of Annette Hanshaw, and this not only works, but seems inevitable. Failing to obtain the rights to the long-unavailable recordings, she outsmarted the system by giving the film away--and made money doing it!  <b>You can view it free at  <a href="http://j.mp/6IsgLB">her site.</a>. </b><b>Read my <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/1/having_wonderful_time_wish_you.html">blog entry</a>. </b></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/9-15838.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/9-15838.html','popup','width=600,height=316,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/9-thumb-400x210-15838.jpg" width="400" height="210" alt="9.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>9</b>  A devastating war is survived by humanoid little rag dolls with binocular eyes. Led by the brave #9, the others venture out into a frightening post-apocalyptic world and do battle with the fearsome Beast, left behind by the horror. An intriguing beginning, too many pure action scenes toward the end for my taste, but delicate artistry by filmmaker Shane Acker, who first imagined this world in a student film which won an Oscar in 2006. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090909/REVIEWS/909099998">review</a>. </b> </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/ice-9305.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/ice-9305.html','popup','width=1400,height=787,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/ice-thumb-400x224-9305.jpg" width="400" height="224" alt="ice.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs</b>  The best of the three films about the inter-species herd of plucky prehistoric heroes. Uses a masterstroke that essentially allows the series to take place anywhere: There is this land beneath the surface of the earth, you see. Scratt the sabre-toothed squirrel pairs with the comely Scrattè, and Sid the Sloth adopts three dinosaur eggs and plans to raise the babies, which is asking for trouble.  Carlos Saldanha, writer of the 2002 film, is the director, and some of his sequences are in the spirit of the brilliant Scratt-and-acorn scene that opened the first "Ice Age."  <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090629/REVIEWS/906299995">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/ponyo-10584.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/ponyo-10584.html','popup','width=1400,height=757,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/08/ponyo-thumb-400x216-10584.jpg" width="400" height="216" alt="ponyo.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Ponyo.</b> The word to describe "Ponyo," is magical. This poetic, visually breathtaking work by the greatest of all animators, Hayao Miyazaki, has deep charm. It involves a friendship between a 5-year old living at the seaside, and a goldfish who magically turns into a playmate. But the fish's crossing from sea to land triggers a tsunami. The two make a dreamlike journey among flooded treetops in a small boat: One of Miyazaki's most beautiful scenes, and the opening is another. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090812/REVIEWS/908129989">review </a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/princess-15843.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/princess-15843.html','popup','width=1400,height=738,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/princess-thumb-400x210-15843.jpg" width="400" height="210" alt="princess.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>The Princess and the Frog.</b> The opening scenes are like a cool shower after a long and sweaty day. This is what classic animation once was like! No 3-D! No glasses! No extra ticket charge! No frantic frenzies of meaningless action! And . . . good gravy! A story! And one starring the first african-American heroine in the genre. A young New Orleans  girl named Tiana is cherished by her parents, but her father  goes off to the First World War and doesn't return. The brave and resourceful Tiana holds fast to her dream of opening a restaurant and serving up her dad's gumbo. Real substance. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091209/REVIEWS/912099996/1023">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-15293.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-15293.html','popup','width=1400,height=910,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-thumb-400x260-15293.jpg" width="400" height="260" alt="up.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span><br />
 <br />
	<b>Up.</b>  Pixar's latest success began with a grumpy old man who tied balloons to his house and is astonished to float away to South America, where he encounters a reclusive old air explorer. A young boy is a stowaway, and they have exciting adventures and meet strange creatures, but the film also has a meaningful undertone, and opens with an extraordinary sequence summarizing the youth and early romance of the crabby old Carl. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090527/REVIEWS/905279997/1023">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/walyz-15847.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/walyz-15847.html','popup','width=1400,height=787,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/walyz-thumb-400x224-15847.jpg" width="400" height="224" alt="walyz.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Waltz with Bashir</b> A  devastating Israeli animated film that tries to reconstruct how and why thousands of innocent civilians were massacred because those with the power to stop them took no action. The event took place during the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. The victims were in Palestinian refugee camps. They were killed by a Christian militia. Israelis were in nominal control of the militia, but did not stop the massacre. Ari Folman's film uses flashbacks as witnesses try to assemble their fragmented memories of the day. <b>Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090121/REVIEWS/901219995">review</a>. </b><br />
</center><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/485401ba-3ab5-40d4-83de-e35bc874b43e"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F485401ba-3ab5-40d4-83de-e35bc874b43e&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX)</p>

<p><script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('3c8a440c-ed70-4078-923e-6f5c1e547bb5');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/twidget">Twitter Widget</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	<br />
	</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The ten best documentaries of 2009</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_ten_best_documentaries_of.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30500</id>

    <published>2009-12-23T04:57:26Z</published>
    <updated>2009-12-26T20:50:12Z</updated>

    <summary>Some of the best documentaries of 2009 hardly seemed to exist. &quot;What&apos;s the matter with Kansas,&quot; based on a best-seller, is still awaiting its fifth vote at IMDb. &quot;The Beaches of Agnes,&quot; a luminous film by the New Wave pioneer...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best film lists--and worst" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/agnes varda-15582.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/agnes varda-15582.html','popup','width=396,height=470,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/agnes varda-thumb-240x284-15582.jpg" width="240" height="284" alt="agnes varda.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Some of the best documentaries of 2009 hardly seemed to exist. "What's the matter with Kansas," based on a best-seller, is still awaiting its fifth vote at IMDb. "The Beaches of Agnes," a luminous film by the New Wave pioneer Agnes Varda, grossed $127,605. "Of Time and the City," by a great British director, grossed $32,000. "Anvil! The Story of Anvil," a hit in terms of buzz and critical reception, brought in $666,659. "Tyson," $827, 046. </p>

<p>	Such figures come from IMDb, which may be wrong, but if it's $1 million off, we're still not talking big numbers. What we're really talking about is eyeballs, or, as old Jewish exhibitors used to ask, "how many <i>toochis</i> on the seats?" The audiences for these films were found first at film  festivals, and will now be found on DVD and video on demand. None </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>of them played more than one theater in Chicago -- five of them at Facets. Yet I take heart from the comments after my earlier list of the year's  best feature films. 

<p><br />
Many said they used critics' year-end lists as a guide for DVD watching. I was told four of my films were already available for instant viewing on Netflix. The future of video on demand is here, and I hardly noticed. Whether this will be a future in which a filmmaker can make any money is yet to be decided. We may be headed for a time when we can choose between mass-market blockbusters and a permanent series of personal classic viewings. More than a century of movies are in existence, enough to last for us awhile.</p>

<p>	Am I being ludicrously pessimistic? I hope so. I really do. I'll be going to Sundance 2010. Last year there certainly wasn't a feeding frenzy. Have you heard about "We Live in Public?" It won the Grand Jury Prize for docs at Sundance 2009. I wonder what the mood will be like this year. I expect the usual mob scenes. But are the mobs there to see, sell and buy good films -- small ones in particular? It's my impression more actual business was done at Sundance when it was half the size. But it sure makes a great business expense.</p>

<p>	I know the comments in my blog don't represent an enormous horde of eager film consumers. But they give me optimism. I hear from movie goers in India, South Korea, Uruguay, who have seen the new movies we're discussing right now. Sometimes they go to theaters, especially if they live in large cities. Sometimes they obtain DVDs, or watch streaming video, which is easier for them because their internet infrastructure is often faster than ours. Sometimes they -- well, you know what they do. That's a fact of life, and sooner or later the industry will have to figure out how to deal with it. PIracy represents theft to the studios, and rightly so. For a marginal indie filmmaker, it represents their audience.</p>

<p>	Well. On that cheerful note, here are my ten favorite documentaries from 2009. Look on the sunny side: You have some good films to look forward to.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/anvil_the_story_of_anvil_movie_image_steve_lips_kudlow__1_l-15585.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/anvil_the_story_of_anvil_movie_image_steve_lips_kudlow__1_l-15585.html','popup','width=2000,height=1330,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/anvil_the_story_of_anvil_movie_image_steve_lips_kudlow__1_l-thumb-300x199-15585.jpg" width="300" height="199" alt="anvil_the_story_of_anvil_movie_image_steve_lips_kudlow__1_l.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Anvil! The Story of Anvil.</b> A story of hope, dogged perseverance and rock and roll, with rock and roll only the occasion for the first two. In 1973, two friends in Toronto started a band and vowed to make r&r  until they were old. Now they are old, at least for heavy metal rockers. The band has era moderate rise and a long, long fall, but they refused to give up, and loyal fans around the world kept the faith and treasure the t-shirts. The founders scrape by with telephone sales, demolition and school meal delivery, but keep on rocking. This is the sound of optimism: "Everything on the tour went drastically wrong. But at least there was a tour for it to go wrong on."  Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090422/REVIEWS/904229993">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/beach1-15588.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/beach1-15588.html','popup','width=600,height=300,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/beach1-thumb-300x150-15588.jpg" width="300" height="150" alt="beach1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p></p>

<p>	<b>Beaches of Agnes.</b>  Made in her 80th year by Agnes Varda, one of the founders of the French New Wave, who brims with joy and energy as she dances on the beach with her family and revisits the places of her life and such locations as the street outside her door, which she once turned into a beach. Of regrets she has few, apart from the untimely death of her beloved Jacques Demy. Includes the most poetic shot about the cinema I have ever seen: Two old fishermen, who were young when she filmed them, watch themselves years later  as they push a movie projector and screen on a cart through the night streets of their village. Read my <b><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/02/saint_agnes_of_montparnasse.html">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/collapse_ruppert_l-15593.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/collapse_ruppert_l-15593.html','popup','width=320,height=240,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/collapse_ruppert_l-thumb-250x187-15593.jpg" width="250" height="187" alt="collapse_ruppert_l.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Collapse.</b> Terrifying. Michael Ruppert, a controversial blogger from way back, transcends opinion about himself by flatly and concisely laying out facts: We have passed the halfway mark in world oil consumption, and it is rising as China and India come online. We will run out in about 40 years. Alternative energy sources use oil. You do the math. We are finished by about 2050, and there's not much we can do. A mesmerizing use of images, music, and Ruppert's  implacable voice. By Chris Smith, of the classic "American Movie." Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091209/REVIEWS/912099993">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/food-8919.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/food-8919.html','popup','width=438,height=292,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/06/food-thumb-300x200-8919.jpg" width="300" height="200" alt="food.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Food, Inc. </b>  A handful of giant corporations control the growth, processing and sale of food in this country, and don't want you to realize the extent of their power. They enforce their policies and threaten reprisals against those raising crops and animals by organic and Green methods. They dictate cruel and unhealthy living conditions for animals, and place our health second to their profits. And they back it all with multi-million dollar ad campaigns portraying themselves as benefactors. By Robert Kenner. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090617/REVIEWS/906179985">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/readafter-15597.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/readafter-15597.html','popup','width=500,height=281,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/readafter-thumb-300x168-15597.jpg" width="300" height="168" alt="readafter.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>Must Read After My Death.</b>  A cry from the grave. A woman who died at 89 left behind 50 hours of audiotapes, 200 home movies and 300 pages of documents, ending 30 years earlier on the death of her husband. It tells a story of a marriage from hell. Now assembled by one of her sons, it portrays a toxic marriage, an overwhelmed mother, and a monstrous road warrior father named Charley who was a Good Time Charley, but not at home. After his death, the woman never mentioned him again. But she kept these records. I've never seen anything like it. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090218/REVIEWS/902189988">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/of_time_and_the_city_still_6-15600.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/of_time_and_the_city_still_6-15600.html','popup','width=640,height=426,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/of_time_and_the_city_still_6-thumb-300x199-15600.jpg" width="300" height="199" alt="of_time_and_the_city_still_6.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Of Time and the City.</b> The British filmmaker Terence Davies, whose subject has often been his own life, now turns to his city, Liverpool, and regrets not the joys of his youth but those he didn't have, especially the sexual experiences forbidden by the Catholic church to which he was devoted.   He was born into a modest home, shaped  by the church, tortured by his forbidden homosexual feelings, and "prayed until my knees bled." His memories, mixed with those of the city, use remarkable archival footage collated from a century. Includes classical and pop music, and Davies's deep voice, sometimes quoting poems that match the images. A film of a reverie. Read my <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090617/REVIEWS/906179995">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/The-September-Issue-15603.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/The-September-Issue-15603.html','popup','width=500,height=500,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/The-September-Issue-thumb-250x250-15603.jpg" width="250" height="250" alt="The-September-Issue.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>The September Issue. </b>  What a piece of work is Anna Wintour, the editor of Vogue, the most ad-heavy magazine in history. Arguably the most powerful woman in fashion, she rules from behind dark glasses and a detached expression. Every word is law. Her staff is on tip-toes, all except for Grace Coddington, a Julia Childian former model who has been on the staff as long as Wintour and is as earthy as Wintour is aloof. Filmed behind the scenes during the ramp-up for Vogue's all-time record Sept. 2007 issue. "The Devil Wears Prada" didn't tell the half of it. By R.J. Cutler. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090909/REVIEWS/909099995">review</a>. </b></p>

<p></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/24tyson_600-15606.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/24tyson_600-15606.html','popup','width=600,height=372,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/24tyson_600-thumb-300x186-15606.jpg" width="300" height="186" alt="24tyson_600.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>Tyson.</b> James Tobak's surprising documentary discovers a Mike Tyson we didn't know existed, a bullied little boy who grew up determined to protect himself and often fought out of fear. It's as if the victim of big kids is still speaking to us from within the intimidating form of perhaps the most punishing heavyweight champion of them all. Working with an unlikely friendship going back many years, Toback asks the right questions and Tyson opens up in ways he may never have before. What emerges is a nuanced and revealing portrait of a heavyweight champion who is anything but the "animal" many people thought they saw. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090429/REVIEWS/904299976 ">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/we_live_in_public_02-15609.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/we_live_in_public_02-15609.html','popup','width=512,height=336,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/we_live_in_public_02-thumb-300x196-15609.jpg" width="300" height="196" alt="we_live_in_public_02.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>We Live in Public.</b> Josh Harris is billed in this film as "the greatest Internet pioneer you've never heard of." He was a myopic visionary, a man who saw the future more vividly than his own life. His Pseudo.com, sold for $80 million circa 1990, financed a project named Quiet:  About 100 of the best and brightest he could find agreed to live 24 hours a day in a cavernous space below street level.  They would be under video surveillance every moment. How this worked in practice makes a doc all the more fascinating because filmmaker  Ondi Timoner was on the scene from the start. Winner of the Grand Jury Prize for best doc at Sundance 2009. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091014/REVIEWS/910149994">review</a>. </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/kansas-11550.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/kansas-11550.html','popup','width=438,height=328,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/kansas-thumb-300x224-11550.jpg" width="300" height="224" alt="kansas.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>What's the Matter With Kansas? </b> Portraits of Kansans, right and left, in a state that seems to be letting them down. We meet a likable Christian mother and farmer named Angel Dillard, and a populist farmer named Donn Teske, both struggling to keep their family farms afloat after two drought years. The doc argues that voters in the heartland vote against their own economic and social well-being, because they consider hot-button issues more important. An evangelical con game is excused as the will of God. Read my <b><a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090916/REVIEWS/909169988/1023">review</a>. </b><center></blockquote></blockquote><center><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wiHm9jplCmY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wiHm9jplCmY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hUUq1HPE6IE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hUUq1HPE6IE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d6BAoo8hmlU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d6BAoo8hmlU&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QtD8S5SnViQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QtD8S5SnViQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_XSTwfdFwIY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_XSTwfdFwIY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hgNDijh5nRs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hgNDijh5nRs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QqQVll-MP3I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QqQVll-MP3I&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sv1sRa35Zr8&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sv1sRa35Zr8&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•<br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XXIRwd1LNVY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XXIRwd1LNVY&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></center><br />
•<br />
•<br />
•</p>

<p><SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/4b3c76c5-29ac-4814-8a97-c7e2e7f6f0fe"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2F4b3c76c5-29ac-4814-8a97-c7e2e7f6f0fe&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT><br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('08c28691-773b-412e-a453-773f04f06841');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/rogerebertcom-movie-reviews-essays-and--rebert">rogerebert.com :: Movie reviews, essays and the M</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
	<br />
	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The best films of 2009</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_best_films_of_2009.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30426</id>

    <published>2009-12-20T01:27:50Z</published>
    <updated>2010-01-17T01:14:14Z</updated>

    <summary>There was hell to pay last year when I published my list of Twenty Best. So this year I have devoutly limited myself to exactly ten films. </summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best film lists--and worst" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Popular entries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-9805.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-9805.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/hurt-thumb-240x159-9805.jpg" width="240" height="159" alt="hurt.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>Since Moses brought the tablets down from the mountain, lists have come in tens, not that we couldn't have done with several more commandments. Who says a year has Ten Best Films, anyway? Nobody but readers, editors, and most other movie critics. There was hell to pay last year when I published my list of Twenty Best. You'd have thought I belched at a funeral. So this year I have devoutly limited myself to exactly ten films. </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>On each of two lists.

<p><br />
The lists are divided into Mainstream Films and Independent Films. This neatly sidesteps two frequent complaints: (1) "You name all those little films most people have never heard of," and (2) "You pick all blockbusters and ignore the indie pictures." Which is is my official Top Ten? They both are equal, and every film here is entitled to name itself "One of the Year's 10 Best!" </p>

<p>Alphabetically:</p>

<p><br />
	<b>¶ The Top 10 Mainstream Films</b> </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-11198.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-11198.html','popup','width=1162,height=717,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/bad-thumb-250x154-11198.jpg" width="250" height="154" alt="bad.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Bad Lieutenant.</b>  Werner Herzog's edgy noir fed off Nicolas Cage's flywheel intensity in  a portrait of a cokehead cop out of control in post-Katrina New Orleans. He starts out bad and, driven by a painful back and pain meds, goes crazy and gets away with it because of the badge. Herzog paints the storied city in dark shadows and a notable lack of glamour, and when he involves Cage in a stare-down with an iguana it somehow needs no explanation. I predict they'll work together again. They probably got along at least as well as Herzog and Klaus Kinski.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/crazy-15277.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/crazy-15277.html','popup','width=387,height=202,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/crazy-thumb-250x130-15277.jpg" width="250" height="130" alt="crazy.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Crazy Heart.</b>  This year's late-opening sleeper, built on a probable Oscar-winning performance by Jeff Bridges. He plays a nearly-forgotten C&W singer, touring nasty dives and smoky honky-tonks for a few dollars and change. He had hit songs, but alcoholism eroded him. Maggie Gyllenhaal is inspired as the woman who cares for him but doubts his newfound sobriety--and no, this isn't a cornball story about romantic redemption. After the screening a critic said: "This year's "The Wrestler." That sounded about right. Astonishing debut by Scott Cooper.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/education-11204.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/education-11204.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/education-thumb-250x166-11204.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="education.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>An Education.</b>  A star is born with Carey Mulligan's performance as a 16-year-old schoolgirl who is flattered and romanced, along with her protective parents, by an attractive, mysterious man in his mid-30s (Peter Sarsgaard). He's sophisticated, she's not; she sees him as a way out of London suburbia and into the circles she dreams of entering. He's not a molester but an opportunist and role-player, and Lone Scherfig's film is wise about what people want in a relationship and what they get. Faithfully adapted by Nick Hornby from the memoirs of the well-known British journalist Lynn Barber.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/hurt2-15281.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/hurt2-15281.html','popup','width=600,height=400,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/hurt2-thumb-250x166-15281.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="hurt2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>The Hurt Locker.</b> "War is a drug," the opening title informs us, and  in one of the best war movies ever, Jeremy Renner plays an expert member of an elite bomb disposal unit in Iraq. Somewhat guarded by a protective suit, he handles delicate mechanisms designed to outwit him. It's like chess. He's very good at his job, but is that what drives him to put his life on the line hundreds of times? Not pro-war, not anti-war, not about the war in Iraq, but about the minds of dedicated combat soldiers. Directed flawlessly by Kathryn Bigelow; as one critic's group after another honored it in their year-end awards, it became a sure thing for picture, actor and director nominations.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/iglor-15284.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/iglor-15284.html','popup','width=982,height=777,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/iglor-thumb-250x197-15284.jpg" width="250" height="197" alt="iglor.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Inglourious Basterds.</b> Quentin Tarantino is a natural and joyous filmmaker who feeds off his own tory story that fearlessly rewrites history. It finally comes down to a conflict between a fatuous Nazi monster (Chrisophe Waltz) and a fearless French Jewish heroine (Mélanie Laurent), with Brad Pitt as a knife wielding American commando leader. You have to hand him this: it's one World War Two movie where we don't know the ending. Waltz won best actor at Cannes 2009, has swept the critic's awards, is a shoo-in as best supporting actor.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/knowing-15288.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/knowing-15288.html','popup','width=1400,height=934,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/knowing-thumb-250x166-15288.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="knowing.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Knowing. </b>  Among the best of science fiction films--frightening, suspenseful, intelligent, and, when it needs to be, rather awesome. In its very different way it's comparable to the great "Dark City," by the same director, Alex Proyas. That film was about the hidden nature of the world men think they inhabit, and so is this one.  I loved the film's extravagance of energy, and the hard-charging Nicolas Cage performance (so different from his work in "Bad Lieutenant.") My praise stirred up a fierce pro and con debate among readers: http://j.mp/4MmMss</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/precious-13383.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/precious-13383.html','popup','width=1400,height=756,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/11/precious-thumb-250x135-13383.jpg" width="250" height="135" alt="precious.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire  </b> The heart-rending story of an overweight, abused young teenager and the support she finds from a teacher and a social worker, who both glimpse her potential. Harrowing, depressing, and yet uplifting, as director Lee Daniels uses her fantasies to show the dreams inside. What a sure and brave lead performance by newcomer Gabourey Sidibe, and what a powerful one by Mo'Nique, as her heartless mother. She, Mariah Carey, Paula Patton and Sherri Shepherd are all but unrecognizable as they disappear into key supporting roles.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/serious-11368.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/serious-11368.html','popup','width=1400,height=930,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/serious-thumb-250x166-11368.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="serious.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>A Serious Man.</b>  Another great film the Coen Brothers, returning to their homeland of the Minneapolis suburbs to tell the story of a modern-day Job who strives to be a good man, a "serious man," and finds everything--but everything--going wrong. Michael Stuhlbarg gives a virtuoso lead performance as the suffering man, who earnestly tries to do the right thing. Fred Melamed is inspired as his best friend, who, he discovers, is having an affair with his wife. The friend tries to console him; he is grief and grief counselor at once.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-15293.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-15293.html','popup','width=401,height=315,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/up-thumb-250x196-15293.jpg" width="250" height="196" alt="up.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Up in the Air.</b> George Clooney plays a man for the first decade of this  uncertain century. "Where do you live?" he's asked while seated in a first class airplane seat. "Here." He wants no home, no wife, no family, and says he is happy.  His job is depriving others of theirs; he's a Termination Facilitator. He fires people for a living. Vera Farmiga plays his friendly fellow road warrior who sleeps with him on the road. Anna Kendrick is the sincere young college grad whose first job is terminating others. The third wonderful film by Jason Reitman, after "Thank You for Smoking" and "Juno."</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/white-11375.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/white-11375.html','popup','width=1400,height=790,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/09/white-thumb-250x141-11375.jpg" width="250" height="141" alt="white.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>The White Ribbon.</b>  The subterranean and labyrinthine secret history of a German village in the years before World War One. A mysterious series of deaths descends like a vengeance. Michael Haneke's elegant b&w photography etches the rural community in striking portraits of sinister normality. We become familiar with the important villagers, we follow their stories, we comprehend everything hat happens -- but something else is happening, something unspoken, kept secret from them, among them, and from us. Infinitely tantalizing.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/avatar-15297.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/avatar-15297.html','popup','width=567,height=319,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/avatar-thumb-250x140-15297.jpg" width="250" height="140" alt="avatar.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>Now you are thinking, hey, what about <b>"Avatar?"</b>  Faithful readers know of my annual Special Jury Prize. This year it goes to James Cameron's ground-breaking epic. No, that doesn't mean it's the best film of the year. It means it won the Special Jury Prize.</p>

<p>¶ <b>The Top Ten Independent Films</b> </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/departures-15300.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/departures-15300.html','popup','width=1400,height=933,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/departures-thumb-250x166-15300.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="departures.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b> Departures.</b>  In Japan,  a young man apprentices to the trade of "encoffinment," the preparation of corpses before their cremation. It is the only employment he can find, after he loses his job as a cellist in an orchestra that goes broke. The company owner approaches the job as a sacred vocation, and although the hero and his wife find the task unsettling, he slowly learns a new respect for himself through respect for the dead. A visually beautiful and poetic film by Yojiro Takita. Winner of the 2009 Academy Award as best foreign film.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/DISGRACE_image__1-15327.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/DISGRACE_image__1-15327.html','popup','width=1752,height=1168,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/DISGRACE_image__1-thumb-250x166-15327.jpg" width="250" height="166" alt="DISGRACE_image__1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Disgrace.</b> A masterful performance by John Malkovich as a disgraced Cape Town English professor, forced to resign during the first years of Nelson Mandela's administration. He goes to live with his daughter (Jessica Haines) on her remote farm, where the manager (Eriq Ebouaney) seems to be establishing an independence of his own. The hard, ambiguous issues of the new South African world are squarely engaged in Steve Jacobs's film, based on the novel by Nobel winner J.M. Coetzee. </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/everlasting-15304.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/everlasting-15304.html','popup','width=1089,height=813,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/everlasting-thumb-250x186-15304.jpg" width="250" height="186" alt="everlasting.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Everlasting Moments.</b> The great Swedish filmmaker Jan Troell ("The Emigrants" and "The New Land") tells the story of the wife of an alcoholic dock worker in Malmo in 1911. He's not a bad man, except when he drinks. She wins a camera in a lottery and tries to pawn it, but the camera store owner develops the one photo she took, looks at it thoughtfully, and asks her to keep taking pictures. Her inner life is transformed by discovering that she has an artistic talent. A luminous performance by Maria Heiskanen.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goodbye-15307.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goodbye-15307.html','popup','width=1417,height=902,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goodbye-thumb-250x159-15307.jpg" width="250" height="159" alt="goodbye.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Goodbye Solo. </b> the third remarkable film by Ramin Bahrani, after "Man Push Cart" and "Chop Shop." In Winston-Salem, NC, a straight-talking man around 70 (onetime Elvis bodyguard  Red West) gets into the taxi of an African immigrant (Souleymane Sy Savané, from the Ivory Coast).  For $1,000, paid immediately, he wants to be driven in 10 days to the top of a mountain in Blowing Rock National Park, to a place so windy that the snow falls up. He says nothing about a return trip. As a friendship develops  between them, the days tick inexorably away.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/julia-9383.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/julia-9383.html','popup','width=1300,height=924,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/07/julia-thumb-250x177-9383.jpg" width="250" height="177" alt="julia.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Julia.</b>  The most striking performance in Tilda Swinton's exciting career. Only poor marketing prevented this from succeeding as the thriller of the year. Swinton plays an alcoholic slut who agrees to help kidnap a child, and ends up with him on an odyssey in Mexico through a thorn thicket of people you do not want to meet. If there's one thing consistent about her behavior, it's how she lies to all of them. Directed by Erick Zonca. </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent light-15311.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent light-15311.html','popup','width=1400,height=1050,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/silent light-thumb-250x187-15311.jpg" width="250" height="187" alt="silent light.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Silent Light.</b>  A story of romance and conscience set among the Mennonites of Mexico. A happily married man falls in love with a single woman, and she with them, and they are both haunted by guilt. Their gravitas is a stark contrast to the casual attitude toward sex in most films; they are violating rules they respect, hurting people they love. Such matters are rarely taken so seriously in films. Carlos Reygadas tells his story with a clarity and attention worthy of Bresson.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sin-15314.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sin-15314.html','popup','width=1400,height=759,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/sin-thumb-250x135-15314.jpg" width="250" height="135" alt="sin.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Sin Nombre.</b>  Atop the fright cars of a train running north through Mexico, hopeful emigrants ride toward their dream of the United States. Two stories: We follow a young woman from Honduras, and Casper, a young gang member who robs those riding on the cars. During the odyssey, scenes of great beauty join with others of the horrifying closed world of gangs. We realize that the difference between the two worlds is the scope of their dreams. An extraordinary debut by Cary Fukunaga, only 31. Won for direction and cinematography at Sundance 2009.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/skin movie family-15317.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/skin movie family-15317.html','popup','width=374,height=244,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/skin movie family-thumb-250x163-15317.jpg" width="250" height="163" alt="skin movie family.JPG" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Skin.</b> The Sandra Laing story obsessed South Africans in 1965. She was the daughter of white Afrikaners. She didn't look white. Her father fights to the Supreme Court to have her reclassified as white, and then when she falls in love with a black man she tries to have her classification changed. A wrenching dilemma, starring Sophie Okonedo ("Dirty Pretty Things") in a tricky and compelling role, and Sam Neill as her deeply conflicted father.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/truckerjpg-042957f91f897f62-15320.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/truckerjpg-042957f91f897f62-15320.html','popup','width=461,height=355,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/truckerjpg-042957f91f897f62-thumb-250x192-15320.jpg" width="250" height="192" alt="truckerjpg-042957f91f897f62.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>Trucker.</b>  Michelle Monaghan is remarkable as a truck driver who has just paid off her own rig. She's 30ish, hard-drinking, promiscuous, estranged from the father (Benjamin Bratt) of her 12-year-old son. In an emergency she has to take the boy back, and that leads from an arm's-length relationship to difficult personal discoveries. A powerful debut by writer-director James Mottern, who avoids the obvious gurns this story could take and follows the characters wih empathy.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/you-15323.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/you-15323.html','popup','width=952,height=756,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/you-thumb-250x198-15323.jpg" width="250" height="198" alt="you.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>You, the Living. </b> In a sad world and a sad city, sad people lead sad lives and complain that they hate their jobs and nobody understands them. The result is in some ways a comedy with a twist of the knife, and in other ways a film like nobody else has ever made--except for its director, Roy Andersson of Sweden. Fifty vignettes, almost all shot with a static camera, in medium and long shot. You laugh to yourself, silently, although you're never quite sure why. Flawless in what it does, and we have no idea what that is.</center></blockquote></blockquote><br />
•<br />
•<br />
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('08c28691-773b-412e-a453-773f04f06841');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/rogerebertcom-movie-reviews-essays-and--rebert">rogerebert.com :: Movie reviews, essays and the M</a></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('3c8a440c-ed70-4078-923e-6f5c1e547bb5');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/twidget">Twitter Widget</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript><script type="text/javascript" src="http://cdn.widgetserver.com/syndication/subscriber/InsertWidget.js"></script><script>if (WIDGETBOX) WIDGETBOX.renderWidget('3c8a440c-ed70-4078-923e-6f5c1e547bb5');</script><noscript>Get the <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/twidget">Twitter Widget</a> widget and many other <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com/">great free widgets</a> at <a href="http://www.widgetbox.com">Widgetbox</a>! Not seeing a widget? (<a href="http://docs.widgetbox.com/using-widgets/installing-widgets/why-cant-i-see-my-widget/">More info</a>)</noscript><br />
<a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><br />
<script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p><br />
	</p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p>	</p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Cameron is recrowned King of the World</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/cameron_is-recrowned_king_of_the_world.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30353</id>

    <published>2009-12-17T05:17:10Z</published>
    <updated>2009-12-25T17:15:08Z</updated>

    <summary>The thing about James Cameron is, he can get his mind around a project the size of &quot;Avatar&quot; and keep his cool. If it requires the development of untested technology, he takes the time to work on it. If he...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Specific films" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/1avatar-wallpaper-15131.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/1avatar-wallpaper-15131.html','popup','width=1373,height=1048,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/1avatar-wallpaper-thumb-240x183-15131.jpg" width="240" height="183" alt="1avatar-wallpaper.jpg" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></form>The thing about James Cameron is, he can get his mind around a project the size of "Avatar" and keep his cool. If it requires the development of untested technology, he takes the time to work on it. If he wants to create aliens human enough to be sexy and yet keep them out of the Uncanny Valley, he test-drives them. If it costs $250 million, as reported, or $350 million, as rumored, you reflect: That's a lot of money, but after seeing the movie I guess I saw most of it up there on the screen.</p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>It became a favorite sport in some Hollywood circles, and even among critics not a million miles distant from myself, to publicly doubt Cameron's claims. He took ten years, starting with a story he began writing years before <i>that?</i> He was determined to film in 3-D, but no 3-D was good enough, so he had to perfect the next generation of that contentious process. The film needed 163 minutes to be told, causing anxiety among exhibitors eager to usher in a new audience every 120 minutes? If that's what it took, that's what it took.

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/2avatar-15134.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/2avatar-15134.html','popup','width=1728,height=1080,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/2avatar-thumb-300x187-15134.jpg" width="300" height="187" alt="2avatar.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
After the epic success of his "Titanic," the highest-grossing movie ever made, no one was prepared to say no to him. That is a risky position to be in, and Hollywood is littered with the corpses of films that were made next after big hits by their makers. There's even a joke about that:</p>

<p>	<i>"Now that you've set box office records, what are you going to do next?"</i></p>

<p>	<i>"I've got this script in my desk drawer that I've been working on since the 1980s, but until now no one has ever wanted to back it."</i></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/3avatar-photo3-15140.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/3avatar-photo3-15140.html','popup','width=1200,height=675,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/3avatar-photo3-thumb-300x168-15140.jpg" width="300" height="168" alt="3avatar-photo3.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	  Doubt descended upon Cameron's fans after he previewed 18 minutes of "Avatar" in the autumn. Audiences were underwhelmed. Did the alien race of Na'vi look a little creepy? Or not creepy enough? The term Uncanny Valley is used by robot theorists and special effects technicians to describe artificial humanoids who look "too" human, so that their artificiality becomes unsettling. Better Robby the Robot as your housecleaner than a Stepford Wife. </p>

<p>	In the days before the first press screenings of "Avatar," a sort of frenzy gripped certain web fan sites. Then the great day arrived, 20th Century-Fox issued individual invitations and posted guards at the door, the chosen people filed in, the movie began, silence descended, interest grew, and doubts were dispelled. Cameron had done it. </p>

<p>	Fox made much of a press embargo: No critics were to review the film until Fri. Dec. 18, its opening day. A flaw in this theory was that the movie opened a week sooner in England, and American fans, not witless, were instantly devouring the London reviews.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/4avatar-photo4-15143.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/4avatar-photo4-15143.html','popup','width=1200,height=800,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/4avatar-photo4-thumb-300x200-15143.jpg" width="300" height="200" alt="4avatar-photo4.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	Kirk Honeycutt of the Hollywood Reporter broke the U.S, embargo and referred to Cameron's infamous speech when "Titanic" won as best picture: "A dozen years later, James Cameron has proven his point: He is king of the world." Todd McCarthy of Variety was also an embargo-breaker:  "Cameron delivers again with a film of universal appeal that just about everyone who ever goes to the movies will need to see." </p>

<p>	You could call those the kinds of reviews Hollywood likes to read, and it's unlikely Honeycutt or McCarthy will be denied entry to Fox screenings anytime soon. What was the point of an embargo, anyway? Was Fox afraid the reviews would be <i>negative?</i> By Friday afternoon editors at the Sun-Times and Tribune were growing restless as the good news leaked out, and both papers published reviews. Soon a movie that wasn't supposed to be reviewed was sporting high numbers in the Tomatometer (86% as I write).</p>

<p>	More sincere praise came from a woman seated not far from me (no, not Chaz), who felt the call of nature, raced out to the facilities, hurried back in, sat down, and 10 minutes later realized she'd forgotten to put her 3-D glasses back on. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/5avatar-photo1-15146.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/5avatar-photo1-15146.html','popup','width=1200,height=800,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/5avatar-photo1-thumb-300x200-15146.jpg" width="300" height="200" alt="5avatar-photo1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	"Avatar" creates a new world from scratch, and, as Lucas did in "Star Wars," fills it with such countless minute details that it doesn't seem artificial. Well it does, but it's as real as a fantasy can seem, if you see what I mean. The creatures of this planetary forest are many-toothed and preposterous, but not the grotesque artifices of so many monster movies. Their battles seem sincere and earnest, and not the banging of pots and pans as in "Transformers 2." </p>

<p>	The special effects pioneer Ray Harryhausen, who made horses fly and sent skeletons into battle, is still alive at 89. If he sees "Avatar" he'll possibly feel the kind of pride Werner von Braun might have felt the day men walked on the Moon. Yet "Avatar" isn't primarily about Harryhausen's kind of special effects at all, in the traditional sense. Its use of CGI means that in the scenes on Pandora it's every bit as much an animated film as "The Polar Express," "Beowulf"--or "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs," which also used motion capture, although its artists drew on paper, not computers.</p>

<p>	Cameron has told a story with comprehensible emotional motivation, physical events that make sense at least within the realities of his imaginary world, and an alien race that exists not as foils for ray guns but an indigenous people living in harmony with their environment. His movie has a Green message and an anti-war message, both effective and organic parts of the plot.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/7Avatar-Neytiri-Movie-15152.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/7Avatar-Neytiri-Movie-15152.html','popup','width=2560,height=1600,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/7Avatar-Neytiri-Movie-thumb-300x187-15152.jpg" width="300" height="187" alt="7Avatar-Neytiri-Movie.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	Those towering blue Na'vi with their long tails look peculiar at first, but it's strange how quickly they grow on us. You don't whip up aliens like that with a sketch pad. It takes trial runs and countless hours of testing. And Cameron was equal to the test. He also overcame the bane of 3-D, which is dimness. His Dolby 3-D seems noticeably brighter. His use of 3-D is restrained; he doesn't poke his picture in  our eyes, and his editing makes sense of things, unlike Michael Bay's mixmaster approach.</p>

<p>	James Cameron set out to do a lot of very difficult things and to do them all correctly.  It took him and his many collaborators a long time and a lot of money, but how many filmmakers could have done it at all? The King of the World has been re-elected.</p>

<p>¶</p>

<p><b>My review of <a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091211/REVIEWS/912119998<br />
">Avatar.</a>. </b></p>

<p>¶</p>

</blockquote></blockquote>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cRdxXPV9GNQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cRdxXPV9GNQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p>¶</p>

<p><br />
<object width="500" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ezqYZT8e8fs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ezqYZT8e8fs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x234900&color2=0x4e9e00&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="315"></embed></object></p>

<p>¶</p>

<p><br />
<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dBiGRraX3Fs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dBiGRraX3Fs&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x5d1719&color2=0xcd311b&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object></p>

<p><br />
<b><i>Footnote to the third video for all the readers who helpfully pointed out it isn't about the same "Avatar" movie. Yes, I know. I added it in a fit of whimsy. Under your tree, don't you always have  few "joke gifts?" </b> <br />
<center><br />
¶</p>

<p><SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/f366bcc7-a490-4a7f-a6bb-d5ab766c1e54"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2Ff366bcc7-a490-4a7f-a6bb-d5ab766c1e54&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com Widgets</A></NOSCRIPT></p>

<p></p>

<p><a href="http://www.twitter.com/ebertchicago"><img src="http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_bird-a.png" alt="Follow ebertchicago on Twitter"/></a></p>

<p><br />
</i></i></i></i></i></i></i></i></i></p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>The Twelve Gifts of Christmas</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/12/the_twelve_gifts_of_christmas.html" />
    <id>tag:blogs.suntimes.com,2009:/ebert//103.30242</id>

    <published>2009-12-13T16:10:43Z</published>
    <updated>2009-12-16T05:11:06Z</updated>

    <summary>The problem with gifts is that you almost always give something you want for yourself. There are obvious exceptions, such as a woman giving a man a tie, but even then he is almost certain to receive the tie she...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Roger Ebert</name>
        
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/christmas-gifts.jpg"><img alt="christmas-gifts.jpg" src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/christmas-gifts-thumb-300x346-14952.jpg" width="300" height="346" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /></a></span>The problem with gifts is that you almost always give something you want for yourself. There are obvious exceptions, such as a woman giving a man a tie, but even then he is almost certain to receive the tie <i>she</i> thinks he should be wearing. Most of the time the rule applies, as I'm reminded every time I use Chaz's iPod, iPhone and MacBook Pro. </p>

<p>People give me books they want to read, music they enjoy listening to, and subscriptions to publications they value, such as the Weekly Standard, Organic Gardening, and Nutrition Action--an excellent publication, but less interesting to me, you understand,  now that I don't eat or drink. Asked by editors year after year  to recommend a holiday gift </p>]]>
        <![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote>for our readers, I invariably find myself at a loss. This year, however, a bright shining bulb illuminated above my head: <i>I would recommend only gifts I myself desired!</i> These choices might be meaningless for others, but at least they'd be sincere. They are so sincere, indeed, that I already possess every single one of these gifts, so they will be of no help to you in answering the age-old question, What to Give Roger?

<p><br />
	I'll list them in order from the most expensive to the least. For free gifts, I recommend an e-mail containing a list of <i>Web Sites I Love That You Have Never Heard Of,</i> such as Tom O'Bedlam's sonorous poetry readings at <b><a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/SpokenVerse ">Spoken Verse,</a> </b> the incomparable <b><a href="http://www.bobandray.com/">Bob and Ray,</a> </b> and of course the comprehensive reference work <b> <a href="oedilf.com">the Omnificent English Dictionary In Limerick Form.</a> </b></p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ikiru-15037.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ikiru-15037.html','popup','width=400,height=325,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/ikiru-thumb-300x243-15037.jpg" width="300" height="243" alt="ikiru.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>12.</b>  We begin at the most expensive gift, at <b>$284.99, </b>  the Criterion Collection's boxed set<b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/AK-100-Kurosawa-Criterion-Collection/dp/B002NOZUEW?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2"> AK 100: 25 Films of Akira Kurosawa</a>. </b> What need I say about this? Akira Kurosawa is one of the grandmasters of the cinema, his films universally beloved. Criterion <i>sets</i> the criterion for DVD quality, Many of these films have been painstakingly restored, and all represent the best prints available. Four of them have never been released on DVD before. A gift for a true film buff, who probably doesn't already own it, because (1) it was released only on Dec. 8, and (2) its undiscounted retail price is $399.95.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/roku-14965.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/roku-14965.html','popup','width=400,height=400,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/roku-thumb-200x200-14965.jpg" width="200" height="200" alt="roku.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>11</b> . At <b>$99.95, </b>  the <b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Roku-N1100-HD-Player/dp/B001PIBE8I?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2">Roku HD Player</a> </b> is a device plays streaming video from the internet through a television set of any size. If you have high-speed internet (we use Comcast), it delivers an HD-quality picture. Even at slower speeds, it uses a buffering system so there's no pausing or stuttering. You can select from the very large Netflix library of <b> <a href="http://www.netflix.com/WiHome?lnkctr=mhWN&lnkce=sntWi">movies to watch instantly</a> </b>as well as video from Amazon, Starz, and indeed any streaming source. </p>

<p>	The Netflix movies are covered by your existing subscription at any price category, even the lowest ($9 a month). You can be watching up to six movies at any given time, and Netflix remembers exactly when you Paused each one, and begins again at that point. Given my experience with streaming video through web browsers, I was pleasantly surprised by the picture quality even before we signed with Comcast.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/facets3333-14970.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/facets3333-14970.html','popup','width=553,height=363,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/facets3333-thumb-325x213-14970.jpg" width="325" height="213" alt="facets3333.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>10.</b>  On a graduated fee schedule starting at as little as <b>$90</b>  a year, become a patron of<b><a href="http://www.facets.org/"> Facets Cinematheque</a></b>  at 1517 W. Fullerton in Chicago, </b> the Midwestern temple of cinema recently praised in The New York Times as possessing the largest collection of art films on video in the nation. Even the <b> <a href="http://www.facets.org/pages/memberships.php">  basic membership</a> </b> includes tangible cash savings when you attend a Facets screening, festival, lecture or workshop, and when you buy or rent by mail from its amazing collection. If you live in Chicago and go to only one theater all year, you might well see the best films, on average, here. Facets was one of the few theaters in North America to introduce two films on my forthcoming 2009 "best" list.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/elegato-15031.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/elegato-15031.html','popup','width=271,height=348,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/elegato-thumb-175x224-15031.jpg" width="175" height="224" alt="elegato.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
	<b>9.</b>  At a price of <b>$81.25, </b>  the next gift speaks for itself. It's the <b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Elgato-10020840-Video-Capture-Device/dp/B0029U2YSA?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2"> Elgato Video Capture Device for Macs</a>, </b> which connects between your VHS player and your computer and transfers all your old tapes--both commercial and home movies--to digital. Then you can burn them to DVD, and Bob's your uncle. So it <i>wasn't</i> a waste of money to pay those guys to transfer your parents' wedding film to VHS!  And here's the <b> <a href="URL">Pinnacle software for PCs.</a>. </b></p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2008/10/ricecooker-1524.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2008/10/ricecooker-1524.html','popup','width=494,height=327,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2008/10/ricecooker-thumb-250x165-1524.jpg" width="250" height="165" alt="ricecooker.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>	<b>8.</b>  Now we come to a gift for <b>$62.99, </b>  the infallible Zojirushi <b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Zojirushi-NHS-18-10-Cup-Cooker-Steamer/dp/B00004S577?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2">NHS-18 10-Cup Rice Cooker/Steamer & Warmer</a>. </b> Six-cup and 3-cup sizes are available for less. In my experience, Zojirushi makes the best rice cookers, but you do <i>not</i> want to spend more money to buy one of their fancy models with extra bells and whistles and fuzzy settings, whatever they are. You (that is, your "friend" who will receive this present) require this basic, foolproof model, because you've never had a rice cooker before and are even right now thinking "I'll never eat all that rice."</p>

<p>	No, possibly not. But I propose a rice cooker as <i>the only cooking appliance you need, </i> especially if you're a student, or live alone, or are not attracted by the notion of whipping up one of  Julia Child's recipes. Veteran readers of this blog know I have written at length about the <b><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/11/the_pot_and_how_to_use_it.html"> miraculous rice cooker</a>.</b> Info is there about how <strike> you</strike> your friend can quickly become a no-muss, no-fuss one-person cooking phenomenon. </p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/intelX155-14973.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/intelX155-14973.html','popup','width=300,height=300,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/intelX155-thumb-175x175-14973.jpg" width="175" height="175" alt="intelX155.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>7.</b>  At <b>$60.98, </b>  the perfect companion to your VHS-to-digital converter would be the <b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Xitel-INport-Deluxe-Record-Computer?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2">Xitel INport Deluxe</a>, </b> which sits between your turntable and your computer and converts all your vinyl into digital, which can then be loaded into iTunes and thus into your iPod or iPhone or burned onto a blank CD.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/siskel-14981.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/siskel-14981.html','popup','width=955,height=179,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/siskel-thumb-480x89-14981.jpg" width="480" height="89" alt="siskel.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>6.</b>  A membership in the <b> <a href="http://www.siskelfilmcenter.org/membership">Gene Siskel Film Center </a> </b> at State and Randolph in Chicago is only <b> $50, </b> for which you receive discounted $5 admission to movies at the Gene Siskel Film Center; a subscription to the Film Center's monthly schedule, the Gazette; a $10 discount on an Art Institute of Chicago membership; discounted $4 admission to the spring and fall film lecture series; and--be still, my heart!--four free popcorns. The Siskel Center is <b> <a href="http://www.siskelfilmcenter.org/filmlisting"></a> expertly programmed </b>for film lovers.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/speakers-14984.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/speakers-14984.html','popup','width=398,height=391,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/speakers-thumb-200x196-14984.jpg" width="200" height="196" alt="speakers.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>5.</b>  At <b> $39.95, </b> the<b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Laptop-Speakers-Portable-Compact-Speaker/dp/B000LJ2T3Q?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2">B-Flex2 Hi-Fi Stereo USB Speaker</a></b> plugs into the USB port of your Mac or PC with a gooseneck arm that allows you to aim the sound. We're not talking Bose quality here, but the volume is much stronger than your laptop's built-in speakers, it weighs only 10 ounces, the music quality is acceptable, and it's ideal for anyone using the computer's text-to-speech function.</p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/salon logo-14987.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/salon logo-14987.html','popup','width=277,height=267,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/salon logo-thumb-175x168-14987.jpg" width="175" height="168" alt="salon logo.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>4.</b>  At <b>$36.00,</b> or $3 a month, give a Premium subscription to the handsomely redesigned <b><a href="https://sub.salon.com/"> Salon.com,</a> </b> the best of all the daily web magazines. You get no ads, access to premium content, books, magazines, discounts, and access to the site's discussion forums. It's one of my daily must stops. Give it to a entertain a liberal friend, or give it to a conservative friend and entertain yourself. They'll both appreciate the movie reviews of Stephanie Zacharek and Andrew O'Herir.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/radioshift-15013.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/radioshift-15013.html','popup','width=543,height=400,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/radioshift-thumb-250x184-15013.jpg" width="250" height="184" alt="radioshift.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>3.</b>  For the worth-it price of <b> $32,</b> download <b> <a href="http://www.rogueamoeba.com/">Radioshift </a> </b>for your Mac. This application, one of my standbys, pulls in thousands of radio stations via the internet. They're searchable by call letters, country,  genre, or by clicking on a dot on their world globe (above). You can save them under Favorites, browse the Most Popular, and record programs for listening later. Download the trial version to test it out.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/yearbook-2010-14990.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/yearbook-2010-14990.html','popup','width=250,height=365,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/yearbook-2010-thumb-150x219-14990.jpg" width="150" height="219" alt="yearbook-2010.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>2</b> . At the bargain price of <b> $19.95, </b>  how can I resist recommending<b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Roger-Eberts-Movie-Yearbook-2010/dp/0740785362?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2"> <i> Roger Ebert's Movie Yearbook 2010, </i> </a> </b> with 60% new material including all my new reviews, interviews, think pieces, Answer Man items and Glossary items. This is the 21st annual edition in this series, and not only is the quality of the writing quite high, but you will find that on a cost-per-word basis, it is cheaper than any new book except for a dictionary. It comes with high praise from Gene Siskel: "I disagree with every word in this beautifully-written volume."</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/nack-14993.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/nack-14993.html','popup','width=314,height=473,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/nack-thumb-150x225-14993.jpg" width="150" height="225" alt="nack.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>1.</b>  For <b> $16.95, </b> I strongly recommend <b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/My-Turf-Horses-Boxers-Sporting/dp/0306812509?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2"> <i>My Turf, </a> </i> by William A. Nack.</b> Bill Nack is a friend of mine since college days, and followed me as editor of The Daily Illini. He is one of the best sportswriters in the world, and I have seen two of the pieces in this book (on the breakdown of a filly, and the death of Secretariat) move listeners to tears. If you <strike> are</strike> know a sports fan who is too intelligent for one of those inane NFL picture books, here is the book you need.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/noodls-15007.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/noodls-15007.html','popup','width=492,height=346,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/noodls-thumb-300x210-15007.jpg" width="300" height="210" alt="noodls.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><b>Almost 0.</b>  At the surprising price of <b> $2.49 </b> (not a mistake, because they've sold these to me) I  recommend for <strike>your</strike> your friend's rice cooker <b> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000VRCPKK?tag=rogerebcom-20&linkCode=as2">Indomie Instant Fried Noodles - Mix 5 Flavor</a>. </b>I have understandably not tasted these myself, but at the urging of S. M. Rana, a popular poster on my blog from India, I bought these for friends, who report they are delicious--"the best instant pasta I've tasted." S. M. praises the <i>al dente</i> quality when they're properly cooked, and the richness of the broth. Pop 'em into the rice cooker with the recommended amount of water, maybe a tad more. My friend Millie Salmon recommends adding fresh or frozen shrimp at the proper moment, and I've always found that on such occasions a few frozen peas never do any harm. </p>

<p><br />
<span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/snap-15010.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/snap-15010.html','popup','width=411,height=287,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/snap-thumb-250x174-15010.jpg" width="250" height="174" alt="snap.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p><br />
<b>0.</b>  Upgrade the <b> FREE </b> SnapNDrag for Mac to the Pro version for <b>$5.95,</b>  and you have a screenshot utility that will define anything on your screen and save it to disk, e-mail it and do all sorts of other things. I used SnapNDrag to snap and grab nearly every image in his entry. How versatile is it? Just now I employed it to SnapNDrag <i>itself,</i> a feat that would awe even a contortionist.</p>

<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goldnhawk-15016.html" onclick="window.open('http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goldnhawk-15016.html','popup','width=500,height=375,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0'); return false"><img src="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/assets_c/2009/12/goldnhawk-thumb-275x206-15016.jpg" width="275" height="206" alt="goldnhawk.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /></a></span></p>

<p>It occurs to me that, even in these times of economic downturn, you might be looking for something a little more expensive than $284.99. In that case, how could you improve on this <b> $39,500 </b> lovingly-restored show car, a <b><a href="http://www.azcarsandtrucks.com/1957goldenhawk.html">1957 Studebaker Golden Hawk? </a></b>   It comes with a shelf-full of trophies, a rebuilt supercharged engine with 200 miles on the odometer, and its own trailer for hauling it to car shows. For less than the price of a banal Mercedes, you'll have the <b><a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/ive_got_the_sweetest_set_of_wh.html">Sweetest Set of Wheels in Town.</a> </b></p>

<p><br />
¶</p>

<p><b><i>Now playing at Facets Cinematheque: The American indie film "The New Year Parade"</b> </i></p>

<p><object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3U427PXx6O0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3U427PXx6O0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object></p>

<p><br />
¶</p>

<p><b><i>Playing all month at the Siskel Center: The Great Silent Clowns. Here is Buster Keaton's complete and wonderful short "One Week." Newlyweds are given an assemble-it-yourself honeymoon home.</b> </i></p>

<p><embed id=VideoPlayback src=http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=3147358394537366471&hl=en&fs=true style=width:400px;height:326px allowFullScreen=true allowScriptAccess=always type=application/x-shockwave-flash> </embed></p>

<p></p>

<p><a class="DiggThisButton"> ('<img src="http://digg.com/img/diggThis.png" height="80" width="52" alt="DiggThis" />')</a><br />
<script src="http://digg.com/tools/diggthis.js" type="text/javascript"></script></p>

<p></p>

<p><SCRIPT charset="utf-8" type="text/javascript" src="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822/US/rogerebcom-20/8001/da409a45-dc61-4e5a-a55f-af986daa6e1f"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT><A HREF="http://ws.amazon.com/widgets/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&MarketPlace=US&ID=V20070822%2FUS%2Frogerebcom-20%2F8001%2Fda409a45-dc61-4e5a-a55f-af986daa6e1f&Operation=NoScript">Amazon.com </A></NOSCRIPT></p>

<p></p>

<p></p>

<p>	</p>

<p></p>

<p> </p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>
