Many a TEEN FLICK: Teens just wanna have fuh-un...

It's true. Teen movies may not be known for their depth and intelligence but they do capture the wonders of our joyous youth...or, at least they try to show the rest of us what could or should have been. Like the chick flick genre, teen flicks are lacking in credibility because the majority falls under the comedy genre. Some of the most popular being teen flick phenomenons are: The American Pie Series (1999, 2001, 2003), The National Lampoon series (1978, 1994, 1995, 2002) and The Scary Movie Series (2000, 2001, 2003, 2006). There are tons of sub-genres in this category including The Teen Cult Favourite that is usually directed at teeny boppers, who are in a different subculture on their own now and could be the topic of another post in itself. The good thing about this genre is that you might just get your boyfriend to go with you to see some of these, even the chick flicks, because they are usually directed at the general teen age group and pay less attention to specific gender preferences.

What started it all...well, kinda
If you are from my generation (all you twenty-somethings), than your parents or older siblings have made you watch The Breakfast Club (1985) (named #1 in Entertainment Weekly's "The 50 Best High School Movies"), Pretty in Pink (1986), Sixteen Candles (1984) or Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986). Some of you may not have considered these teen flicks because...well they're old now, but you must face the truth and embrace the past. It was the era of Molly Ringwald and John Hughes, a man that got audience buzz and critical acclaim with these movies. Before him, teen films were classified as beach party films like Gidget (1959). He was the first director of teen film to explore real teen issues like sex, drugs, abuse, suicide, cliques, and alienation in high schools.

The problem is: I'm not sure if it's because it's set in the 80's, but everything is cheesier (of course, the hair and clothes don't exactly help). And if you don't like Molly Ringwald, I suggest you pick a different genre for this time period, because she was in everything. I love The Breakfast Club, but the teen angst and cross-clique bonding is a little much for my generation of teenage drug overdose, alcohol poisoning, teenage pregnancy, bullying and murder, though if you can come to the table with an open mind than there is a lot to gain.

Must-see: Ferris Bueller's Day Off and The Breakfast Club because I am not alone in believing it is seriously a right of passage. And you might just want to skim through Pretty in Pink for James Spader alone.

Ah, the good o'l days: For all of their cheesiness, the acting is better, the writing is better and they strived for deeper storylines with more substance unlike a lot of what is put out currently.

Teen Comedy
This is the genre that can get away with almost anything and still remains the most popular of teen films. There are girl versions and guy versions though the main audience is the teenage consumer, and guess what, it works. Though, funnily enough, this may be the one genre where the romantic comedy holds a higher critical status and, in my opinion, makes more interesting films. Teen rom-coms are basically adult rom-coms featuring teenage stock characters (the popular crowd, the geeks, cheerleaders, jocks, the girl next door, the stoner kid, etc.) and at least one scene at the prom.

Watch out for: Many versions of the same movie over and over again, overage casting, under par acting, offensive stereotypes, hyper-sexualized teen girls, and disgusting bawdy humour.

Why you should still see them: They are the only films out there that directly relate (sometimes barely) to the teenage experience and don't we all want to see movies about ourselves? Plus, other will talk about them and you'll be out of the loop. That's no fun.

Bright spots in the darkness: Check out Drama Queen for a fairly good top 5 list. On top of that, my personal recommendations would be The Princess Diaries (2001, but stay away from the sequel) and Clueless (1995) though stay tuned for what I call, "a better alternative".

Teen Drama/Romance
The chickiest and possibly the chic-est in the teen film genre. Like the romantic drama (coming soon), there is usually an element of tragedy that has its roots in the classic structure of Romeo and Juliet, arguably, the archetypal teen romance. Teen drama is the same only it is not restricted to a romantic storyline, or what would usually be classified as a chick flick, like Dead Poet's Society (1989), Almost Famous (2000) and The Virgin Suicides (1999). These movies are more likely to have critical acclaim but not necessarily box office hits which mirror the adult versions.

The problem is: The cheese factor, of course. It's also harder to believe a love story between teenagers than between adults so it falls back on tragedy to gain the emotional attachment of the audience (see Crazy/Beautiful [2001], How to Deal [2003]). The acting is usually better than in comedies but is still under par and while the storylines are deeper, the writing isn't always better.

I would still recommend: A Walk to Remember (2002) to any chick flick lover despite all the sappiness. And for a good twist on this sub-genre, check out films like Twilight (2008) and then read my post on it.

Upcoming Teen Flicks: On April 17th, Zac Efron makes his post-High School Musical debut in 17 Again. I am extremely tempted to see this movie for the hilarious Matthew Perry and Leslie Mann (remember, her husband is Judd Apatow) but if Efron is actually funny than it could possibly be decent. Also on July 10th, I Love You, Beth Cooper (featuring Heroes star Hayden Panettiere) about the bonding between popular cheerleaders and nerds.

THE EMSEMBLE PIECE: Curtis' Love Actually! Love is everywhere I go...

This may me one of those times you just don't believe me and my crazy sub-genre inventions, but I beg of you, hear me out. The Ensemble Piece is not just a movie of a standard genre with an ensemble cast but a form all on it's own. I am sad to say that this is yet another film deemed a romantic comedy featuring an ensemble cast and while, yes, it does have romance and it does have comedy, it goes beyond what this limiting genre is capable of. This sub-genre is a more general Sisterhood flick, because it features the different kinds of relationships between women and men. The ensemble is also like the fantasy genre that can be integrated with wide span of different movies including films like The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001, 2002, 2003), CrashOcean's Eleven (2001) and it's sequels (2004, 2007). Other chick flicks or romantic-comedy-like films that fit into this sub-genre are A Midsummer Night's Dream (1999), Playing by Heart (1998) and the newest and sadly disappointing He's Just Not that Into You (2009).

A movie that I think uses all it can from this sub-genre and does it well is Love Actually (2003), originally called Love Actually is All Around which pretty much gives you a general synopsis of the story. The most appealing thing about this movie and possibly what made it successful is it's star packed cast. Think of ten of the most interesting, talented and popular British actors. I'm sure at least five are in this movie. And while I know it is shallow to see movies because of the actors themselves, I am a firm believer in the quality of the actors in a film can tell you a lot about the quality of the film itself. True to ensemble style almost every character is connected through an "it's a small world" kind of theme; Prime Minister David (Hugh Grant) and Karen(Emma Thompson) are brother and sister, Harry (Alan Rickman, as in Snape, anyone?) is Sarah's (Laura Linney) boss, and Jamie (Colin Firth)and Sarah are friends with Peter (Chiwetel Ejiofor), Juliet (Keira Knightley) and Mark (Andrew Lincoln) and so on and so forth.

Sadly because there are so many performances in an ensemble film they are usually snubbed by the Oscars and other award-giving societies, especially in the acting category. I remember critics going on and on about Bill Nighy (Davy Jones anyone?) and Emma Thompson but they were snubbed in the more popular award categories. Something similar happened to nominee, Matt Dillon for Crash who was over-shadowed by George Clooney and the actors in The Lord of the Rings, specifically Andy Serkis and Sean Astin, who, The Academy revealed, who were number sixes on the nomination list and to . On a more positive note, it did receive Golden Globe nominations for Best Musical or Comedy and Best Screenplay by writer and director, Richard Curtis. He is one of the prominent romantic-comedy writers who gave us Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994), Notting Hill (1999), and the Bridget Jones Series (2001, 2004) and makes his directorial debut with this film.

This movie, once again, received a disappointing 64% rating on Rotten Tomatoes fresh meter and not much better on the average use and critics ratings on Yahoo! Movies. Most of the negative comments from the critics argue that the movie is too long and drags just before the end which I didn't notice the first or last time I watched it. A few also complain about that the number of connected storylines are too ambitious and do not deliver. It's hard for me to appreciate these valid criticisms because most are written nonchalantly, as if they're expected, or give no evidence or insight into their claims. Thank the Lord for Ebert, who makes similar claims but writes them factually, without disdain and with evidence:

The movie's only flaw is also a virtue: It's jammed with characters, stories, warmth and laughs, until at times Curtis seems to be working from a checklist of obligatory movie love situations and doesn't want to leave anything out. At 129 minutes, it feels a little like a gourmet meal that turns into a hot-dog eating contest.

My thoughts are that I am a big fan of the ensemble. I love seeing the dynamics of interconnected stories that are like short stories that give the good stuff and only the good stuff. I also like seeing the country of dry humour, wisdom and cynicism depicted as normal, fallible human beings who are on the same quest for happiness as the rest of us. Who knew the English were such big softies? And on top of that there is even a scene where a guy and his step-son indulge in a little chick-flick therapy. I like to think they're sending a subliminal message.

Favourite quotes: "When the planes hit the Twin Towers, as far as I know, none of the phone calls from the people on board were messages of hate or revenge - they were all messages of love." -Hugh Grant voice over, "Christmas shopping, never an easy or a pleasant task" -Harry, "But you know, the thing about romance is... people only get together right at the very end." -Sam, "Hiya kids. Here is an important message from your Uncle Bill. Don't buy drugs. Become a pop star, and they give you them for free!" - Billy Mack, "Meatloaf definitely got laid at least once. For God's sake, Ringo Starr married a Bond girl!" -Daniel
Chemistry level: 5/5. Even the kiddies had good chemistry.
Best love story: A hard choice indeed. I'll break it down for you: sweetest was by far the movie stand-ins (Martin Freeman and Joanna Page), saddest by far is Sarah's that is a conflict between her love for her brother and her co-worker Karl (Rodrigo Santoro)and
Best performance: While it is really nice to see Liam Neeson as really light-hearted and funny, Emma Thompson really steals the show. She tries to stop herself from having a break down while listening to one of the greatest Joni Mitchell songs ever (and it's pretty incredible. But the most entertaining by far are also guest appearances by Billy Bob Thorton as the pompous American President and Rowan Atkinson (Mr.Bean, anyone?) as a sort of quirky Puck-like character who helps out little Sam(Thomas Sangster) and takes his sweet time with everything he does.
Interesting choices: The film begins and finishes with scenes involving real people experiencing different kinds of love in the Heathrow airport. Apparently the director filmed there for a few days and asked people's permission when he caught something he wanted to put in the film. Also, there are relationships that are interracial, have a large age difference, a language barrier and an obvious class difference between the Prime Minister and Natalie(Martine McCutcheon) from the "dodgy end" who everyone seems to think is chubby. By the way, she so is not.
Musical Atmosphere: The climactic theme music that gets the audience's heart racing happens at two significant moments in the film: when the Prime Minister stands up to the President after he hits on his girl and during the montage in the last moments of the film. I will admit whole-heartedly that this is a feel-good moment in a feel-good movie.
Best overall moment: Hugh Grant's dance solo. Not only a white-boy dance but a pasty, British white-boy dance to a 1980's pop song. Classic.

THE ROMANTIC FANTASY: Hallstrom's Chocolat! Indulge a little...

To keep with the magical theme of this week, I thought why not venture into another one of my favourite genres; fantasy. Now, don't worry I'm not getting carried away, I do know that the fantasy genre has nothing to do with chick flicks but it has influenced the romance genre and created a sort of hybrid I like to call The Romantic Fantasy. You might call this the fairytale for adults. This is basically, the ever-popular, romantic comedy or romantic drama (coming soon), with a fantastical storyline that critics and movie-goers recognize and connect to the fantasy genre. Movies you might rcognize that I would put into this sub-genre are ones you, yourself may have had trouble categorizing: romantic comedies like Kate and Leopold (2001), Penelope (2006), dramas like Big Fish (2003), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button(Academy Award nominee 2008) and even mystery or adventure films like The Illusionist (2006), The Fountain or Stardust
(2007).

Following an Oscar season of seven nominations for The Cider House Rules (1999), director Lasse Hallstrom decided to embark on the adventure of a film adapted from Joanna Harris' novel; Chocolat (2000). The film is about a travelling medicine woman, Vianne Rocher played by the glorious Juliette Binoche(1997 Oscar winner), whose methods are a little different than you might think. Vianne and her daughter, Anouk (Victoire Thivisol), arrive in a small French town with large and rigid Catholic morals. The story follows Vianne as David and the Comte de Renaud (brilliantly played by Alfred Molina) as Goliath in a fight to the death over paganism and organized religion, discipline and indulgence or even control and freedom. Of course, like any good chic-flick, Goliath isn't really Goliath but more of a David with a superiority complex who you really feel bad for as the movie progresses.

Unfortunately Ebert and Yahoo! Movies have failed me with no record of reviews for this film but I can relay that Rotten Tomatoes gives it a slightly disappointing 62% on it's fresh meter. I can also say that the Academy thought highly of this film giving it five nominations including Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress (the incredible Dame Judi Dench), Best Picture, and Best Adapted Screenplay. I also watched the making-of featurette on the DVD that told me the Los Angeles Times called it "a splendid work of artistry and craftsmanship". The heart, as producer Leslie Hollerman says it, of this movie is the three generations of "such strong and varied" women who come together to support each other in a movie about generation gaps. That is where the chic-flick lies. Hallstrom also adds that this film has "very vivid and textured portrayals of women that are wonderful role models for any contemporary woman".

Basically, this is up there with my favourite movies of all time. I love it's respect for younger generations; even Vianne, free spirit and all, relaizes that she is caught up in her own strict tradition created by her mother that severely affects Vianne, that she has forced her daughter into accepting. This movie is about the good things in life that you shouldn't deny yourself and as a chocolaholic I am very grateful for the message. And speaking of guilty pleasures, how appropriate for my blog, dontcha think?

Favourite quotes: "Who says I can't use a skillet?"- Josephine, "I hear she's an atheist."- Boy #1, "What's that?"- Boy #2"I don't know. "- Boy #1, "We can't go around measuring our goodness by what we don't do, by what we deny ourselves, what we resist and who we exclude. I think we ought to measure goodness by what we embace, what we create and who we include." - Pere Henri
Best performance: Like another one of my favourites, I say the ensemble. Well done, all.
Chemistry level: 5/5. With this ensemble, how can you go wrong? Writer, Robert Nelson Jacobs calls this film "an ensemble movie" in which he actually added characters to make the story resonate in a more Global way. For more on the ensemble, stay tuned.
Best love story: In a film with many love stories (requiremed in an ensemble film) there is one that is short, sweet and rarely seen. Not to mention it features Leslie Caron, the most gorgeous 70 year-old alive, and who you might recognize from a little musical called Gigi (1958). It also features a charming dog and John Wood in a love story for an older audience.
Best revenge moment: It's a tie between when Serge claims that they're "still married in the eyes of God" to which Josephine replies "Then He must be blind". Next is a very dramatic scene involving Josephine, Serge and a skillet. This moment definitely deserves an independent-woman booyah! Also, the Comte de Renaud, in a decreasing mental state, starts to cut up his wife's dresses. As annoying of a guy as he is, you can't help but be happy that he indulges in some form of pleasure by this point of the film.
History of chocolate: Originally a drink called cacao by the Mayans and Aztecs, it was said to have magical properties that were mostly an aphrodisiac. Chocolate is also known to produce high amounts of serotonin and endorphins in the human brain. One of the best scenes in the movie is a table of people eating in slow motion; a great visual example of the magical feeling of eating chocolate.
A question of bad taste: This movie questions the basis for good and bad taste that is stereotyped by people like the ones in Lansquenet-sous-Tannes. Young Luc (Aurelien Parent Koenig) is ashamed for liking horror stories and grotesque images like his grandmere, Armande (Dench). But he is also a great artist. Pere Henri (Hugh O'Conor) is looked down upon by the Comte de Renaud for singing and dancing to Elvis and even Guillaume Blerot (Wood) is chastised for thinking his dog, Charlie, has a soul.
Johnny, Johnny, Johnny: Half way through the movie we get this little surprise... Johnny Depp! He's definitely one of the best actors of his generation and I can't believe he hasn't won anything yet. This is also one of my favourite performances by him and an unlikely one at that. Mr. Depp has made it known that he doesn't like to be pretty or attractive onscreen and therefore does not usually take roles that look anything like a romantic lead; but look at him now in a verified chick flick and everything. He's a Gypsy with an Irish accent, a wavy ponytail and some serious guitar picking skills; there's nothing left to say.
Fun tidbit: Producer, David Brown (you know, the guy who did Jaws, Driving Miss Daisy, and The Verdict), says this is his favourite movie he has ever produced because it is so "beloved by all" which is rare and very different from a "hit" that he is used to.

THE FAIRYTALE: Disney's Enchanted! That's how you know...

And....I'm back! Everyone watches Disney. Even if you say you don't and that their portrayals of race and gender are skewed, you've still watched them and at least loved one. Even you boys. I remember my brother loved Peter Pan (1953) and Pinocchio (1940). But it's the Disney Princess movies that are the real chick flicks and possibly the first ones we ever see. You might even be able to blame the chick flick genre on classics like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Cinderella (1950), Sleeping Beauty (1959), The Little Mermaid (1989) and Beauty and the Beast (1991).

The newest of the Disney Princess movies, Enchanted (2007) pays homage to Disney's classics while also making fun of themselves and the fairytale genre. Director, Kevin Lima, has a limited resume, but it includes some great kid's films like A Goofy Movie (1995) and Disney's Tarzan (1999). Enchanted is what the critics might call a modern fairytale; a genre which also includes Ever After (1998), Ella Enchanted (2004) and even The Princess Bride (1987). These movies are usually more feminist-friendly with complex characters and storylines that deconstruct the archetypal and overly simplistic fairytale story. I kind of like to think of it as Disney's apology for making so many movies that depict women as weak, desperate, stupid and useless. You may not believe me when you start this animated movie because Giselle, voiced by the charming Amy Adams, is your typical Disney princess who makes a creepy statue of her Prince Charming and sings to her forest friends about the importance of lips. She admits to the man she thinks is her Prince Charming, the multi-talented James Marsden, that she was made "to finish [his] duet". She is the girl who believes that someone will always catch her until she gets transported into modern New York City, a place her step-mother-to-be says "there are no happily ever afters".

The film goes on from there with larger doses of reality and live-action. Giselle is not delicate and optimistic in this world, but naive and perceived as insane. I'm sure all the hardcore feminists appreciated the depiction of a Disney Princess in the "real" world as a potential mental patient. She learns about real emotions like anger, lust and obligation while teaching the cynical real-world residents that a little fantasy in your life won't kill you. Poor, jaded Robert Philip(possibly named for Prince Philip from Sleeping Beauty), played by McDreamy himself, Patrick Dempsey, wants to pursue a sensible marriage with his girlfriend, Nancy (Idina Menzel) and tries to discourage his daughter, Morgan (Rachel Covey) from her fairytale attachment. He's a man who was hurt by love and is shocked by the grandiose romantic gestures and ideals of someone like Giselle. He is portrayed as somewhat of a disappointing stereotype; a single father/workaholic who tries to force his daughter into adulthood, can't keep his apartment clean and pathetically sends his girlfriend emailed flowers instead of real ones.
It was received well by the critics getting a 93% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes fresh meter. The worst reviews on Yahoo! Movies have the same complaints of a great idea with a lot of potential that didn't quite deliver. Disney has never been know for their high-end emotionally invigorating, intellectual scripts but for their innovation and spectacle, so I can't say I had the same expectations as these critics. Ebert gives the film a fairly high review that focuses on Amy Adams' performance which makes this film so lovable. I think it's smart and fun! It's told through a pop-up book, Julie Andrews narrates it and it has the prettiest credits I have ever seen. The best part of the story is the end where Narcissa (Susan Sarandon) narrates the changes in the fairytale story and Giselle finally becomes three-dimensional. Instead of the handsome prince "catching" her, which is consistent throughout the film, she must save poor Robert from the evil sorceress. Yes, everything ends happily and there are cheesy, unrealistic moments, but isn't that what Disney is about? Creating some interesting conflicts and challenges but then putting every perfect, cookie-cutter piece together at the end? Only these cookies have a little self-parody and feminism, so they're even better.

Favourite quotes: The best quotes are the contrasted moments of reality and fantasy that cause confusion in the characters. "Why do people keep giving you free stuff?" - Robert Philip, "No one's been very nice to me." -Giselle, "Yeah, well. Welcome to New York." -Robert Philip, "Oh, thank you." - Giselle, "I seek a beautiful girl." - Edward, "I'd like to find one of them too." construction worker, "You looking for a beautiful lady too?" - construction worker, "No, actually I'm looking for a prince." - Nathaniel, "Riiight." -construction worker
Best performance: Susan Sarandon as Narcissa(Narcissus anyone?) has the greatest evil sorceress voice ever and is a fun addition to the last part of the movie. She turns into a dragon and everything. But the definite best performance is by Amy Adams who even looks like an otherworldly Disney princess. She received a Golden Globe nomination for it and many other awards. I read an interview with her that described her technique for portraying an essentially animated character which basically drew on her dance experience as a child (watch her movements, especially her hands and arm gestures). I think this part is a difficult feat that she conquered brilliantly.
Chemistry level: 4/5. Not bad for Disney. I upped it a little for the juicy sexual tension scenes(Dempsey in a robe and Adams in a towel) that I don't think anyone saw coming and for the gay jokes(in scenes featuring Nathaniel and Edward's comic relief, see quotes) throughout that make this movie fun for adults too.
The Disney Musical: Most classic Disney films are considered musicals because the characters sing at least one song(see any of the films mentioned above). I wouldn't consider it a musical per se, but a movie with integral musical elements. Stephen Swartz, writer of the hit Broadway musical Wicked, is the lyricist and possibly explains Idina Menzel's appearance. Check out the serious singing chops of James Marsden as Edward as well as singing the background song, "That's Amore", in the pizza parlour.
Romantic comedy?!?: Can you believe that, that is how this is classified? People have no imagination. Anything that takes a little effort is called a romantic comedy. Watch out for this overused term and be aware that it may just be a cop-out.
And the moral of the story is...: With it's self-critique as well as the critique of modern society I think this film has some great messages for young and older viewers. Love is a fantasy, Fight for love, Practicality, sensibility and excitement all have thier place in love, Optimism and pessimism are both extremes, It's all about balance, Save yourself, you're the only person who can, Stand up for yourself(Yay, Nathaniel played by Timothy Spall), The only way to be happy is to be honest.

FUN FIND: If you check out IMDB, there are photos of the moments that reflect all the different Disney movies moments in Enchanted. And a great photo galley commentary featured on MSN about the girl movies that guys secretly like. Check em' out!

The Oscar 2009 Wrap-up: The Academy loves the chic-flick and says "The Musical is back!"

For all of you who want the chic-flick back, I promise that this is my Academy wrap-up. Please feel free to give me your opinions about what you enjoyed and didn't enjoy or if you even considered watching it, in the comments section.

4.5/5 BABY!: How excited was I, that all my predictions were spot on, if you count my half prediction for Sean Penn. Even if you don't, it is still pretty good. Now that I look back on it, I really should have known. The Academy loves the minorities and I'm sure wanted to express their support for gay marriage. I really wanted to kick myself after. Though, I will say that this was a fairly easy year to predict, so I'm a little lucky. Congratulations to all the winners!

Best Dressed: Shockingly enough, Miley Cyrus. There were some incredible dresses all round but she had great hair and jewelery to match. I was way impressed! Also some shout outs to Nicole Kidman, Penelope Cruz and Taraji P. Henson who all looked stunning.

Shock moment: No, it wasn't Ben Stiller as a certain "retired" actor during Cinematography (way inappropriate) or Jack Black's dig at DreamWorks (bitter much?) or even the amount of times they showed James Franco and Sean Penn making out (yes, we get it, you homo-loving sons of guns), it was the In Memoriam montage that featured greats like Anthony Minghella, Sydney Pollack and one of my favourites, Paul Newman, but didn't feature one of the night's winners. Where was Heath Ledger's picture? Where was his chance to, yes for a second time, to get an applause and be recognized not only for his work as the Joker but for other roles? Shocking, indeed.'
note: I realized after this post that they featured Ledger in the 2008 award show because he died in January of that year. This year featured people who died from March 2008-February 2009, I'm assuming. I am still mad about it though!

Tribute to the Musical: Once again, luck is on my side. I think it's fate that I recently decided to dedicate a post to, as, host, Hugh Jackman sang, "The Musical is back!". But I known people will complain because The Oscars is not The Tonys and maybe they shouldn't have tried to be. What do you really expect though? Jackman is a many-time Tony host and a theatre-man so really, what else could he have done other than sing and dance? Make fun of Brangelina so more? I loved the show as a whole: the pacing was better than usual, the performances were interesting and the sets were a feast for the eyes. I was also really impressed by the organization; the process of making a film gave the awards and presenters a new twist and the genre montages were so much fun. Everyone must watch The Comedy Montage, it may have been the best, non-award winning, moment of the night. Also check out MSN Movies version of the night's best and worst moments.

Chic-Flick Moment: What a personal, heart-warming and chick flick like way to present awards to the nominated actors! My mom and I were gushing about it the whole night. Shirley MacClaine made Anne Hathaway cry, Kevin Kline saluted the late Heath Ledger and Sir Ben Kingsley gave a Oscar-worthy tribute to Mickey Rourke. What a great year to be nominated!
Not only was Edward Cullen...uhmm, sorry I mean, Robert Pattinson a presenter, but he introduced the chic-flick moment of the night along with musical-girl Amanda Seyfried: The Romance Montage. This moment inspired the wrap-up post because, take a breath everyone, The Academy is acknowledging chic-flicks. I say chic-flicks and not chick flicks because, if you saw it you would notice the quality of the films that were chosen (mostly Oscar winners or nominees and then promotion for other 2008 and 2009 movies). It may have been my favourite moment of the night.

Do Chic-Flicks get nominated?: Obviously not all. But take a look at this year's nominees and winners: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a love story that spans over time and is made to touch the hearts of us all. Plus you cry your eyes out and isn't that what skeptics say girly movies are? Or even The Reader, which at first seems like a basic World War II film, but essentially tells the story of love affair between two unlikely people and the effects of it afterwards. You can also look at the big winner, Slumdog Millionaire; a movie about a kid who really only wants to see the girl he loves again. I say the rules are about the same as any other genre; comedies and action flicks are just not going to cut it (Dark Knight, anyone?), no matter what kind, and if there is enough drama to call it a Drama that it just might have a chance. Throw in a heavyweight director and similar actors and you might just have yourself a winner!

FUN FIND: For those wondering about The Academy Rules, there is definitely more. I, myself, came up with two or three more just watching last night's show. For another take, check out the gallery-accompanied, How to Win an Oscar from MSN.

The 2009 Oscar Predictions of a Chic-Flicker: The Frenzy starts 7pm EST on ABC!

This is the second part to my Oscar frenzy. I'm sure you are all excited and even though it's a little last minute I thought, what better way to keep my predictions going, than divulge my hopes and predictions for the Oscars? There have been some really interesting movies nominated and while I haven't had the pleasure of seeing every single one, I think some of my predictions have merit. Keep in mind The Academy Rules from my first Oscar post. I'll be borrowing the style of who will win versus who should win based on some of my Academy Award knowledge, experience and preference.

And finally to the predictions....

Best Supporting Actress
Who should win: I think this may be the most even grounded playing field. The movies aren't outrageously popular and neither are the performances. Each of these actors have mostly been overshadowed by other performances in the films. I think Amy Adams, nominated for Doubt, is fantastic, but I would of rather have seen her win for the incredibly unlikely Enchanted.

Who will win: There seems to be some in favour for Penelope Cruz for Vicky Christina Barcelona but she of course suffers from rule #6. Marisa Tomei from The Wrestler is also predicted, but is already a winner even though there is some controversy over her first award that seemed to be a result of rule #7. Also Taraji P. Henson for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Viola Davis for Doubt have been predicted but suffer from rule #2. I think it might be Cruz's year.

Best Actress

Who won't win: Melissa Leo for Frozen River for the same reasons as Jenkins and Langella in the Leading Man category. I'm sure she's a fabulous actress but I just don't see it happening. Also, Angelina Jolie because she is already a winner, the Brad Pitt reasons and the fact that the public was even shocked by her nomination for Changeling. She just might be our rule #7 but there are other possibilities out there as well.

Who should win: This is a strange scenario because before Kate Winslet won both the Supporting and Leading Actress Golden Globes people couldn't stop talking about Anne Hathway in Rachel Getting Married. I thought this was very exciting because someone unexpected might be the big award winner this year. But now I'm not so sure it'll be this one because of rule #2.

Who will win: Some people say Meryll Streep for Doubt and some say Winslet for The Reader. But I am still holding out hope for Hathaway. Honestly though, I know it will be Kate Winslet, because she is not a winner yet and has accumulated quite a few nominations over the years. She's really one of my favourites and has been deserving to win for quite a while. She is the example of rule #4. I'm almost positive it'll be her year because Meryll Streep is a phenomenon with over a dozen nominations and a few wins. They can't give it to her every year even if she is the greatest living actress.

Best Actor

Who won't win: I think Brad Pitt was pretty incredible in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. The poor guy gets so much flack for being pretty that people seem to ignore how good of an actor he is; because of that and rule #2, he will not win this award. I think he's also too popular in the world right now to win because there seems to be a separation between Hollywood and The Academy. Most unfortunately, this movie was not completely accepted by critics and audiences. I also don't think Frank Langella in Frost/Nixon or Richard Jenkins in The Visitor have a shot in hell because they are not well known enough and neither were their movies. It's sad because it doesn't mean they weren't fabulous, just that they have been overshadowed by other things than performance.

Who should win: Sean Penn for Milk. I haven't even seen it and I'm about 99.9% sure. He's has never been bad in anything and the guy just seems to be better than a lot of other people, a lot of the time; but because of rule #3, I'm not sure he will. The Academy is known for not liking him, since he tends not to show up even if he's nominated. He also doesn't promote his movies a lot and gets in trouble with the law. People also thought he had been jipped for years until he won in 2003.

Who will win: I honestly think it's between Penn and Mickey Rourke, who made a stunning comeback in The Wrestler. But because of rule #2, I'm not completely confident in his win either. His case is a little different because he is an older actor who has always been respected for great performances. He also won the Golden Globe, which doesn't exactly mean he's a shoe-in, but definitely gives a little perspective. I am also worried about rule #4 from reviews that solely focus on his performance and not so much on the movie itself. Ebert predicts Penn but wants Rourke to win. We'll just have to wait and see.

Best Supporting Actor

Who won't win: Most likely Philip Seymour Hoffman because he has won recently and people seem to be picking Meryll Streep for Doubt instead. Michael Shannon for Revolutionary Road just fades into the background. Unfortunately Robert Downey Jr. for Tropic Thunder, even though he astounded me and everyone else. People were shocked by his nomination and though he deserves to win, he won't because it's a Ben Stiller comedy. If he does win, it might just be the greatest thing ever! This is a great category, in which I am very invested, with very worthy nominees.

Who should win: This is the one category where I believe my emotional and my logical choices are the same(check out Ebert). It has to be Heath Ledger and if it's not I'm gonna be really mad about it. He literally blew my mind in The Dark Night and I don't think it matters how good everyone else is, because he was so unique. The public and critics also made a big fuss over the lack of nominations for the movie, especially Best Picture, so they have to give them something. The critics believe his only competition is Josh Brolin for Milk who, as far as I'm concerned, can wait until next year.

Who will win: The unfortunate thing is that the reason Heath will mostly likely win is because he died. It is his second nomination and his last chance to win and if the Academy wants to please the public and look like nice people, they will give the award to his family. It's sad because it shouldn't be about that. He was incredible and that's why he should win. They would be risking a bad response if they chose this award to be their rule #7. But if they do, it should be Downey!

Best Picture

Who won't win: As films in general, none of Milk, The Reader or Frost/Nixon seem to be big favourites. These movies seem to be respected mostly for the performances and not so much for every other aspect of film. I believe any of these choices would be worthy candidates.

Who should win: As much as the predictions are pretty much unanimous, I was still blown away by The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. There was not one bad performance in the bunch and it had one of my favourite and the greatest actresses of all time, Cate Blanchett. I was disappointed that she wasn't nominated this year but she has quite a few nominations and a statue to her name. But in this case who will will is probably who should.

Who will win: Everyone seems to say Slumdog Millionaire and I agree. It's a really fantastic film and it's great that it was so small, with such a little budget and that it grew to be loved by so many people. It's also amazing that an foreign film is being recognized as one of the greats. But I will say my emotional choice is Benjamin who stole my heart.

For more information and some other predictions check out Ebert's discussion of a guy who does it all by numbers, Moviefone's predictions by photo gallery, The Guardian's Film Blog picks, Jay Stone's CanWest thoughts, and just about every other movie site or critic you can think of. Basically I want to say that, don't think it's bull when the nominees say "It's really an honour just to be nominated" because I'm sure most of them mean it. They know just as well as you and I that the award is not always given to the best actress or best director of the year because ultimately, the award is voted on by human beings. People with preference and bias and opinion that cloud the whole event. So I say they all win because they get to go, hear their name aloud next to the word's best and show a small clip of their movie to one of the biggest audiences of the year. I can't really blame the Academy because I think they are so many best films, actors, directors, etc. They gotta decide somehow.