Previous month:
November 2014
Next month:
January 2015

jane the virgin, season one break

The proverbial project that seemed to come out of nowhere, even though it was based on another show, a Venezuelan telenovela. The title role went to Gina Rodriguez, who had a fairly low profile prior to this. The only person in the cast I recognized was Priscilla Barnes, Suzanne Somers’ replacement on Three’s Company, and she has a minor role. It was created by Jennie Snyder Urman, who as far as I can tell still doesn’t have a Wikipedia page, and whose only previous series was Emily Owens, M.D., which ran for 13 episodes. And it airs on The CW … I can’t say anything about the quality of shows on The CW, because I don’t think I’ve watched one since the network emerged from the ashes of the WB and UPN.

Then there was the premise: a young woman who is a virgin is accidentally artificially inseminated.

But a lot of good reviews convinced me to give Jane the Virgin a chance. And now I’m hooked.

The most obvious comparison would be to Ugly Betty, another series based on a South-American telenovela. Ugly Betty ran four seasons, and I stuck with it for quite awhile, although I didn’t last to the end. Ugly Betty also had a vibrant star in the title role, in that case, America Ferrara. It was larger than life, which superficially lent a telenovela tone to the show, but I felt it soon moved past its influences, for better or worse.

Through nine episodes, Jane the Virgin shows no sign of abandoning its roots. The plot twists are fantastical. They even work a telenovela into the show: one of the characters is the star of a telenovela that all of the other characters in the show watch. What makes things loony is the way the numerous plot threads become entangled, such that the “previously on” segments are marvels of compression. The best friend of one character is sleeping with the friend’s wife. The wife has a mysterious, Eastern-European background. Jane’s boyfriend, a policeman, learns about this affair when doing a stakeout looking for information about an international drug kingpin. The wife is the person who was supposed to receive the artificial insemination that ended up in Jane. Her cuckolded husband is thus the father to Jane’s baby. In the midst of all this, Jane learns the identity of her own supposedly long-dead father, and he is … well, enough with the spoilers.

What makes this all work is the effective blend of goofy and grounded characters. The telenovela star in real life acts like his character in the TV series. Patricia Barnes plays the mother of the vaguely-European wife; she’s in a wheelchair and she has an acid-scarred face and a personality to match. Meanwhile, Jane is a rock who maneuvers through all the craziness without becoming crazy herself. Many of the actors play stereotypical characters, yet between their performances and the solid writing, those characters become real to us, no matter how wildly the plots swing. You care what happens next because you care about Jane, and since there’s a telenovela feel to it all, there is always something happening next. Often, it’s what you least expected, although at this point, I’ve come to expect the unexpected.

And I haven't even mentioned the narration, which works like a charm.

The CW has availed itself of that new habit of splitting a season in two, so Jane the Virgin is off until mid-January. That gives you plenty of time to catch up! Of course, once you catch up, you’ll want to see the next episode long before mid-January rolls around … you can only imagine how many cliffhangers there were at the end of the last episode.

Things could go bad in a hurry, but I don’t imagine that will be any time soon. Meanwhile, take advantage of the opportunity to see Gina Rodriguez in one of the top acting jobs of the year. Grade for first half of Season One: A-.

olive kitteridge (lisa cholodenko, 2014)

When I write about movies, I include the name of the director in the header. When I write about television, I don’t do this … TV is often considered a writer’s medium, although in recent years, the “showrunner” is the person who gets the attention. But I’ve done it here, because Cholodenko directed all four episodes of this mini-series.

However, this is misleading, for Elizabeth Strout wrote the novel on which the mini-series is based, and Jane Anderson wrote all of the episodes. I’m going to leave Cholodenko’s name in the header, but I’m probably overestimating the contribution of the director in a case like this.

Still, Olive Kitteridge reaches greatness when its actors achieve greatness, and while it’s easy to imagine that Frances McDormand and Richard Jenkins will deliver no matter who is directing them, at some point, you have to look at the sheer number of top performances and realize the director had something to do with it. Readers of the novel probably had their own idea of what kind of actress would play Olive … now that the series is over, it’s hard to imagine anyone but McDormand in the role.

Cholodenko did a good job of showing the passage of time in subtle ways. The four episodes cover around 25 years, so the changes must be subtle, and Cholodenko never bashes the audience over the head. The same goes for McDormand and Jenkins, who age believably … the makeup is good, but the acting is better.

It’s all about the character Olive Kitteridge, who is fascinating, although she is also quite off-putting … at times I wondered why I was spending four hours with this woman. But a hint of humor occasionally peeked out from McDormand’s performance, and even when Olive was acting her worst, we understood her point of view. Although the blowout doesn’t occur until late, there is a sense that Olive is gradually beginning to understand the effect she has on those close to her. When she finally accepts how poorly she has treated others, it is heartbreaking. Her husband is something of a flawed saint; her son is a complete mess. And she finally knows how badly she treated a husband who didn’t deserve it, a son she couldn’t connect with. There are suggestions of a family tendency towards depression, which doesn’t exactly put us on Olive’s side, because we know her own depression creates problems for others.

I’m having a hard time explaining why this character, almost always making others uncomfortable, rarely happy, not given to flights of fancy, makes such a good person to spend time with. That we become invested in Olive Kitteridge is a testament to the great things Frances McDormand does with the character. Grade for mini-series: A.

the newsroom, series finale

If Aaron Sorkin never made another television series (and there are rumors that The Newsroom is his last), he would still be in the TV Hall of Fame. For most people, the main reason would be The West Wing … I liked that show, too, but my fave Sorkin was always Sports Night. Sports Night came before I started this blog, and The West Wing was already well into its run when I first opened the site for business, so I didn’t write a lot about Sorkin for a long time. So Sorkin’s third run at TV, Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip was the first Sorkin show I paid much attention to here. And boy, did that series lose its appeal quickly. On September 26, 2006, I wrote “Studio 60 is a pretty good show, has the makings of a very good show”. By February 6, “I’m done. At this point, the show is just horrible. I’ve cut it all sorts of slack because I’ve liked Aaron Sorkin in the past, but it is almost impossible to imagine that this is the same guy who wrote Sports Night. Studio 60 is probably one of the biggest TV series disappointments in many years.” In a comment I added, “Bad stuff about Studio 60: The way every female character is written. The way every black character is written. The writing. Saddest of all, given the artist: the dialogue. The last episode's dinner sequence with Matthew Perry and Sarah Paulson was painful, and would have made just as much sense if they just dubbed in those waa-waa horns that mean an adult is talking on Peanuts cartoons.”

And so, The Newsroom. Some people were excited that Sorkin was returning to a world closer to the White House than to Saturday Night Live. My first thoughts were that it was a slight return to form, but that the pontificating had become almost unbearable. A few episodes in, I noted, “Plenty of witty dialogue delivered at a rapid-fire pace, lots of condescension towards the female characters, and a ton of speechifying where every character on the show serves not as an individual but as a mouthpiece for Sorkin. I agree with a lot of what is said in those harangues, but the soap-box aspect isn’t why I watch TV.” By the end of Season One, while admitting I’d be back for another year, I wrote:

Most of the characters on The Newsroom are infuriating and unlikable … Everyone gives rousing speeches that would sound great coming out of the mouth  of Aaron Sorkin, but since he is supposedly writing dialogue for individual characters with differences, the speeches, which all sound like Aaron Sorkin, don’t work. He creates interesting female characters and then undermines them every chance he gets, making them clumsy, socially inappropriate, stupid, anything but professional.

The sad thing is, Sorkin writes great dialogue, and he is terrific at what is best called “banter”. But when the banter takes place between unlikable characters, it’s not so terrific.

I gave Season One a B-. I gave Season Two a B+, although most of what I wrote reflected my earlier problems with the show.

And now it’s done, and I realize I won’t miss it. I liked watching it, for those scenes in each episode that were a delight, where a stable of fine actors got to wrap themselves around Sorkinese. It was good to see Jane Fonda whenever she turned up, and I hope by now everyone knows that Olivia Munn can act. If Sorkin ever returns to TV, I’ll probably give him another shot. But I’ll come at it with lowered expectations. Grade for Season Three and for Series: B.

what i watched last week

Kuroneko (Kaneto Shindô, 1968). Could be called “A Japanese Ghost Story”. It’s got samurai, it’s got vampire ghosts, it’s got vengeful women. It even has wire-fu. It’s got atmosphere up the wazoo. Doesn’t make much sense, but what do you want from a ghost story? This isn’t exactly a scary movie, but I don’t know that it is supposed to scare us. I can imagine some people getting very involved in the various underlying contexts. I’m being vague because, just a couple of days later, I’m having a hard time remembering the movie. Many critics call its haunting ambience unforgettable, though, so don’t take my word for it. 7/10.

The Gold Rush (Charles Chaplin, 1925). 10/10.

Gomorrah (Matteo Garrone, 2008). 9/10.

blu-ray series #19: gomorrah (matteo garrone, 2008)

gomorrahAnother example of me not knowing anything about a film before I watched it. In this case, I actually own it (it was a gift from a couple of years ago … remember, if you gift me a disc, I do eventually get to it). All I was working with was the front cover … if I’d turned it over, I’d have seen a summary, but I didn’t get that far. It shows a man dressed only in skimpy underwear and some ratty sneakers. He is holding a really big gun in his right hand, and he is walking all over a city by the water. I don’t know why, but I seem to have ignored the gun. Truthfully, my thoughts didn’t make much sense … I probably didn’t spend enough time thinking … I thought it would be a movie about poor people in, oh, Turkey or Bulgaria. Some country where I wasn’t familiar with their history of cinema, which would explain why I’d never heard of Gomorrah.

Imagine my surprise when (spoiler alert, but I’m talking the first scene, so if you watch this, you’ll be spoiler free after a minute or two) some guys in a tanning salon get murdered, blown away. If only I’d read the back cover. But this way, Gomorrah could take me by surprise. (The back cover reads, in part, “a stark, shocking vision of contemporary gangsterdom, and one of cinema’s most authentic depictions of organized crime.”) Authentic? Who am I to say. The film is based on a book by a young Italian journalist named Roberto Saviano, who studied the “Camorra” for many years. The ever-trustworthy Wikipedia tells us that this book has sold 10 million copies worldwide. It also explains the consequences Saviano faced after the book was published:

Since 2006, following the publication of his bestselling book Gomorrah (Gomorra in Italian), where he describes the clandestine particulars of the Camorra business, Saviano has been threatened by several Neapolitan "godfathers". The Italian Minister of the Interior has granted him a permanent police escort. Because of his courageous stance, he is considered a "national hero" by author-philosopher Umberto Eco. He lives at a secret location to avoid reprisal attacks … Saviano was also accused by former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of defaming the country and being unpatriotic.

Quite a combination, when organized crime and Silvio Berlusconi are after you.

The movie tells five stories about various people whose lives are affected by the organization. These stories are filmed in something approaching a documentary fashion, and feel “authentic”. I didn’t always follow the machinations, but the general idea, that crime involves everyone, and reaches out across the globe, even infiltrating “legitimate” businesses … that part is clear. For me, the most involving of the stories focused on Totò, a teenager who delivers groceries and becomes involved in gang life. But all of them work, and once I fell into the rhythm of the movie, I found the switching between the stories seamless. One spoiler I wish I’d known is that the opening scene sets up the “Scampia feud”, which is an actual event wherein rival factions in the Camorra war against each other. This fact helps explain some of the motivations seen during the movie.

It sounds pretty dry in my descriptions, but that is not the case. What is true is that Gomorrah is anti-romantic. This is not The Godfather … more to the point of these characters, it is not Scarface. The young wannabes wish they were Tony Montana, but there is no glorious excess in their lives. Nothing is appealing about how they live. There is a lot of acceptance of how these lives play out, which is sad in the extreme, and there is little payoff. The scene semi-depicted on the cover is a good example. Marco and Sweet Pea steal some weapons from the gang. They can’t think of anything better to do with the guns than simply shooting them, so they go to a canal and fire the weapons in the air. That’s it … that’s their payoff. (Not to mention what will happen to them when the gang catches up with them.)

Everything in the film has a grimy look … imagine the scenes of Vito, and Michael, in Italy, then cover them with neo-realist touches. Poof, there goes the romanticism.

Gomorrah stands on its own as a very good movie. But it is also a useful counterpart to the gangster films we have grown up with. 9/10. Scarface would make a good double-bill.

blu-ray series #18: the gold rush (charles chaplin, 1925)

Will I ever manage to talk about a Chaplin film without at some point bringing up Keaton? Not this time. Chaplin doesn’t do as much stunt work as Keaton … in the famous scene where the cabin is teetering on a ledge, the comedy comes from the interplay between the long shots of the cabin and the frantic efforts of the people inside to escape. Keaton would have managed to hang outside of the cabin’s door, legs dangling in space, with the usual stone face and the realization that Keaton was somehow actually hanging off a cliff. Keaton’s movies are more immediately impressive … you can extract a stunt and it works as a standalone. Chaplin relies on a more subtle approach. I’m referring solely to the comedy in their films. Chaplin also adds dollops of sentimentalism, which is rare in Keaton. Keaton will follow a big scene with another big scene … Chaplin will follow a comedy sequence with a sappy one.

One of the nice things about The Gold Rush is that the sappy parts are mostly absent. This makes the more emotional moments more powerful, because they aren’t tied to an incessant tug at the heart strings. When the Lone Prospector is stood up on New Years’s Eve, it’s crushingly sad … we know what it meant to him, we know he is hurt, we know he will try to hide it. One scene like that is enough for an entire movie, and it works wonderfully.

Meanwhile, there are all of the scenes that make The Gold Rush famous to this day. Eating shoe leather, and Big Jim looking at the Prospector and seeing a chicken. The Dance of the Dinner Rolls. The teetering cabin. The plot plays out nicely, with the famous scenes spread out just right. Georgia Hale is no Paulette Goddard, but she’s OK as the love interest. Overall, this is a complete picture, and one of my favorite Chaplins (Modern Times is probably my top fave). The quality of Chaplin’s best movies only makes his decline with Monsieur Verdoux and Limelight all the more depressing.

There are a couple of versions of The Gold Rush, and for me, this is one time when the “director’s cut” is inferior. The 1925 silent original ran around 95 minutes. In 1942, the film was re-issued with a new music score by Chaplin, some edits that bring it down to 72 minutes, and the removal of intertitles with narration by Chaplin. It’s the later which ruins things. Chaplin swore by the 1942 version, and you can see both on the more recent Blu-rays and DVDs and decide for yourself. My rating is based on the original. #63 on the They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They list of the top 1000 films of all time. 10/10. Pair it with another Chaplin film, say Modern Times, or pull out a Keaton, perhaps The General, which is carefully made and quite impressive, if not as funny as some of Keaton’s other pictures. Or what the heck, watch Benny & Joon.

music friday: the last 12 months

This is a quickie … I got a Nexus 6 today, and that has taken up all of my time, with the exception of the two minutes I spent getting tickets to see Sleater-Kinney next May. (San Francisco must be big fans … another show has already been added, which we are thinking of attending.) I’ve seen several people post their top artists of the year, based on what Spotify or told them, so I’ll do the same, even though it is embarrassingly predictable and dominated by artists from the 60s.

According to, these are my top artists of the last 12 months:

1. The Rolling Stones

2. Sleater-Kinney

3. The Beatles

4. Bob Dylan

5. Elvis Presley/Jefferson Airplane (tie)

7. Bruce Springsteen/Jason Derulo (tie)

9. You+Me

10. Van Morrison/The Velvet Underground/Aretha Franklin/Perfume Genius (tie)

Honorable mention: The Roots, Paul McCartney, and the Temptations.

Not sure which is the most surprising … would be one of the newer artists, Derulo, You+Me, Perfume Genius. Here are songs from all three.

Jason Derulo, “Trumpets”:

OK, You+Me weren’t actually new … it’s Pink and Dallas Green. This is “You and Me”:

And Perfume Genius, “Queen”:

And a bonus:

sons of anarchy, series finale

Kurt Sutter had a famously acrimonious relationship with critics. If you didn’t like what he was doing in Sons of Anarchy, he would rip you a new one (and he’s really, really good at that). Some of the critics were “names”, so Sutter named them, with Alan Sepinwall in particular coming in for some vehement dismissals. But Sutter also liked to rant against the nameless people like me who wrote about his show on blogs or other similar web sites.

I didn’t exactly take this personally … Kurt Sutter doesn’t know who I am. And his ranting was often profanely funny. But it got tiring, and I quit reading it.

Having seen the conclusion of Sons of Anarchy, I think I finally understand why Sutter obsessed so over critics. He knew the kind of show he wanted to make, and he proceeded to make it. If people didn’t like it, that was one thing. But if people had issues over the direction of the show, people who had liked it from the start and wondered what had happened, well, Sutter had no time for those people. It wasn’t the job of the critic or the blogger to tell Kurt Sutter how to run his own show. We might say that this scene or that episode wasn’t good, we might explain why we thought that, but Sutter didn’t think we had the right to question his show.

Sometime during the endless finale of Sons of Anarchy, I got Sutter’s point. He never made Sons of Anarchy to impress critics. He made it to impress himself, and was lucky enough to be working for a network that encouraged him because he brought home good ratings. People like me spent the last five seasons thinking that Sutter was failing the promise of SOA, but in Sutter’s eyes, he wasn’t failing at all, because he was always making the show he wanted to make. I might have thought that the things I didn’t like were missteps by Sutter, but in fact, “missteps” isn’t the right word, because it implies Sutter ended up in a place he didn’t want to be. He always went in the direction of his desires for his show.

This worked for most of his audience. I’m not just in the minority in the larger sense, I’m in the minority in my own family.

I don’t want to overdo my complaints. Looking back, I see I didn’t feel that strongly about the first season … I gave it a B … but in retrospect, I underrated that opening season. Season Two was easily the best the show gave us, prompting me to hand out an A grade. Then a B+ for Season Three, a bump to A- for Season Four and Season Five, then a B+ for Season Six. There were lesser seasons, but I never quit watching, always handed out at least a B+. Any series that makes it through six seasons without stinking deserves praise.

For whatever reason, though, Season Seven felt like it was in a rut, full of repetitions of things that had happened before. Maybe it just lasted a bit too long, became too familiar, so that those repetitions became less enjoyable and more annoying. Take those stupid end-of-episode montages. They were always there … we made fun of them for years … but this season, I just got pissed, especially in the penultimate episode, which should have ended with Gemma’s final bow, but instead ended with Yet Another Montage.

I once wrote an essay on House (check it out in House Unauthorized), a good show that relied excessively on formula. House used the end-of-episode montage on a regular basis, and I argued that this insulted the audience, by telling us what we already knew, as if we hadn’t the sense to understand it in the first place. Sutter’s use of these montages wasn’t quite as insulting; he used them not to reiterate, but to give a thoughtful fade-out to an episode. But they were rarely the best thing about any episode, and their predictability meant I giggled inappropriately more often than not. And Season Seven, being the culmination of all the episodes, made me giggle cumulatively, as each montage piled onto the ones that came before.

Then there was the central character, Jax. I thought Charlie Hunnam was OK … his slippery accent didn’t bother me, and he had some fine moments over the years. And in the early seasons, Jax as a character was interesting. But in Season Seven, Jax fell into full anti-hero mode, which was fine except he wasn’t a very good anti-hero. Week after week, Jax would come up with a plan to save the club. Usually, he’d do this on his own, just telling his club brothers after the plan had already been decided, and his brothers would always pass over any misgivings, assuring Jax that they were with him 100%. And week after week, Jax’ plans would fail miserably. People died, the club didn’t escape danger. Basically, Jax was the worst president of a motorcycle club in history. Yet come the next episode, Jax would have a new plan, his brothers would stand behind him, and more people died and the club did not thrive and things got worse. This set up the finale, where Jax finally cleaned up most of the existing problems, which might seem impressive, except most of those problems were of his own making because he was such a shitty club president. (It occurs to me … and I don’t think Sutter did this on purpose … but the Season Seven Jax, doing what he thought best regardless of what others might say, is a metaphor for how Sutter treated his show.)

Speaking of metaphors, the whole Jesus thing at the end was overdone and ridiculous, and seemed to come out of nowhere. Sutter happily played along with the “this is like Hamlet” angle during the series, and it was fun, partly because it was there if we wanted to find it, but it was always under the surface. Closing the show with a quote from Shakespeare, though … that was one of those “the audience is stupid, I’ll make it obvious for them” moves.

And I can’t let this finish without mentioning the CGI work as Jax-as-Jesus met up headlong with Vic Mackey’s truck. I can’t find the citation now, but at least one person compared that last shot of Jax with Sharknado.

It’s time to say some nice things about a show I often enjoyed over the course of seven seasons. Season Two was as good as television gets. Katey Sagal did work of the highest quality throughout. Some of the characters were memorable (I’d mention Opie, and who doesn’t love the Tig/Venus romance?). When time was taken for us to get to know a character deeply, their demise was emotional. And I’m not going to lie … no matter how formulaic it was, I always liked a good shootout.

Against that, there were the silly plot shenanigans … best/worst was the Season Four shocker where some characters turned out to be CIA agents … and the way Sutter, always willing to kill off an important character, still kept Clay alive for far too long. But I was saying nice things.

In retrospect, I’d raise that Season One grade, and lower everything from Season Three on. If someone down the road decides to binge watch, I’d recommend Season One for context, Season Two for excellence, and then go find another show. For one season, I thought this was a great show. But ultimately, I don’t think it ever lived up to that season. Grade for Season Seven: B. Grade for series: B+.

5/10 movies

For Sean, a list of the movies to which I have given ratings of 5/10.

13 Ghosts (1960)
20 Million Miles to Earth (1957)
About Schmidt (2002)
Alien³ (a.k.a. Alien 3) (1992)
"American in Paris, An (1951)"
Anaconda (1997)
Apocalypto (2006)
Attack of the Crab Monsters (1957)
Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me (1999)
Auto Focus (2002)
Bad Santa (2003)
Baraka (1992)
Barbarella (1968)
Barry Lyndon (1975)
Basic Instinct (1992)
Batman Forever (1995)
Battlestar Galactica: The Plan (2009)
Better Luck Tomorrow (2002)
Big Fish (2003)
"Birdcage, The (1996)"
"Breakfast Club, The (1985)"
"Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? (1975)"
Bush's Brain (2004)
Casino (1995)
"Cell, The (2000)"
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)
Charlotte Gray (2001)
Cherish (2002)
"Clockwork Orange, A (1971)"
Coming to America (1988)
"Day After Tomorrow, The (2004)"
Divine Madness! (1980)
Dogtown and Z-Boyz (2001)
Double Whammy (2001)
Earth vs. the Flying Saucers (1956)
Earthquake (1974)
El Dorado (1966)
Everybody's Famous! (Iedereen beroemd!) (2000)
Fahrenheit 451 (1966)
Fallen Angels (Duo luo tian shi) (1995)
First Man Into Space (1959)
Frailty (2001)
Friday After Next (2002)
Get Over It (2001)
Godzilla vs. Mothra (Mosura tai Gojira) (1964)
Haiku Tunnel (2001)
Half Baked (1998)
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (a.k.a. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone) (2001)
Head (1968)
Hollow Man (2000)
How the West Was Won (1962)
I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)
I'm the One That I Want (2000)
In the Cut (2003)
Interiors (1978)
Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles (1994)
Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (2001)
Kids (1995)
Kiss of the Dragon (2001)
"Last Wave, The (1977)"
Limelight (1952)
Made (2001)
Marie Antoinette (2006)
Men in Black II (a.k.a. MIIB) (a.k.a. MIB 2) (2002)
Miller's Crossing (1990)
Mister Lonely (2007)
Money Talks (1997)
Monsieur Verdoux (1947)
"Monsters, Inc. (2001)"
Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979)
Mr. Peabody & Sherman (2014)
My Wife is an Actress (Ma Femme est une Actrice) (2001)
Naked Gun 33 1/3: The Final Insult (1994)
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
Nine to Five (a.k.a. 9 to 5) (1980)
Nurse Betty (2000)
"One, Two, Three (1961)"
Ordinary People (1980)
"Passion of the Christ, The (2004)"
"Piano Teacher, The (La pianiste) (2001)"
Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
River of No Return (1954)
Rollerball (1975)
Romeo Must Die (2000)
Ronin (1998)
"Rundown, The (2003)"
Salt (2010)
"Sand Pebbles, The (1966)"
Seven Psychopaths (2012)
Sexy Beast (2000)
Shaft (1971)
Sharknado (2013)
Shooting Fish (1997)
Shrek 2 (2004)
Six-String Samurai (1998)
"Sound of Music, The (1965)"
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Step Brothers (2008)
"Synecdoche, New York (2008)"
"Theory of Flight, The (1998)"
"Tree of Life, The (2011)"
"Triplets of Belleville, The (Les triplettes de Belleville) (2003)"
United 93 (2006)
"Usual Suspects, The (1995)"
Vampires (1998)
"Village, The (2004)"
"Weight of Water, The (2000)"
Wide Awake (1998)
Windtalkers (2002)
"World Is Not Enough, The (1999)"
World Without End (1956)