Showbits

Dear faithful readers: Hiphopguy23 has finally finished watching all the movies he wanted to see that were released in 2007. Therefore, Hiphopguy23 would like to issue some updates to his 2007 Best Movie Awards.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Sadly, nothing has changed. There weren't any stand-out supporting actresses so Hiphopguy23 is going to give the award to Cheryl Hines in Waitress. Waitress is a very well acted movie and the award could just have easily been given to the late Adrienne Shelley, but Cheryl Hines was just a wee bit more memorable.

BEST DOCUMENTARY: The King of Kong. This one isn't even close. This is an absolutely astounding documentary, with heroes and villians for you to root for. Never mind the claims that the documentarians "fudged" with the truth. Watch this movie for the entertainment factor. Also, you do not need to be a fan of video games at all to appreciate this movie.

WORST MOVIE: Across the Universe. Yikes, was this movie a disaster. Hiphopguy23 figured, "The Beatles are enjoyable. How could a movie featuring their songs go wrong?" It turns out that you need to be a tremendous fan of the Beatles to even remotely enjoy this movie. The filmmakers picked the most unpopular B-side "hits" to fill out the soundtrack, and there are constant references to obscure lyrics and callbacks to the horrid Beatles movies, none of which Hiphopguy23 has seen. All of this occurs in the most unstructured free-flowing mess of a "plot". Not even a special appearance by Bono could save this train wreck. Hiphopguy23 is curious to hear if any die-hard Beatlemaniac enjoyed this movie, because that seems to be the only audience.

BEST DIRECTOR: David Yates (Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix). Finally, a Harry Potter movie that works! Yates abandoned the "feel-good" vibe of the first two movies and wisely disregarded the "trendy teenager" motif of the third movie. The fourth movie was also too colorful and upbeat for this stage in Harry's life. Yates picks a dark, sinister direction that is very real and very true to life. This movie plays less like a crowd-pleaser and more as a twisted look into the good (and bad) that takes place at Hogwart's. This is the first Harry Potter movie that is better — yes, better — than the corresponding novel.

None of the other awards have changed, so in conclusion, Hiphopguy23 will give his top five recommendations:

1. 300
   
2. Enchanted
   
3. Juno
   
4. Waitress
   
5. The King of Kong
   

HONORABLE MENTION: Balls of Fury — but only if you prefer your comedy very slapstick.

The Half-Blood Prince was the only Harry Potter book that left me looking forward to the sequel. But before I take that step forward this coming weekend, I took a step back and watched the film adaptation of the series' most boring entry, The Order of the Phoenix.

The movie's opening is fashioned after one of the novels' most lamentable traits: a complete lack of introduction or context. Anyone who is just a casual fan of the series — that is, those who read the books only once each — will have trouble recognizing Dudley Dursley or Nymphadora Tonks in the opening scenes. Indeed, many characters' roles have been reduced, Potter's love interest is of little note, and the titular Order is rarely seen or referenced.

Most disappointing than these cuts, necessary to adapt this behemoth of a book to film, is that the parts cut were the parts I liked. Ginny Weasley speaks not a single word in the entire film, whereas in the novel, she provided a helpful connection between Potter's current dilemma and the one she faced in The Chamber of Secrets. Potter's hesitancy to pursue lessons with Snape is absent, yet that motivation is vital to understand the depth of Voldemort's manipulation. And though we know the Dark Lord is seeking a weapon, but the movie never solidifies what the weapon is, or its value and implications (including to Neville Longbottom and Professor Trelawney).

The Potter films often serve as a useful refresher to anyone who hasn't memorized the source material, and in this case, I was hoping to be satisfied by the movie in a way I wasn't by the book. Though the film was well-acted and had some nifty special effects, its lack of detail — or rather, its choice of detail — left me hoping the silver screen has not overwritten my memories of the original text.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the film to be released on July 13th, will be followed eight days later with the literary franchise's seventh and final installment: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

Naturally, I'm looking forward to the book more than the movie. As I previously commented, the fifth book was more voluminous than it needed to be, serving as a dull but perhaps necessary bridge in the series. Its successor, on the other hand, was my favorite of them all (with Goblet of Fire running a close second), with an ending that left me eager and excited for the next book — something none of the other five books had done.

I'm one of the rare few who has read each book only once, though, so I will likely see the movie anyway, just to refresh my memory as to some of the vital details of which Rowling is fond of not reminding her audience. Watching the film will certainly be a succincter reminder than rereading the book.

But it won't be the only such film vying for audience's attention this year. I remember in March 2000, when I first told someone about the Harry Potter books, she thickly asked, "Is it about a bunch of rabbits?" Apparently, Hollywood has finally realized the opportunity to cash in on that confusion.