I'm Batman

Ever since his appearance in issue #27 of Detective Comics, Batman has surfaced in a number of Hollywood adaptations, some laughable (Batman and Robin) some campy (the 1960's rendition), some downright awesome (Christopher Nolan's reworking of the Caped Crusader's chronicles). Voiced by Kevin Conroy in various animated series, Batman has withstood the test of time as DC Comics' premier figure, one who could rival Superman with his everyman appeal. Listed below are the five men who have played the Batman over the years, just in time for tonight's premiere of The Dark Knight.


5. Adam West
Nothing says onomatopoeia like a 1960's Batman fight sequence. In a series that brought you painted on eyebrows, the stylish red Bat Phone, and the Batusi, Adam West gave campiness a whole new meaning with his portrayal of the fearless knight of Gotham City, a character who seemingly took great pleasure in lecturing his 'gee-whillickers' sidekick, Robin. It's amazing the crap you tolerated as a child; watching this series now makes me cringe with every pun West delivers, not to mention those god-awful capers involving the Riddler.

4. George Clooney
Two words: nipple suit. Clooney's undertaking as Batman was so dreadful, not even an Academy Award nomination (Syriana), three Ocean films, or a touching timepiece (Three Kings) could rid our minds of the disaster that was Batman and Robin. There's a reason this film and portrayal has been bashed in numerous posts these past few days: Schwarzenegger's Mr. Freeze (he actually delivered the line, "Ice to see you!"), Bruce Wayne's puzzling use of a Bat Credit Card, and the use of too many damn villains made for a deliciously putrid addition to the Batman series, worthy of all the jeers they deserve. If you thought Spiderman 3 was unwatchable, you need to feast your eyes on this steaming pile of feces, a movie that nearly killed the franchise with its juvenile appeal and awkward tribute to the cheesy series that preceded it thirty years ago. Clooney, throughout the course of this dungfest, played Batman like nobody else could, by overacting from one tedious scene to the next. I imagine Batman and Robin would be the in-flight movie on a first-class trip to hell.



3. Val Kilmer
Kilmer's role as Batman was truly underrated, as he compensated for the uneven acting of Nicole Kidman and Tommy Lee Jones's pointless turn as Two Face. It was a pleasure to watch Bruce Wayne as he took Dick Grayson (who would later become Robin) under his wing, showing him the true meaning of fortifying oneself as Gotham's vigilante force. Although Batman Forever set the tone for the technicolor glaze that became Joel Schumacher's calling card in the two Batman films he directed, the movie, broadened by Kilmer's presence as Wayne, wasn't half bad. Even so, Forever started an ugly trend: using Batman for its commercial allure, going so far as to borrow U2 (during their glamorously strange Pop days) for use on the film's soundtrack.



2. Michael Keaton
Although diminutive in size and better associated with silly roles like Beetlejuice and Mr. Mom, Michael Keaton played one hell of a Batman. In fact, Keaton was far more believable as the Dark Knight than he ever was playing the enigmatic Bruce Wayne. Tim Burton's stab at directing the Batman series was dark and intruding, a look into Batman that brought moviegoers to the cinema in droves. Essentially, Keaton's portrayal of Batman was all about pleasing the women, as Wayne tickled the fancy of leading females Kim Basinger and Michelle Pfeiffer, flirtations worthy of a cold shower (like when Catwoman straight up licked Batman's face. Grrrrroooowl).





1. Christian Bale
The man who was made for the role of the Dark Knight, Mr. Christian Bale. For those of you not up on Bale, observe his body of work (The Machinist, American Psycho, The Prestige, 3:10 to Yuma, Rescue Dawn, etc.) and take pleasure in the superb actor he is. His balance in playing both Wayne and Batman (although splendid at Batman, Keaton's role as Wayne often times left something to be desired) is what made Batman Begins so startlingly good in the first place. Bale made Wayne extremely cool (his banter with cohorts Alfred and Lucius is priceless) and Batman a mystery to be unfolded. Just as Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones, moviegoers everywhere can take solace knowing that Christian Bale will be playing Batman yet again after The Dark Knight processes through the theater this summer. While we still wait for a sequel to Superman Returns and the slow death of the Spiderman series, Christopher Nolan's Batman will continue to impress with films that speak to the true nature of who Batman is and has yet to be.

The Verdict is In: Stay Away, Mr. Favre

According to the V-List's esteemed audience, Brett Favre should ride off into the sunset and disregard any attempt at a comeback (a staggering 92% were against his return, a figure that speaks volumes about Favre's tired venture into prolonging a suddenly crumbling NFL legacy). As sparkling a career as the three-time MVP had, Favre has drawn ire from many NFL fans, from even the most diehard of Cheeseheads, who are ready to usher in a new era at Lambeau sans-Brett. Simply put, Favre is ruining Green Bay's prospects the way he impeded on Ben Stiller's chances with Cameron Diaz in There's Something About Mary. Remember how that worked out for Stiller? Mr. Favre was left out in the cold, a Hollywood demise that hopefully ends the same way in reality. The V-List presents a definitive look at why Favre needs to call it quits...for good.






10. The short list of teams interested in Favre: da Bears, the Vikings, and the Ravens, three squads that (1) run, (2) play defense, and (3) have no substantial threat at wide receiver. That's like Joe Montana 'gloriously' ending his career with the Chiefs. Man, did he look ugly in that red, white, and orange get-up. Can you seriously picture Favre in a purple uniform? Yeesh.

9. Check out the Packer website and find the Favre headline, if you will; return or no return, Green Bay still doesn't give a f*%&. Mr. Favre, your former organization has moved on: so should you.

8. The longer he prolongs this, the longer we'll hear Favre mentioned in the talks as one of the five greatest QB's of all-time, a distinction he doesn't deserve. Did you know: the NFL's all-time leading touchdown artist (Brett Favre himself) also threw the most picks in league history.

7. Imagine the recall totals of Madden '09 if Favre were to sign with the Vikings.

6. Ponder if you will this scenario: Favre signs with the Vikings, the Packers' opponent on Monday Night Football, September the 8th. On Brett Favre Night. When his number is supposed to retired. That would be awkward.

5. Prilosec and Wrangler Jeans will have no other choice but to extend their endorsement deals for the graying superstar.

4. David Witthoft is going to get the bright idea to wear Favre's jersey for another 1500+ days...in a row.

3. Aaron Rodgers has become the equivalent of that pet fish you continually forget to feed.

2. Thanks to Brett, Trey Wingo of NFL Live officially crossed the line by referring to the retirement controversy as 'Favre-gate.'

1. Favre is monopolizing headlines with Keven Federline-like prowess. Will we recall Brett Favre the legend or Brett Favre the spoiled celebrity once this is all said and done?

The Dark Knight

With vomit-inducing exposure to the likes of Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, Bane, and Batgirl , movie-goers forced to endure the atrocity that was Batman and Robin had nothing good to say about a comic book franchise that had seemingly flatlined the instant George Clooney agreed to play Bruce Wayne's alter-ego, the third actor to reprise the role. With every star (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Uma Thurman, Alicia Silverstone) that signed on to to be a part of Joel Schumacher's Razzie-worthy project, the Batman story became more about marketability and less about comic book mythology. Seven years later, Christopher Nolan (mastermind behind the films Memento and The Prestige) opted to give the series a 'reboot,' recapturing the essence of Batman with a dark, introspective look into Bruce Wayne's psyche and Batman's principled origins. Thanks to Mr. Nolan, loyalists to the DC Comics production were given Batman Begins, one of the best comic book adaptations to reach the silver screen in recent years. Starring a devilishly good Christian Bale, Batman Begins thrived off gripping performances by Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, and Cillian Murphy, who parlayed the film's success into roles in Red Eye and The Wind that Shakes the Barley. Batman's revival allowed for a fresh take on the Caped Crusader, one that will continue with Friday's premiere of The Dark Knight, a film that needs no additional billing. Regardless, here are five reasons to engage in a summer blockbuster that will surely live up to the hype that Spiderman 3 and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End could not.

5. Recall just how important Batman Begins was to the franchise.
It took the directorial efforts of Tim Burton and Schumacher three films before they decided to inject an origin story into the storyline of their collective Batman chronicle. Nolan, giving the crowd exactly what they it wanted, incorporated Bruce Wayne's martial arts background and clandestine findings of the criminal underworld into the lore of the Gotham Knight with his masterwork, Batman Begins. Batman never looked so dark (like Burton before him, Nolan paid homage to Frank Miller's mid-1980's portrayal of Batman), so militant, so aggressive, and above all, so human. His decisions affected the people around him and the city he tried ever so hard to protect, a pursuit met by Wayne's search for his identity and place in Gotham City. Wayne's story was rife with betrayal (Henri Ducard's expectations for a young Wayne's place in the League of Shadows), lost love (his fractured relationship with Rachel Dawes), and ambition (what can a symbol like Batman do against the crime lords of Gotham?). All in all, a bold way of telling Batman's story.

4. Thanks to Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), Bruce Wayne will have more astounding gadgets to try out.

As part of Batman's origin, we understand how Wayne procured such mind-blowing technology like the Tumbler: it was all delivered courtesy of Lucius Fox, a character reminiscent of James Bond's Q. With each addition to Nolan's Batman series, fans will be eagerly anticipating the gadgets, tools, and vehicles that will be at Batman's disposal (in The Dark Knight, we will be introduced to the Batpod).

3. Out with the old (Katie Holmes's Rachel Dawes, Neeson's Ra's Al Ghul) and in with the new (Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent, Maggie Gyllenhaal's Rachel Dawes).
At the expense of dumping a boring portrayal of Dawes and a great villian like Al Ghul, The Dark Knight will be replaced by Thank You For Smoking's Aaron Eckhart (a brilliant film in which Eckhart, ironically, starred opposite of Katie Holmes) and a 'refurbished' Rachel Dawes, played by bad-girl Maggie Gyllenhaal. As is custom with any Batman film, the Caped Crusader, at one point or another, will face two villains, primarily, the Joker, secondarily, Dent's reincarnate Two Face. Dent plays an antagonist on a number of levels, going so far as to sweep Wayne's sweetheart Dawes off her feet. Despite the failure of the multi-villain approach (see Batman Returns and the aforementioned Batman and Robin), Nolan made it work in Batman Begins and will surely devise a way of making it work again in Batman's newest installment.

2. Heath Ledger's final performance will stop at nothing to impress.

Film veteran Michael Caine went so far as to favor Ledger's undertaking as the Joker over Jack Nicholson's, a role he was ultra-renowned for. Said Caine about Ledger's performance, "Jack was like a clown figure, benign but wicked, maybe a killer old uncle. He could be funny and make you laugh. Heath's gone in a completely different direction to Jack; he's like a really scary psychopath. He's a lovely guy and his Joker is going to be a hell of a revelation in this picture." While filming, Caine was so taken aback by Ledger's Joker that he could not recall his lines. Channeling the role of Alex in A Clockwork Orange, Ledger prepared for his Dark Knight act by living in isolation in a hotel room for a month, nailing the Joker's mannerisms, psychology, posture, and voice by the sojourn's end. Will it be Oscar-worthy? We'll have Friday's premiere to see for ourselves.

1. Batman is a superhero needing no super powers to fight crime.
Nolan's take on the series is as much about Bruce Wayne as it is the symbol he morphs into on a nightly basis, the Dark Knight himself. By extrapolating one of his innermost fears into a crime-fighting persona, Wayne, ever-so ferociously, battles past demons he felt he created in the first place (the death of his parents). If Batman Begins is any indication of Wayne's fragile mindset, then The Dark Knight will delve even deeper into Bruce Wayne's ego and ambition. Wayne's chemistry with Alfred (or should I say, Bale's connection with Caine) will serve as another great subplot that will only be matched by the Joker's pursuit of the Batman, the heart of a 152-minute epic that will deliver the goods---you have the word of this V-List contributor to back that up.

The Josh Hamilton Story

Twins first baseman Justin Morneau, much like he did when he beat out Derek Jeter for the 2006 American League MVP, edged out a fan favorite to win the 2008 Home Run Derby, with a total of five homers in the final round of competition. His opponent? Josh Hamilton, a baseball legend in the making, who battled demons that made lesser men of professionals like Dwight Gooden and Darryl Strawberry, players who made inspirational, championship-inducing comebacks with the Yankees that pales in comparison to what Hamilton has done these past two campaigns with the Reds and Rangers. Should the season end today, Hamilton would win the MVP award outright, in lieu of his flirtation with baseball's elusive Triple Crown, last achieved by Carl Yastrzemski in 1967. To add to these feats, Josh won over a fickle Yankee Stadium crowd with a Mantle-esque swing that crushed a ball measured at 504 feet. In the first round of this evening's slugfest, Hamilton hit a record 28 homeruns (four more than the previous record holder, Bobby Abreu, compiled in 2005), his accomplishment met by 58,000 lauding crowd members emphatically chanting his name, the majority of whom were Yankee fans, that, in all the years I have followed the organization, have never glorified the accolades of an opposing player so passionately. Hamilton, as he proclaimed himself in an article featured in an ESPN spread last year, wished for a better life, one he found through family, baseball, and belief in God. Upon bowing out in the final round of tonight's derby, Hamilton committed a task that was perhaps more arduous than any addiction or pitcher he has yet to face: he gave praise to God in front of a legion of new-found Hamilton followers, a wave that has reached some tens of millions in light of the show he put on at the derby. Say what you will about his past: as Hamilton continues to joust with addiction, he remains clean en route to one of the greatest baseball stories ever produced in the game's fabled history. With 95 RBI's and 21 homeruns to his credit thus far, Hamilton is sure to impress with a strong finish to the 2008 season, one that conveys sports' capacity to allow stories of the human condition to prevail.

Please Don't Go: The Case for Yankee Stadium

Despite the aura and mystique that Yankee Stadium has bestowed upon its in-house tenants, the Bronx Bombers (26 World Series championships, 39 American League pennants, and a gaggle of Hall of Famers), ‘The House that Ruth Built’ has been privy to several papal visits, the 1925 Notre Dame/Army game altered by the ‘win one for the Gipper’ speech, “The Greatest Game Ever Played” (the NFL’s first overtime contest, a 23 – 17 win by the Johnny Unitas-led Baltimore Colts over the New York Giants), Pele’s tenure as New York Cosmos’ striker from 1975 - 1977, numerous Billy Joel, U2, and Pink Floyd concerts, and boxing matches that featured the likes of Muhammad Ali, Joe Louis, Max Baer, Rocky Graziano, and Sugar Ray Robinson. Although many associate the Stadium with our national pastime, the Yankees’ home field is a sports arena that has attracted audiences of varying interests for nearly 85 years. Renovated in 1975 and 1976, a project funded by benefactor George Steinbrenner (a time during which the Yanks played their home games at Shea), the Stadium has developed an ambiance of winning, professionalism, and poignancy that has earned it the title of the Cathedral of Baseball. July 15, 2008 will mark the last All-Star Game (the Stadium’s fourth) to be played in the Bronx, while September 21 (at the earliest) may in fact be the last game contested at the Stadium, playoff berth notwithstanding. With construction of the new Yankee Stadium to end in early 2009, the old Stadium will be bulldozed, only to be recalled in history books and the minds of baseball fans across the nation. Should this deconstruction take place? This Yankee fan says no. Here’s a look at why:

5. There are no foreseeable plans to construct ‘The Bat’ at the new Stadium site.
Constructed as an aesthetic cover to an eyesore of an exhaust pipe, the 138-foot tall rendering of a Louisville Slugger stands as a meeting place for ticket holders looking to rendezvous with fellow fans sitting in their section before each game. ‘The Bat’ is a landmark by which all fans can relate and easily seek out, as it is the epicenter of the many vendors peddling hot dogs, pretzels, and pinstriped memorabilia outside of the Stadium’s gates. Although current renovations do include the upheaval of Monument Park (a collection of plaques that commemorate Yankee legends) and the inclusion of the trademark frieze atop the scoreboard (the white façade that lines the upper interior of the Stadium), there is no intention to include ‘The Bat’ in the current architectural state of the new Yankee Stadium. In spite of this exemption, the nonchalant uprooting of locker room artifacts and placards for their placement in the new Stadium simply will not be the same—it’s the equivalent of dusting off your old NES games and revisiting them for old time’s sake, knowing that your Xbox 360 collection currently predominates. Just as the old Yankee Stadium has transmuted into a highly identifiable landmark (with pennants and championship-caliber lineups compiled along the way), attempting to recreate the former Yankee aura simply will not cut it knowing what was previously sacrificed in the name of tending to the corporations and suits that will flood the new Stadium. After all, why relinquish a perfectly good product that still works just fine (Yankee Stadium continues to pull in over three million fans on a yearly basis, in spite of the third-world atmosphere surrounding the Stadium’s confines)?

4. Thousands of seats are being removed for more luxury boxes and party suites.
At its peak, Yankee Stadium held an upward of 70,000 fans (in 1942), a far cry from the 57,545 it currently holds. For various reasons (the infrastructure of the Stadium is too fragile to hold such numbers and baseball implemented the 'batter's eye' in all ballparks; hence, the 'black' and loss of hundreds of seats in right-center), Stadium architects were given no other choice but to modify the seating arrangements in order to keep the park up-to-date with its safety codes. The new Yankee Stadium will hold 52,325 fans at maximum capacity, a number that dwindles from the original capacity in light of Steinbrenner and Company's incessant desire to incorporate luxury boxes and party suites along the mezzanine, two measures that allows businesses to keep the Stadium's revenue costs in the black. As is the ongoing trend in the construction of new ballparks, stadiums are constructed with luxury boxes in mind, all in the name of procuring filthy money hand over fist.

3. Shall we call it “The House that A-Rod Built?”

Say this about Alex Rodriguez: with three American League MVP's to his credit (two with the Yankees) and the inevitable onslaught of Barry Bonds's homerun mark, A-Rod is worthy of the spotlight and a place in Cooperstown as one of the game's greatest. Even so, Rodriguez does not, nor will he ever, amass the same kind of 'Ruthian' resume that the Babe did. In light of the Black Sox Scandal in 1919, baseball was on the operating table, a sport in desperate need of a savior. Enter George Herman Ruth. His capacity for clubbing mammoth homeruns lifted the game from the Dead Ball Era and made the pastime worth following again. In 1923, Ruth's third year with the Yankees, the Stadium was constructed, an era that was forever fortified by Babe's dominance as baseball's greatest power hitter. Without the Babe, the Yankees don't go on to win four World Series during his Yankee tenure, nor do fans fathom the namesake that will forever belong to the old Stadium. Alex Rodriguez, arguably the face of the franchise, will usher in a fresh era with the new Stadium's construction, but has a long way to go before he deserves his name hypothetically associated with a ballpark.

2. The Ghosts of Yankee Past won’t take too well to a relocation.
When Yankee captain Derek Jeter waxes nostalgic about the ballpark he so masterfully made his own domain, he fondly speaks of its intangibles, the 'ghosts' who mythically manipulate games in the Yankees' favor. Now, imagine excavating the very grounds these spirits called home for so many years and you get a sense of the horror new Stadium architects are facilitating. Think Poltergeist II, when Craig T. Nelson realizes that the home he purchased in the first film was erected on top of a burial ground for deceased cult members, led by the demagogue pastor Kane. The spirits of these misled cult disciples were not exorcised in the first house and would follow Carol Anne wherever she went. Pretty terrifying, huh? If Yankee brass knew any better, they would ask for Pope Benedict's return to the Bronx in order to perform a service that allows the ghosts of DiMaggio, Mantle, Gehrig, and Ruth to rest peacefully. If not, we're talking a curse of Red Sox proportions.

1. Says loyal season ticket holders everywhere, “You expect me to pay WHAT?”
You better sit for this one. While you're at it, remove anything breakable from your reach, pop a shot of tequila, and prepare a bucket for possible upchuck. Currently, you can 'afford' a seat behind home plate at Yankee Stadium for $250. The same seat in the new Yankee Stadium will cost... (figure will be written out for much-needed emphasis)...TWO THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS, ten times the original cost!!! Mind you, these seats will be catered, but unless Yankee ownership intends to defray the cost for a year's worth of groceries, you are s%$# out of luck. Many current season ticket holders will be expected to fork up twice the amount they already pay on their ticket plan. If they choose to not pay such a price, then to hell with them; the Steinbrenners will find somebody else that will. For a game that is sustained by the common man, an everyday Joe that can enjoy a game anywhere in the ballpark, whether it be in the bleachers or the upperdeck, the sport of baseball is willing to excise this fanbase in exchange for suits with gargantuan money market accounts. As the Yankees are willing to embrace this trend, you can say goodbye to the Bleacher Creatures that made the Stadium the experience it is today, while you nuzzle up to a yuppie who knows nothing about the game and guzzle that eight dollar brew of yours.

Nadal and Federer: The Rivalry

In response to the epic that was the 2008 Wimbledon men's final, a video tribute to the greatest individual rivalry in all of sport. Nadal and Federer; legends in every sense of the word. Enjoy the spead.

The Governator Speaks!

Before becoming the governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger provided some of the best soundbites in Hollywood history. It is virtually impossible to quantify the awesomeness of Arnold in a mere five entries, however the following soundboard does a decent job at capturing the verbal genius that is Aaaaaahnold!

Just in Case that Wasn't Enough, Here are some more hits!


and my personal favorite...

Survival of the Fittest: V List Style

Charles Darwin described the process of natural selection, stating that the species that was best adapted once an ecological niche was filled would survive. Darwin got me thinking, what if we applied his logic to Hollywood films. There are only so many films that can be made on a certain topic before the audience is saturated (or the ecological niche is filled). What if there were two films made on the same topic in the same calendar year? According to Darwin, one of those films would do very well, while the other film would die out and become extinct, having a place on TNT or even worse, the CW. The "V" list presents a new concept called pop-culture natural selection where two films go in, but only one will survive.


5. Volcano versus Dante's Peak



This is a tough battle because neither one of these movies deserves to survive. To quote Lewis Black, choosing a better film from this pair is like, "choosing between two bowls of s#%t, the only difference is the smell." Let's break down the components of each title:

• Volcano sports Tommy Lee Jones while Dante's Peak enlists the services of Pierce Brosnan. (Winner: Volcano)
• Dante's Peak is set in the cascade mountains (population 20,000) while the "Volcano" is set in the middle of Los Angeles (population circa 4 million). (Winner: Volcano)
• Finally, Volcano melts a dude alive while Dante's Peak involves a lot of hot ash. (Winner: Volcano)
  

If you're a sucker for outlandish films involving geothermal catastrophes, then both film might suffice, however for the sake of this list, Volcano is the clear survivor.

4. Finding Nemo versus A Sharks Tale


Not only did both of these films use fish as their main focus, but both utilized computer generated animations and "A"-List voiceovers. Both Dreamworks and Pixar Studios continue to battle for animation domination, however this round wound up being an easy decision:

• Nemo was geared towards children, yet it enticed adults with its heartwarming and dramatic storyline. Shark's Tale was more sophisticated and its humor was geared for adults, it failed at being as inclusive to kids and adults like Nemo. (Winner: Nemo)
• Both films used amazing talent when it came to voiceovers, however Sharks Tale felt compelled to flaunt its actors, while Nemo subtly let its story speak for itself. I don't need to know that your film has Will Smith, Robert De Niro, and Renee Zellweger if your story is good. (Winner: Nemo)
• Sharks Tale seems like a fish out of water story, giving the fish way too many human qualities. While the fish in Nemo can speak and think rationally, they behave like fish the entire time. The fish in Sharks Tale are performing stunts and exhibiting mannerisms more like humans than sea dwellers. It kinda turned me off. (Winner: Nemo)

Unlike Volcano and Dante's Peak, these movies are both worth your time. While there are thousands of fish in the sea, Nemo is the only one meant for us here at the "V"- List.

3. Happy Feet versus March of the Penguins



Everybody (except for James Rolfe) loves Penguins. They're so cute and apparently they can tap dance like Fred Astaire when given the opportunity. Choosing a survivor out of these two films is like trying to choose which child is your favorite. You love them equally for their talents and qualities, but since we don't have room for social niceties here at the "V" List, one of them has to be put down.

• 
  
  
• Both movies have excellent actors. Happy Feet enlists the vocal talents of Hugh Jackman, Robin Williams, and Nicole Kidman, however March of the Penguins uses the voice of god himself, Morgan Freeman. Obviously we think that Freeman is the man (we did an entire blog on his talents), therefore the winner must be March of the Penguins.
• Don't get me wrong, March of the Penguins is a fascinating movie, but it doesn't have the replay value of Happy Feet. Children would prefer to watch Happy Feet over and over again rather than sit through the "boring parts" of March of the Penguins. (Winner: Happy Feet)
• Of the billions of Penguin movies that were released in this year, March of the Penguins was the most remarkable of the lot. It won an Oscar for best documentary, but was embraced by a much larger audience. Even though it was a documentary it was remarkable in the fact that it created a narrative often lacking from a National Geographic Channel. If more animal movies followed this format, then biology class would have seemed more interesting. Happy Feet was fun, but it didn't break any new ground in the film making department. Happy Feet will enjoy no distinction, but will remain one in a series of animated films released in the new millennium. (Winner: March of the Penguins)
  

This is a really close call, but March of the Penguins is more edifying and groundbreaking when compared with the animated goodness of Happy Feet. Sorry we had to drive one of these films to extinction, but how many movies about Penguins can there be?

2. Deep Impact versus Armageddon



The concept was so nice, they wanted to blow up the earth twice. There's just something about hitting the planet with giant rocks that rings true to moviegoers. What is it about catastrophe movies that draws us in like moths to a flame? Hollywood was banking on our obsession with death and destruction when they made both these films, but moviegoers embraced Armageddon and rejected Deep Impact, here's why:

• If you compared casts, Deep Impact should win hands down with Morgan Freeman and Robert Duvall alone, however none of the characters were ever given a great chance to show off their talents. Armageddon excels at bringing a crew of misfits together and making them funny. Almost every character in Bay's Armageddon interacts with others and has the opportunity to develop a persona that you actually care about. I felt myself rooting for the rock in Deep Impact because I didn't care who died.
• Armageddon is funny, while Deep Impact is mad depressing. While Armageddon is not a comedy, there are moments where you can forget the fact that the earth is about to be annihilated and just laugh. Deep Impact didn't have a single moment where you could feel good about what was happening on screen. What a downer!
• Bruce Willis blows himself up! One male friend (who will remain nameless) once admitted to me at a Giants game that he cried when Bruce Willis sacrifices himself in Armageddon. Wow! I know that Robert Duvall made a similar gesture in Deep Impact, but like I stated before, by this point in the movie you don't give a damn about any of the characters and hope the rock crushes them all. Any movie that kills John McClane is Bad Ass!

1. The Illusionist versus The Prestige



Perhaps the only exception to Hollywood Darwinism are these two films. While both focus on magicians, each one took a unique path in telling its story. One is a love story (Illusionist), while the other deals with jealousy and unhealthy competition. It's going to be difficult to pick a winner with these two movies, but I'll try my best.

• When it comes to casting, both films do a superb job. Edward Norton (Illusionist) is my homeboy, but Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman hold it down in The Prestige. While I would pick Edward Norton against any other single actor, it's difficult for me to choose him over both Bale and Jackman in this particular instance. While Norton is the bomb with his performance, the exchanges between Bale and Jackman are incredible and are the source of drama for The Prestige. Without their collective efforts, The Prestige may not have turned out so brilliant. (Winner: The Prestige)
• The twists in both films are so well executed. While I won't ruin either film for you let me say that when it comes to this category, I have to go with The Illusionist because it's rooted in reality. While The Prestige had an amazing twist, yet I was kinda bothered by the fact that it defied so many scientific laws and left my head spinning. I can suspend my disbelief, but what they suggested happened was just crazy. I like the fact that The Illusionist worked within the framework of possibility and much like the magician that frequents the FOX network, it showed us that not all magic is real. (Winner: The Illusionist)
• The storyline is a matter of personal preference, so my suggestion here might annoy some fans of either film. While I just railed against the fact that The Prestige uses crazy physics to accomplish its big payoff, it was way more engaging than the love story of The Illusionist. I dig the fact that Illusionist accomplishes so much with less, but when it come to movies I want to be dazzled. I really enjoy a great drama, but neither of these movies compare with No Country, so I want to be entertained. Which story entertained me more? The Prestige. Please don't let my preference alter your decision as my recommendation is that you rent both of these movies and then buy a home magic kit for yourself to impress the rest of your family. (Winner: The Prestige)