In mere hours, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will be handing out film's highest honors. But you don't have to wait that long to find out my favorites from the year. Without further ado, I give you the Sakeriver Movie Awards for 2004!

Best Drama: The Door in the Floor

This was a great year for film, and it was really hard for me to pick just one favorite. I eventually settled on The Door in the Floor because out of the two movies I saw this year with which I couldn't find any flaw, it produced a stronger response in me. It's a smaller, less well-known film than the runners-up, but it's got everything you could ask for: flawless, understated, moving performances bearing out an amazing script.

Runners-up: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Closer, Finding Neverland, Ray, Garden State, Friday Night Lights, Sideways

Best Comedy: The Incredibles

Interestingly enough, for the second year running I picked a smaller film for my Best Drama and a blockbuster for my Best Comedy. I've said it before, but I need to say it again (no matter how cheesy it sounds): The Incredibles is an incredible film. Not only is it a technically amazing film—the animation is superb—but it also had a great script and really wonderful voice acting. The result was a movie that was hilarious and touching in all the right ways.

Runners-up: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, 50 First Dates, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, I Heart Huckabees

Best Actor: Jamie Foxx (Ray)

This category was the only easy decision for me. There were a lot of great performances this year, but there's just no question that this was Jamie Foxx's year. It wasn't just that he completely immersed himself in the role, making me forget that I was even seeing Jamie Foxx and not Ray Charles himself. It's that he made me feel Charles' life, all the joy and pain and wonderful, wonderful music. Foxx's Ray Charles isn't just my favorite of the year; in my opinion, it's one of the greatest performances I've ever seen.

Runners-up: Jeff Bridges (The Door in the Floor), Clive Owen (Closer), Clint Eastwood (Million Dollar Baby), Johnny Depp (Finding Neverland), Jim Carrey (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)

Best Actress: Julia Roberts (Closer)

On the other hand, this category was the most difficult for me to make up my mind on. I finally settled on Julia Roberts because, while I think that Hilary Swank may have given a technically better performance, I'm so conflicted about Million Dollar Baby that I just can't bring myself to call hers my favorite performance of the year. Meanwhile, Julia Roberts was able for the first time to really get my attention and respect as an actress. As I walked out of the theater after Closer I found myself genuinely impressed by her acting in that film. It may just have been that the script was the first one I've seen that gave her a chance to flex her acting muscles, but if that's the case then I hope she continues to get such roles in the future.

Runners-up: Hilary Swank (Million Dollar Baby), Natalie Portman (Closer), Kate Winslet (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), Bryce Dallas Howard (The Village)

Best Supporting Actor: Peter Sarsgaard (Garden State)

I just watched Garden State again last night, and I was amazed that I had completely forgotten about Peter Sarsgaard's performance. He managed an incredibly natural performance that balanced the huge dichotomy of a character who is both a deadbeat lowlife and a good friend. It was really his performance that really made the film's sense of a young adult's homecoming ring true.

Runners-up: Freddie Highmore (Finding Neverland), Thomas Haden Church (Sideways), Ian Holm (The Day After Tomorrow), Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar Baby)

Best Supporting Actress: Natalie Portman (Garden State)

It was a good year for Natalie Portman. With Closer she proved that she can handle more adult roles. But as good a job as she did with that performance, where she really shined was in Garden State. It was a more similar character to the other ingenue roles that she's played, so perhaps it wasn't as much of a stretch, but she really brought the character of Sam to life. I am still amazed that the woman who did such a great job with such a wide range of emotion portraying the mercurial love interest in Garden State was the same actress who fell so flat in the Star Wars prequels.

Runners-up: Kim Basinger (The Door in the Floor), Virginia Madsen (Sideways)

I find it extremely irritating when I go see a comedy only to find out that every single one of the funny parts was in the preview. I know that the advertisers are trying to get people in the door, but I feel so gypped when I spend my money for no extra funny. So if you're looking for cute parts, Hitch will do just fine, but if you want funny, the preview will suffice. As for the rest of the film, well, it doesn't break any new ground, but it's entertaining enough. I found myself wishing for a slightly different climax, but all the same it was a decent example of a romantic comedy with, perhaps, slightly more guy appeal. (Slightly.)

Viewed: 2005-02-11 | Released: 2005-02-10 | Score: C

IMDb Page

Gabriel García Márquez is one of the most amazing prose writers ever, though, having won the Nobel Prize he hardly needs me to say so. 100 Years of Solitude became one of my all-time favorite books as soon as I read it. This book is a much smaller, simpler story, but every bit as rich in language and color. In terms of plot, surprisingly little happens—though in so few pages there isn't room for much—but it's not really that kind of story. Rather, it's an examination of the culture of a small town in Colombia, and in that way it works very well. García Márquez paints such a clear picture of the town that by the end of the book we feel almost as though we lived there ourselves.

Started: 2005-02-15 | Finished: 2005-02-28

Purchase from Amazon

It seems like there has been a lot of popular interest in the Greek-American experience in the wake of My Big Fat Greek Wedding. It's an interesting phenomenon. Whether that has anything to do with the popularity and high acclaim won by Middlesex I couldn't say. I can say that I enjoyed it, though. The first word that comes to mind when I try to think of how to describe Middlesex is "epic." It's not a bad choice, really, as the book is spans three generations of the Stephanides family. The fact that the narrator and main character is named for the Greek muse of epic poetry is also a nice touch. On the one hand the book is an explanation of the family history that produced Calliope Stephanides. Beneath that, though it's also a look at the history of America as experienced by an immigrant family. The scope of the story could have been pretty overwhelming, but the narration provides a sense of intimacy that manages to hold it together. On the other hand, that very closeness also creates a curious sense of distance from the other characters. My one complaint is that I wish the author would have chosen a tense and stuck with it; the constant switching from present tense to past and back again was very jarring.

Started: 2005-01-11 | Finished: 2005-02-08

Purchase from Amazon

It's now been almost two weeks since I actually saw this film. I've been pretty busy lately, sure, but really I just didn't feel like reviewing it. Many of you may have already formed your own opinions about it; it's been out for a while, and even if you haven't seen it, all of the controversy might have left an impression. For my own part, I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, from a technical standpoint, it's a brilliant film. The acting, directing, and score were all very well done, nearly perfect. (All three of the stars I gave it are solely on the merit of these technical points.) But on the other hand, the actual story is so tragic that it's over the top. And now that I've had several important plot holes pointed out to me, the writing seems even clumsier. I don't feel the same outrage that many people do, but I am still bothered by how the film ends. I don't know if I'll ever completely make up my mind. So, to end with a corny one-liner, I guess you could say that Million Dollar Baby was a split decision.

Viewed: 2005-01-29 | Released: 2004-12-14 | Score: B

IMDb Page

Some of you who go to see this film may be a little surprised to find a little more substance than you were expecting. But then again, you could say similar things about writer-director Paul Weitz's last project, About a Boy. The trailers for In Good Company make it look like either a light-hearted romantic drama or a somewhat serious romantic comedy. Either way, you expect the movie to be mainly about the romance between Topher Grace and Scarlett Johansson's characters. Really, though, the movie is about Topher Grace's character taking on Dennis Quaid's character as a father figure and becoming an adult in the process. Overall, the picture is pretty good, with the only real flaws centering around Johansson. She's not a particularly great actor to begin with and her role was rather underwritten to boot. But since the movie focuses so much more closely on Quaid and Grace—who were, in my opinion, perfectly cast—these are forgivable flaws.

Viewed: 2005-01-15 | Released: 2006-12-05 | Score: B

IMDb Page

Despite the fact that The Aviator has a very good chance of winning Best Picture this year, I didn't think it was that great. It's not the fact that the film changed some of the historical facts. Not only should that be expected from a Hollywood biopic, but it makes for a better, more cohesive story. I didn't have a real problem with the acting. True, Kate Beckinsale still lacked any personality and I found Cate Blanchett's portrayal of Katharine Hepburn a little stilted, but I'm finally starting to respect Leonardo DiCaprio as an actor. I might even think he deserves a Best Actor nomination (the win obviously going to Jamie Foxx). No, the real problem with this movie is that it's so long. Any film would feel long at 170 minutes, but long stretches of The Aviator limp by with almost nothing happening. This is not to say that the movie didn't have it's moments, but so much time passed between those moments that it got kind of boring.

Viewed: 2005-01-08 | Released: 2004-12-13 | Score: C

IMDb Page

With all the buzz about this movie, I felt I had to see it before the Academy Awards. Still, I'd heard enough personal reviews that I wasn't expecting real greatness. Sure enough, Sideways didn't live up to the hype. The film follows two friends, Miles and Jack—played by Paul Giamatti and Thomas Haden Church, respectively—through a week-long wine-tasting trip leading up to Jack's wedding. The characters were interesting and the principal actors all did a good job—though I don't think the role was that much of a departure from Giamatti's previous work—but I just didn't find any real profundity in the story. Moreover, all of the wine talk kind of turned me off, even while simultaneously being interesting to me. Now, people who know me know that I like wine. I even like talking about wine. But in Sideways it just made me feel like the filmmakers were pretentious. Still, the wine provides the background and sets the tone for the whole film; it wouldn't have been the same story without it.

Viewed: 2005-01-07 | Released: 2004-10-11 | Score: B

IMDb Page

I'm sure by now that everyone has either read this book or been told about it by a friend. But if you're reading this review, I guess you want my opinion. So here it is: If you're into fast-paced books about conspiracies and secret societies with lots of action, and you don't much care about good writing or the Christian religion getting trashed then you'd probably enjoy this book. On the other hand, if you prefer your novels to be written by someone with a good narrative voice and strong characterization, or if you find overly sensationalist books distasteful, you may want to avoid this one. If you do decide to read The Da Vinci Code, though, just keep in mind that it's a work of fiction.

Started: 2005-01-01 | Finished: 2005-01-05

Purchase from Amazon

I hated Meet the Parents. You see, there's a certain style of humor involving humiliation that makes me physically uncomfortable that, unfortunately, is a big part of many comedy films and most sitcoms. For example, just about every scene in Friends that centers on Ross. I call that "the part of the show that I can't watch." When it starts, I know immediately, and I avert my eyes and start squirming in my seat. I usually have to leave the room. This meant that more or less the entire 108 minutes of Meet the Parents was completely unwatchable for me. I expected Meet the Fockers to be much the same, but Juliette wanted to see it so badly that I saw it anyway. And you know what? With one glaring exception, the movie was quite watchable. In fact, I found a lot of it hilarious. Dustin Hoffman and Barbara Streisand were perfect as Ben Stiller's uninhibited parents. Sure, much of what they did would have embarrassed me horribly, but they were so well-meaning that it didn't really bother me. Additionally, they provided a much-needed contrast to Robert De Niro's character. In the first movie, De Niro's ex-CIA father figure is contrasted with Ben Stiller's Greg Focker, making Stiller look even more bumbling than he would on his own. Here, the Fockers make De Niro's Jack Byrnes look much less sympathetic. All of that added up to a movie that I was actually able to laugh at instead of running away screaming in agony.

Viewed: 2005-01-02 | Released: 2004-12-15 | Score: B

IMDb Page