Last week I listed my five worst theatrical experiences of 2007. It was a difficult thing to do, because as a former proud and happy employee of the theater industry, and as a huge supporter of going to the movies over home viewing, I hated to showcase cinemas and exhibition formats in a bad light. But how else to encourage improvements in movie going if not by pointing out unsatisfactory experiences? Part of my interest in the theater industry has always been to help make improvements where needed, whether it was back when I worked as a theater manager or now when I merely comment on theater practice and procedure. I not only want people to go to the movies; I want them to enjoy going to the movies as much as possible.

I've gone to a great number of movies over the past year, some of which were free and some of which cost too much, and aside from those five experiences listed last week and a few others that were more affected by minor or nitpicky problems. Otherwise I've had a lot of fun going to the movies in 2007. I've seen old movies on the big screen, new movies as they premiered, I've sat among other critics in comfy yet popcorn-lacking press screenings and most enjoyably I've sat with regular audiences in regular cinemas. It's difficult to pick the best kind of theatrical experience, but it wasn't too hard to pinpoint five specific experiences that stood out in my mind as being the best of my theatrical experience in 2007.

Theatrical Experiences of 2007 Part II: The Best

The Darjeeling Limited at Cerrito Speakeasy Theater, El Cerrito, CA -- 12/26/07

Everyone always tells me I have to experience the famed Alamo Drafthouse(s), but I feel the Speakeasy cinemas are probably just as cool. And until or if I experience better, the Speakeasy in El Cerrito is my new favorite place to see a movie. Unfortunately, it's across the country from where I live. It combines three of my favorite things: great movies, restored old cinemas and beer. Also the owners are delightful, the chairs and couches are comfy, they often show old movies, some of which are free, and the popcorn is delicious. I'd already seen The Darjeeling Limited once, but I think it was a better experience this second time, mainly due to the more chill atmosphere in which it was presented. Most important: I'm not that enthusiastic about major chains charging extra for relaxed, living-room-style viewing with wait service (I will be writing about this problem soon), but when it's only $6, like at the Speakeasy (or 2 for $6, as it is there on Wednesday nights), it's absolutely perfect. I wish I could fly back in two weeks to check out The Maltese Falcon there.

Just a few more shopping days left until Christmas, and I'm just about done. We always get a couple DVDs for the kids stockings. When the sugar high from all the cookies and candy has worn off, there's nothing better than a new DVD (or two) to settle the kids down and give the grown-ups a little much-needed quiet time (or time to watch those movies Santa left in our own Christmas stockings ...). If you're looking for a few things to round out your own shopping, here are seven sure-to-please DVDs for kids of various ages:

High School Musical/High School Musical 2 -- If you have a tween girl in your house, all things High School Musical are likely at or near the top of your list. Disney knocked the ball out of the park with the resounding success of this musical for kids last year, and followed it up with High School Musical 2 (I liked the first one better, but my kids like them both). While the High School Musical films may not be that well-reviewed critically, these DVDs (trust me on this) top the Christmas lists of tweens and teens everywhere. Just be prepared to watch them over and over again, until the song "We're All in This Together" is permanently embedded in your brain and you want to claw your eyes out find yourself singing it in the shower while you practice your cool dance moves. Psst ... I hear Erik Davis knows all the lyrics and dance steps by heart, and he doesn't even have kids.

In what seems like a repeat of last year, the 2008 Annie Award nominations include a Pixar movie and a movie about penguins. The top contenders for the 2007 Annies, which recognize the best in animation, were Cars and Happy Feet. The former ended up winning the big award, Best Animated Feature. However, a couple weeks later it was Happy Feet that won the corresponding Oscar, so the Annies can not be looked at to predict the Academy's decision. In 2008, though, the two awards should actually match. The only real contender for both the Annie and the Oscar is Pixar's Ratatouille. There isn't much chance of this year's penguin movie, Surf's Up, winning either award. If there's any minor competition for Pixar, it's from Persepolis. The other two nominees for the Best Animated Feature Annie are Bee Movie and The Simpsons Movie.

Ratatouille was the leader in nominations at 13, while Surf's Up received the second highest amount with 10. In addition to the top award, the two films are competing in the categories for writing (also competing: Simpsons and Persepolis), storyboarding (also competing: TMNT; Meet the Robinsons; Bee Movie), production design (also competing: Beowulf), directing (also competing: Shrek the Third; Simpsons; Persepolis), character design (no other competitors), character animation (no other competitors, but Surf's Up received two mentions here) and animated effects (also competing: Spider-Man 3; Disney short How to Hook Up Your Home Theater; Ratatouille received two mentions here). One category that Bee Movie seriously missed is voice acting, which features three nominations for Ratatouille -- for Janeane Garofalo, Ian Holm and Patton Oswalt.

One thing that is interesting about the Annies is how the awards can be distributed to many different movies. Last year, Over the Hedge won the directing, storyboarding and character design categories, Flushed Away won in writing, voice acting, animated effects, character animation and production design categories and Happy Feet took away no awards. Then again, the year before, Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit picked up ten trophies and then went on to pick up the Academy Award. So, the 2008 Annies could go any number of ways.

I don't believe the hype that 3-D will dominate the movie world in the near future, but it does seem like a lot of movies are using the technology these days. The Hollywood Reporter has announced that Disney will release the animated feature Bolt, (once called American Dog) in Digital 3-D next year. Bolt features the voices of John Travolta, Woody Harrelson, and Susie Essman (who had better curb her Curb Your Enthusiasm language!). It tells "the story of a TV star dog named Bolt (Travolta) who is accidentally shipped from his Hollywood soundstage to New York, where he begins a cross-country journey through the real world." Chris Williams directs the film.

Disney has been one of the biggest supporters of 3-D. In recent years, Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and the sweet, sweet Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas were all released in the format. Speaking of Nightmare, as Monika told you earlier this month, Tim Burton has signed to produce and direct 3-D versions of Alice in Wonderland and his own terrific short film, Frankenweenie for Disney. On the opposite end of the cool spectrum, Disney's next 3-D release is the Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert Tour, which will play in theaters Feb. 1-7. Start scalping those tickets now!

Before I get to the meat of this week's column, I have a little appetizer of an issue to discuss. The other day, I went to see American Gangster at a Regal theater and once again participated in the Guest Response System. But unlike my first experience, I actually had to use the thing this time. While pressing the "Other Disturbance" button over and over and over because of a loud toddler, then finally after too long a time receiving responses in the forms of, first, a security guard and, second, a crew of ushers, I eventually realized that there is no way to communicate what exactly is the disturbance you're alerting the staff about. I don't want to say the parents of the toddler were covering the kid's mouth each time a Regal employee scoped out the auditorium, but coincidentally there was no disturbance whenever someone was monitoring the audience. And so, despite my having the little complainer pager, I put up with two-and-a-half hours of a sporadically loud child who should have never been brought to American Gangster in the first place.

Okay, now that I've got that off my plate, it's time to address the main topic of the week:

Beowulf.

On Friday, Robert Zemeckis' new performance-capture "animated" film hits 2,800 screens across the U.S. More than 700 of those screens will show the film in digital 3-D, via IMAX, Real D or Dolby systems (yes, there's three different 3-D systems). It's apparently the largest rollout of a 3-D release ever, and it could mean big things for both Hollywood and the exhibition industry. Or it could be just another 3-D movie, no more an event than when Disney's Chicken Little came out a couple years ago touted as the first digital 3-D release to hit regular cinemas.

I think we all know that Ratatouille will win the 2008 Oscar for Best Animated Feature. So, do we really need to waste time nominating others? Yesterday, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences named 12 movies eligible for the award, a shortlist that will eventually be pared down to three finalists when the Oscar nominees are announced in January. Had there been at least 16 eligible animated films this year, the number of nominees would be five, but with only 12, the category will only see three contenders. What could they be? Certainly Ratatouille will be one of them, and it's my guess that Persepolis and Surf's Up (the Academy loves penguins) will be the ones to join the Disney/Pixar sure-thing. I'm on the fence about Beowulf, especially after reading Scott's praise this morning, but I think it has a good chance of eventually being disqualified from being nominated. There's some debate already about whether or not it is technically an animated film. Another movie I have doubts about is Alvin and the Chipmunks, which seems to be primarily live-action. Last year, Arthur and the Invisibles ended up out of the race due to its own matter of having too much live footage.

The full list of animated features: Ratatouille; Persepolis; Shrek the Third, which should be the first of its series to not get a nomination; The Simpsons Movie, which the Academy should deem too television for its award; Bee Movie, which would only get a nomination if the Academy needed Seinfeld to attend the ceremony -- and hopefully it doesn't; TMNT (aka Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles); Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie Film for Theaters; Alvin and the Chipmunks; Beowulf; Meet the Robinsons; Surf's Up; and Tekkonkinkreet, a Japanese film by American director Michael Arias, which could be a dark horse if Persepolis wasn't the favorite for the necessary foreign animated selection. I'm not sure why Happily N'Ever After was excluded, but I guess it wouldn't have a chance anyway. What do you think should win, or at least make the nomination round?

What is it about Disney films and the whole dead/lost mother thing? I'm not one of those moms who won't let their kids watch Disney films because they're too traumatic, or too merchandise-heavy, or too much a sign of the coming of the apocalypse or whatever, but I swear, everytime I hear there's a new Disney film coming down the pike, the first thing I think is "wonder how they're going to kill off the mom this time?" Anyhow.

That minor quibble aside, I enjoyed Meet the Robinsons. I didn't review the film theatrically, and for whatever reason we never ended up taking the brood to when it was out, so reviewing the DVD was both my and my kids' first chance to see it, and we all thoroughly enjoyed it. We've had it on several times now, and so far, I haven't had any urges to rip the DVD player out of the entertainment center yet, so that's gotta be a good sign.

On the other hand, though, I also have a fairly high tolerance for High School Musical, Hannah Montana, and other kidfare. I know, it's probably some kind of double-standard that should get me banned from the cool kids' lunch table that I can even stomach High School Musical, which I guess I'm supposed to hate or risk losing my "serious film buff" cred, but I tend to judge kid movies by two rules: 1) did my kids like it? and 2) can I stomach repeated viewings of it? I also consider things like the storyline, the characters, the music, and whether or not the film is dumbed-down too much or filled with stereotypes, but if my kids hate it or it makes me cringe from the opening song, I'm probably not going to get that far.

Always be wary of overblown announcements from Hollywood. Disney is announcing a great achievement in the opening weekend of its latest animated flick, Meet the Robinsons, but the studio is making a bigger deal out of its supposed success. The announcement pertains to the performance of 3-D showings of Robinsons versus the more available 2-D version of the film. Yes, Robinsons now holds a record for having the greatest opening for a 3-D movie, with regards to the width of its rollout and to its box office gross, but there are a few details that aren't being revealed in Disney's promotion of this news.

First of all, the wider rollout is due to more screens being equipped with Real D's 3-D exhibition technology -- Robinsons in 3-D opened on 521 screens (3413 with 2-D screens included) compared to Monster House in 3-D on 178 screens (3553 with 2-D screens included). Second of all, Robinsons technically did worse business than Monster House in 3-D theaters if you consider each film's per-screen average. Robinsons made $7.3 million off its 3-D showings, which makes its per-screen take only $12,220. Monster House, on the other hand, made only $2.3 million from its 3-D screens, making its per-screen take $15,000. Overall, with 3-D and 2-D screens tallied, Robinsons grossed better in its opening weekend than Monster House ($25.1 mill. vs. $22.2 mill.), and Robinsons' percentage grossed from 3-D was higher than Monster House's (13% vs. 11%), but otherwise it seems that people may have been a tad more curious about the new 3-D format last summer than today.

It's rare that anything I see at the movies these days strikes me as profound, groundbreaking or revolutionary. I've been watching a lot of movies for a very long time. Visually, things have changed over the years. But it always comes back to the story, doesn't it? 300 is a movie that pushes the boundaries of conventional movie-making. And the story was OK, too. So we watch it and think, "Wow, that's pretty f**king cool." But if the story completely sucked, the movie wouldn't be nearly the smash hit it is.

So I went to see Meet The Robinson's at the famous El Capitan theater in Hollywood. My first thought when the movie started playing was, "Wow, this is pretty f**king cool looking." At about 600 hundred theaters across the country, the movie is shown in Disney Digital 3-D (yes, glasses and all). As I started getting roped into the movie about the orphan kid and his friend, I thought, "I really like these characters, and this is pretty f**king cool looking."

As I continued to watch the movie, I was totally engrossed. And I was aware that I was totally engrossed. (As a movie "reviewer" you actually start to monitor your own reactions. I know, it's a bit creepy and droid-like). I thought to myself, "This movie is totally fun and I love the characters, but why the hell am I so into it?"

If you want your animated movie to thrill the kiddies, be sure it contains the following things: time machines, dinosaurs, robots and baseball. If you want your animated movie to appeal to the grown-ups that are required to get the kiddies into the theater, be sure it contains the following things: a clever sense of humor, some really impressive animation, a bunch of solid voice performances and a few life lessons that are sweet but not over-sappy. Then throw in a great score by Danny Elfman, an admirably speedy pace and more colorful characters that you'll know what to do with ... and voila: Disney's Meet the Robinsons, which is just about as good a CG feature as you can get without the words "Pixar Animation Studios" emblazoned across the opening credits. (Matter of fact, I had a lot more fun with the non-Pixar Meet the Robinsons than I did with last summer's Pixar flick Cars!)

Based on the book by William Joyce, Meet the Robinsons is about a sweet-natured prodigy who is also an orphan. Young Lewis is a true-blue genius to be sure, but his technological obsessions always manage to scare potential parents away. Lewis has precisely one caring guardian and one loyal pal, yet of course he dreams of fitting in with a traditional family all his own. But when a devious mishap at a local science fair introduces Lewis to Wilbur Robinson (a crazy kid who claims to own a time machine), our little hero is in for a whole lot of craziness. Suffice to say he finally meets up with a loving family ... but "traditional" doesn't even come close to describing this futuristic clan.