I was a little hard on the International Press Academy last year, but they made some ridiculous decisions when handing out their Satellite Awards. Still, at least they came off as being different than every other year-end awards giver by picking winners like Joseph Cross and X-Men: The Last Stand (best comedic actor and best editing, respectively). Those are at least some interesting, unpredictable picks, right? This year, I feel the need to be harder on the organization, because it's gone totally predictable in honoring No Country for Old Men, Juno, Sicko, American Gangster, Ratatouille, Diablo Cody and Christopher Hampton, among others. The actors they honored -- Marion Cotillard, Viggo Mortensen, Ellen Page, Ryan Gosling, Tom Wilkinson/Casey Affleck (tied) and Amy Ryan -- aren't all the most obvious choices, but they aren't shocking, either. Couldn't they have at least gone with nominee Clive Owen or his nominated "comedy or musical" Shoot 'Em Up (!?!?!?), or something?

Not that the winners aren't deserving, but what good is yet another awards ceremony if it's not going to distinguish itself from the Golden Globes, which are the Satellite's unrecognized yet unmistakable "baby daddy". Yeah, the Hollywood Foreign Press will likely go with some other winners, but they won't seem that different. Again, I do salute the IPA for having a documentary category, though it wouldn't have hurt to give The King of Kong its one possible prestigious(?) award -- not that it was actually a better film than fellow nominee No End in Sight. Also, it's always enjoyable to see what the IPA picks for best DVDs (The Prestige for overall; Borat and Masters of Horror Season 1 (tied) for extras; Ratatouille for youth-oriented; Ken Burns' The War for documentary; The Graduate 40th Anniversary Edition for classic). For the rest of the nominees and winners, head over to Variety.

I'm not a complete Woody Allen snob, but I am picky and I haven't been satisfied with any of his films since Sweet and Lowdown. For me to have liked even Match Point I would have had to lower my standards and expectations, and in the end I decided it didn't work for me. One of my problems with it is Scarlett Johansson, who I may never be able to enjoy as an actress. As a handbag model she's great, sure, but as someone who has to portray any feelings on the big screen she can't get my attention. I don't avoid her work, though, because some of her films are good despite her. I couldn't bother with Allen's Scoop, but now the filmmaker has cast the actress in another film, his untitled Spanish project, which I'm at least intrigued about.

So far we had learned that Allen would be shooting in Barcelona and Asturias this summer with the great Spanish actors Javier Bardem and Penélope Cruz. His new additions include Johansson and her co-star from The Prestige, Rebecca Hall. This will now be Johansson's third film for Allen, putting her closer to the level of collaboration as Louise Lasser, Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow, all of whom Allen had been involved with romantically. I'm not saying that Soon-Yi should be worried, at least if she doesn't mind Allen simply looking, but it is a bit strange. Following this film, Allen will return to England for his next film, which will go into production in 2008, hopefully without Johansson.

"Did you have a good world when you died? Enough to base a movie on?" -- Jim Morrison

Fortunately Morrison did have enough to base a movie on (the inappropriately titled The Doors), but thousands of dead celebrities and historical figures would make horrible subjects for biopics. Just because they led famous lives doesn't mean they led dramatically entertaining lives. Of course, Hollywood is good at making up or manipulating events for dramatic purpose and therefore just about any person could be given the formulaic biopic treatment.

Some people are better served with made-for-TV movie, others with big-budget studio epics. The easiest subjects to imagine are those who would provide great soundtracks; the more difficult personalities are those without current relevance or some fitting resonance today. I picked seven dead people (and a bonus: one living dog) who don't already have films in development (as far as I know) whose lives we need to see on the big screen as soon as possible.

Another week, another Best Picture Oscar nominee arrives on DVD just in time to sway Academy voters. Last Tuesday, it was Martin Scorsese's masterful crime drama The Departed; today, it's Babel, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's sprawling multilingual, multicultural, multi-everything meditation on the simultaneous interconnectedness and disconnectedness that plagues intercultural relationships. Wow, that was a mouthful. On the less heavy end we have a flick in which Hollywood spoofs itself (always good times) and another in which Scarlett Johansson shows off the twins (also always good times). So let's get to it: Here are my top DVD picks for the week.

Babel
Be warned: This most assuredly is not a light romantic comedy to watch on a Friday night as you prepare a romantic dinner at home with your significant other. But it is a must-see for its unflinching depiction of the devastating ramifications of miscommunication on both the personal and global levels. And it showcases phenomenal performances by a graying Brad Pitt, an ailing Cate Blanchett and a Full-Monty-flaunting Rinko Kikuchi.
Rent, buy or get more on Babel | Download the movie

Fun Fact: Originally slated for one of the leading roles in a certain Martin Scorsese drama, Brad Pitt departed The Departed so that he could appear in Babel. Crafty guy that he is, Pitt retains a producer credit on The Departed, so he'll be happy if either flick wins Best Picture.

The Prestige
Christopher Nolan's slick thriller didn't get the love it deserved when it hit theaters this fall, thanks in part to that other 2006 magician mystery The Illusionist -- and also in part to Scarlett Johansson/Hugh Jackman overload. While Scarlett in a cleavage-sculpting bodice doesn't sound bad to me, apparently not everyone is of the same opinion. Regardless, The Prestige's strengths lie (primarily) elsewhere. Like the two dueling turn-of-the-century magicians whose tale it tells, The Prestige pulls one hell of a trick on the audience. On the surface, it appears to be the simple tale of two egomaniacs trying to one-up each other, but in reality it's a subtle meditation on the existence of God. If you didn't catch that the first time, go back and take a gander at the film's opening sequence in which Michael Caine asks, "Are you watching closely?" Apparently, you weren't.
Rent, buy or get more on The Prestige

Fun Fact: Jackman and Johansson appeared opposite each other in another 2006 flick, Wooy Allen's Scoop. Alas, there was no magician around to make that one disappear.

My love of cinema originally came about through my love of production design, particularly for science fiction and fantasy films. As I grew up, one of my dream careers was art director, and some my early heroes were Dante Ferretti and Bo Welch. Naturally, then, a lot of my favorite filmmakers have been those who display creative art direction in their movies. Terry Gilliam has always been at the top of my list.

Other fans of Gilliam will agree with me that no other living director is more deserving of recognition by the Art Directors Guild. In fact, I'm surprised that he wasn't the first choice to receive the guild's Outstanding Contribution to Cinematic Imagery Award when it was originally given in 1998 (to Norman Jewison instead). Other filmmakers that I expect to see honored in the future include Tim Burton, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro.

Gilliam will receive the award at the Art Director's Guild Awards on February 17, when the guild also names the winners of its prizes for excellence in production design for 2006. Like other guild awards, the ADG's honors recognize distinct categories for its field. Nominated films are separated into three groups: period piece; contemporary; and fantasy (you may remember these are the same categories for the Costume Designer Guild Awards).

At the risk of stating the fairly obvious: movies are a visual medium. Sure, you have actors speaking lines of dialog, music, sound effects and a whole host of other elements that go into the final motion picture experience. But first, you have the image, the picture, the light and shadow. Think back to all the movies you've loved over the years and what comes to mind? For me, its occasionally a great line of dialog I remember fondly. But more often, its a series of iconic images etched in my mind from the films I've seen.

John Wayne standing in the doorway at the end of The Searchers, T.E. Lawrence walking on top of the train, triumphant and defiant, after he and his men attacked it in Lawrence of Arabia, De Niro's violent slo-mo ballet in the ring as boxer Jake La Motta in Raging Bull, Janet Leigh meeting Norman Bates' "mother" while taking a shower in Psycho, the hands pointing to the sky indicating where the sounds made by the aliens came from or the giant mothership almost obscuring Devil's Tower in Close Encounters of the Third Kind and yes, even the "Rosebud" sled burning in the furnace at the end of Citizen Kane. These images, and so many more, helped define the "look" of movies then and now -- and will continue to do so far into the future.

So, I feel its fitting that Variety is currently running some articles that specifically address one of the most important jobs of the filmmmaking process and one of the major -- if not the major -- element that determine the "look" of any movie -- the cinematographer. In the articles, many of the top cinematographers working today, such as Newton Thomas Sigel, Tom Stern, Emmanuel Lubezki and the great Michael Ballhaus, discuss the latest tools and techniques that allow them to push the boundaries of filmmaking and further shape how movies look. In addition, Variety also interviews many other cinematographers, such as Wally Pfister of The Prestige, Robert Richardson of The Good Shepherd and Rodrigo Prieto of Babel, about "facing the challenges, aesthetics and problem-solving behind some of this year's most visually compelling pix." All in all, a good series of articles and a good way to pay a little well-deserved respect to these artists.

With so many movies crowding the box office these days, distributors have to try to produce marketing for their films that will cut through the cacophony of TV, radio, iPods and ringing cell phones. It can be hard to produce a poster that is eye-catching enough to make you stop and give it a second look. What's the last poster that really caught your eye? The blog Sam's Myth has a nice collection up of his favorite five posters from the past year. While we don't agree with all of his choices (Nacho Libre, really?) -- for the most part they're nice picks from the absurd amount that were seen plastered around a town near you.

Check out the poster for Dave Chappelle's Block Party, which proves that a movie doesn't have to be great to have a fantastic poster. This is basically a concert film, but the poster really pops and has a 60s/70s feeling to it. Plus, a film like Hard Candy, which was barely a blip on the radar, has what is probably the most visually arresting poster from the entire year. I'm a huge fan of retro art and magic, so naturally I rushed out to see both films that were set in the world of turn-of-the-century magic. I thought The Illusionist was extremely engaging, but The Prestige fell a bit flat for me. The same is true for their posters, as well. In fact, The Illusionist is probably my favorite poster from this year, besides the Superman Returns poster that pays homage to the amazing artwork of Alex Ross.

However, this year has also produced some posters that weren't worth the adhesive they were hung with. What's with The Good German directly ripping off Casablanca? That's a classic movie poster that shouldn't be imitated, and there's a fine line between homage and copying.

Look for my inner Grinch to come out as I post the Worst Movie Posters of 2006 just before Christmas. Bah, humbug!

I've been steeped in year-end "for your consideration" screeners and press screenings, dozens of high-profile movies, each hoping for some kind of Oscar buzz. I can't really talk about most of them yet, given that they haven't opened and also that they're not in my 400 screen realm, but I can tell you that my "worst" list is expanding faster than my "best" list.

I wanted to focus, instead, on those movies, now playing on 400 screens or less, that aren't getting any awards consideration.

Christopher Nolan's The Prestige (321 screens) had the misfortune to open a few months from a vaguely similar film about stage magicians, The Illusionist (173 films). Both films have their supporters and detractors, but both have fared well. The Prestige currently rates 73% on Rotten Tomatoes.com, while The Illusionist rates only two points higher. The Prestige has earned $51 million on a $40 million budget, while The Illusionist has earned less, but with a wider margin of profit: $40 million on a $16.5 million budget.

Poor Scarlett Johansson. The Guardian's Joe Queenan has a piece up slamming the actress with gems such as, "Basically, her acting repertory consists of staring intently at the person she is speaking to, keeping her lips spread apart, and hoping no one will notice that she is no threat to Meryl Streep, and not all that much of a threat to Hilary Duff ." When you're being compared unfavorably to Hilary Duff -- that's gotta hurt.

Queenan goes on to enumerate Johansson's string of box office (and acting) failures, including in that list her BAFTA and Golden Globe-nommed performance in The Girl With the Pearl Earring ("listless and vacant"), The Island ("hopelessly miscast"), Match Point ("passive and useless"), Scoop ("thoroughly implausible"), The Black Dahlia ("ridiculously out of her league"), and The Prestige ("entirely extraneous"). Harsh words, but does Queenan have a point?

At this rate folks, I'd expect a new Saw film for the next -- whaddya think -- 10 years or so? Saw III absolutely annihilated the competition this weekend, racking up an estimated $34.3 million for the franchise's biggest opening yet. Not only is this huge for Lionsgate, but it also ruins at least the next Halloween for everyone else, as Saw IV will most likely hit theaters this same time in 2007. Eventually, we'll get another Friday the 13th and Rob Zombie-directed Halloween sequel, but will they be enough to tackle Jigsaw and his wacky diabolical schemes?

As much as it doesn't seem possible, there were other movies playing around the country this weekend. The Departed managed to hang on, dropping only 27 percent in box office sales over the last week, taking home $9.8 million. Not far behind was The Prestige ($9.6 million) which took a bigger hit, dropping 38 percent from the previous weekend. With its $90 million budget, Flags of Our Fathers ($6.35 million) currently holds a 10-day total of $19.9 million, which means Eastwood and friends are praying Oscar and his pal Buzz help drag this flick out of the gutter. Open Season (man, will this pic ever go away?) finally forfeited the fourth spot, sliding into fifth with $6.1 million.

And what about those Dixie Chicks and their controversial documentary Shut Up and Sing? Well, that puppy made plenty of noise in only four theaters, taking in a healthy $50,798. In just seven theaters Babel ($365, 801) also brought home some hefty figures. However, Catch a Fire (which debuted in 1,306 theaters) crashed and burned without much of a fight, as it wound up with a measly $2 million.

Full numbers after the jump.