For the most part I had a relaxing Saturday – not a lot to do. Just some chores. The kids are at the age were they are content playing video games and skateboarding outside. My wife was at work today, which gave me the opportunity to watch a movie that I bought last night in hopes of watching it with her, but she shot down as soon as she looked at the cover. LifeTime is more her thing. In all fairness, she did sit through 300 with me.

Anyway, I get the laundry out and put in Apocalypto. My eyes were glued to the TV the whole time. I didn’t fold a piece of laundry. How did I overlook this film when it was released in theaters? I don’t think I heard anything about it at all.

Did this film win any awards? Why not? Is Mel Gibson getting blacklisted by Jewish Hollywood because of his anti-Semitic views? I do think that every person should except responsibility and the consequences for their ignorant actions, but should his body of work or new work take a hit because of it? Should the actors, writers, cinematographers, musicians, and producers not receive any recognition because they are in one of Mel’s movie’s?

His personal life should be left at just that, because what he does with film is undeniably genius. Apocalypto takes place in ancient Central America – a region that is dear to my heart because I grew up in Costa Rica. Many of the images in the film that take place in jungles and rainforest were very familiar, which was exciting. The film's dialogue was in some ancient native Mayan language which was translated into English via subtitles. For a guy who has ADHD, I was still enthralled the entire time.

This movie was so intense, so graphic, and so realistic, my adrenaline was going the whole time. The main character in the movie is Jaguar Paw. His village was invaded by a superior and ruthless tribe – it’s hard to explain. They take most of the village’s men off to the stone built city to be executed in a very graphic nature, via human sacrifice for some type of Mayan god. He escapes death due to a solar eclipse; and from that point, it’s a roller coaster ride.

Jaguar Paw makes his way back to his village where he hid his pregnant wife and child in a cave before he was captured. Through the jungles, he is being chased by ancient demon-like warriors. At the end, he is vindicated. This is a must see.

Then you have Braveheart, a movie in which Mel directed and starred. It was an instant classic about the liberation of Scotland with historical relevance – something that seems important to Mel. Then you have the Passion of Christ. No matter which way you cut it, it is probably the closest thing on film to what actually happened throughout the New Testament. I wonder why this movie was plagued by so much controversy? It didn’t really stray from biblical history and was incredibly touching. The actors were superb and you could tell that a lot of the research, blood, sweat, and tears were put into it.

All at the demise of Mel Gibson that and very public drunk driving incident where he was babbling anti-Semitic comments to the police. Although I am willing to forgive Mel Gibson and move on to sitting and waiting at the edge of my seat for his next film, is everybody else? I think they should, if for no other reason than for the sake of personal entertainment. Because you're missing out on what a guaranteed quality film when you skip out on one of his movies.

Mel Gibson is movie making genius.

Look at the difference between 1950s and ’60s comic books and those drawn and written in the 1990s. Older comic books were more about developing story lines, while newer books even of the same title have become more and more about sensationalistic artwork. Look at Spiderman of the ’60s versus Spiderman of the ’90s. Did he ‘roid up, or what? Everything about those same comic books are newer, flashier, more muscular, and more sensational.

The ’90s saw the advent of the full page spread, where the pencils and inks flaunted their stuff, highlighting every crease in the face or bulge in muscle. In some cases, the quality of content was surrendered to make room for bigger and better artwork. And even when the stories weren’t lost, the amount of dialogue and narration was dramatically reduced so that the readers had to spend more money on more comic books to get the same amount of story. Bigger artwork meant fewer dialogue boxes. Image Comics, like Spawn, Shadow Hawk, Youngblood, and Savage Dragon are prime examples of the excesses to which comics took their artwork, to the detriment of their storyline. The stories were there… readers just had to read twice as many issues to get anywhere with the storyline.

Hollywood has followed the way of the comic book. Obviously, films like The Matrix prove how much directors can borrow from the comic book creating process to make a movie. Storyboards are often drawn up to look like comic book pages. But beyond the storyboards, everything in Hollywood films seems heading towards a bursting of the film making bubble. How much time in a film can you spend on special effects, cheesy one-liners, and head shots? Quite a few, if you’re making an action movie. But action movies don’t usually win awards or critical acclaim. They’re fun, sensational, and forgotten.

The “artsy” critics shifted away from Hollywood long ago in preference to Cannes and Sundance and many other film festivals featuring very few sensational effects. These films are rich in content, focusing on emotional details or clever story telling rather than bizarre shifting camera angles.

Comic books sales took a drastic down turn in the ’90s. Altogether, I think it was the combination of ridiculously increased prices, more space taken up by advertising, and the lack of quality narrative and dialogue. The commonly accepted value of comic books dropped drastically and new independent comic book companies cropped up to compete in a suffering market space. Hollywood’s bubble hasn’t popped just yet, but it could be coming.

It’s hard to predict what will happen. In some senses, the general populace has been conditioned to expect less from most films. It has sadly become enough if three of four films out a year’s 30+ are of any real value.

Thousands of comic book readers decided that sensationalism isn’t compelling enough to warrant expensive comic books. The question is: will movie watchers come to the same conclusion?

No offense to women, but choosing the Top Ten actors is much more difficult than actresses. There are easily 20-30 men who qualify for consideration. As you can tell by my list of actresses, my Top Ten has nothing to do with who’s the sexiest, hottest attraction in Hollywood. I judge by acting talent and how well each person entertains me.

#10 Gene Hackman – It’s impossible for me to think of Gene Hackman without picturing his bald head in the old Superman movies. My favorite films starring Gene Hackman include Hoosiers, Mississippi Burning, Unforgiven, The Firm, The Quick and the Dead, Crimson Tide, Get Shorty, Absolute Power, Antz, Enemy of the State, and Runaway Jury. Gene Hackman typically plays a cold, hard leader who makes the tough decisions other people can’t make. His characters generally aren’t the emotionally available or vulnerable type.

#9 Robin Williams – Robin Williams had delivered some amazingly unique performances. My favorites include Dead Poets Society, Awakenings, Hook, Aladdin (one of the best animated films ever), Mrs. Doubtfire, Jumanji, Good Will Hunting, Patch Adams, What Dreams May Come, Jakob the Liar, Bicentennial Man, and Insomnia. That’s an impressive list, and I haven’t even seen somewhere between 5-10 of his most recent films. Robin Williams does comedy better than anyone. He also mastered the tear jerker and more recently the suspense thriller.

#8 Dustin Hoffman – You cannot keep Dustin Hoffman from the Top 10. How many actors have learned how to portray the handicapped because Hoffman nailed it in Rain Man. My other favorite Hoffman films are Outbreak, Hook, Mad City, The Messenger, Sphere, and Wag the Dog. Hoffman has an excellent sense of wit and humor.

#7 Jack Nicholson – Most people would have Jack at the top, and I can understand why. Still, I only appreciate his recent films. Jack is the only person to make a decent villain in a Batman movie, and he owned that role. My favorite Nicholson films include As Good As it Gets, About Schmidt, Something’s Gotta Give, and A Few Good Men. I also enjoyed Wolf though it wasn’t received well. There are a couple highly regarded films I haven’t seen yet. No one portrays confidence and arrogance like Jack Nicholson. The epitome of his characters’ attitudes is the scene in Wolf when he pees on another guys leg in a public restroom and while staring at the man with absolute ownership says, “I’m markin’ my territory.”

#6 John Cusack – John Cusak is my guy for dry wit and sarcasm. I haven’t watched his older stuff (i know – it’s sacrilege). He drew my attention in Bullets Over Broadway (excellent movie that nobody talks about). My top Cusak films are Cradle Will Rock, High Fidelity, Serendipity, Max, Identity, and Runaway Jury. Second tier films include Con Air and Must Love Dogs (which was disappointing). There are a couple recent films I still haven’t seen. Cusack is the guy you want to hang out with and discuss pointless issues, politics, and music just so you can hear his long winded, witty responses.

#5 Al Pacino – I like Al Pacino for his flair and charisma. He doesn’t really play too many different roles, but he does what he does well. He sure can give a speech. He deserves mention for The Godfather if nothing else. Then he hits it big in Scent of a Woman, perhaps my favorite Pacino role. Heat, City Hall, and The Insider are all honorable mentions. I liked him in S1m0ne and especially in The Recruit (I just like the genre). He was excellent, though disturbing, in Two for the Money, Insomnia, and The Devil’s Advocate. Al Pacino is THE motivational coach.

#4 Sir Anthony Hopkins – I wanted to place Sir Anthony Hopkins at the top of my list, but he didn’t quite make it. He is an exceptionally entertaining actor, and I wouldn’t trade him for anyone. I’ve only been a fan of him in his old age, however. The oldest Hopkins film I’ve enjoyed was 84 Charing Cross Road (1987). Four years later he revolutionized the role of the villain in The Silence of the Lambs. Howard’s End and Remains of the Day were excellent period pieces. The Trial was disturbing (Kafka, if memory serves). Shadowlands is one of my favorites, because C. S. Lewis has had such a profound influence on my life. Hopkins was legendary in Legends of the Fall. I walked out of Nixon and watched Jumaji instead (I was a teenager). Surviving Picasso was a great video rental in college. I wanted to move to Europe and start painting. I was entertained by the conversion of knowledge to skill in The Edge. Meet Joe Black and Instinct are favorites of mine as well. I cannot say enough about Hannibal (though there are parts where I have to look away or be scarred) and Red Dragon, and he was didn’t disappoint in Proof or The Human Stain. I still haven’t seen two or three of his most recent films. Anthony Hopkins is the epitome of class, intelligence, and style among Hollywood’s leading men.

#3 Denzel Washington – Regardless of what the girl at Starbucks thinks, Denzel is a treasure. I had no idea when I saw him in Ricochet (1991) that Washington would make something of himself in Hollywood. Malcom X blasted him into the stratosphere a year later. The Pelican Brief, Crimson Tide, Virtuosity, and Fallen are his earliest films that I enjoyed. The Siege (1998) is among my Top 20 all-time favorite films. The Bone Collector is one of those films I can watch over and over. I skipped The Hurricane (no interest), but I really enjoyed Training Day, John Q, and Man on Fire. Second tier favorites include Remember the Titans and Inside Man. Denzel Washington is the emotionally balanced alpha dog you want running the show.

#2 Brad Pitt – It will grieve many, I’m sure, to see Brad Pitt at the #2 position. I can’t help it. He has been in more of my favorite movies than any other actor. While Brad Pitt did well in A River Runs Through It, his career didn’t truly begin until Legends of the Fall and Interview with a Vampire both opened in 1994. He was an instant megastar. He followed up with two more incredible performances in 1995 in Se7en and Twelve Monkeys. Sleepers was a quieter hit – a film that should probably only be seen once at most. Pitt returned in 1997 with The Devil’s Own and Seven Years in Tibet. He played Death in one of my Top 20 films in 1998 – Meet Joe Black. He ruled the world in 1999 with Fight Club (every teenager wanted to be that cool). I was personally disappointed with Snatch and The Mexican. I loved Spy Game in 2001, but wished that I could have seen Pitt as a present day operative. Ocean’s Eleven was okay, but Pitt still outplays everyone else in the film. His charisma and style are unmatched. Troy was an epic worth watching at least once. Mr. & Mrs. Smith was one of the most anticipated films ever (because every single person in America wants to sleep with one of the stars). I haven’t seen Babel yet, but it won the award for best drama, so it must be pretty good. Pitt has seven movies in the works between now and 2008. Brad Pitt is the good looking, emotional silent type who exudes confidence and charisma.

#1 – Tom Hanks – for my money, there is no better actor in the world than Tom Hanks. I don’t want to like him sometimes, but I can’t help it. He plays even the most surprising roles well. I first noticed Hanks in The Man With One Red Shoe (1985). I can’t remember The Money Pit, but that was the first film of his I saw in the theaters. Big was, of course, his breakout role. I absolutely loved The ‘Burbs. He did well in A League of Their Own, but in my book it all began with Sleepless in Seattle. That film is in my Top 20. Then there’s Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan (I walked out of that one) and my next favorite, You’ve Got Mail. He was excellent in The Green Mile, Cast Away, Road to Perdition (surprised me with that one), The Terminal, and The Da Vinci Code. He has at least 6 films planned for the next couple years, and I expect 5 of the 6 to be stellar performances. My least favorite Tom Hanks films are The Ladykillers (hated it) and Joe Versus the Volcano (I never recovered from the suicidally dismal office scenes at the beginning). Tom Hanks simply hasn’t met a role he can’t do as well or better than everyone else.

It wasn’t easy to narrow down my list of best actresses, but since it must be done for the sake of a Top Ten, here they are, from least to best:

#10 Kate Hudson – best films with Kate Hudson include How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, Raising Helen, Almost Famous, and The Four Feathers. Kate is still building a decent portfolio, but she’s definitely on the right track. She brings a level of sophisticated hip wit to both dramas and comedies that are unique for her age group.

#9 Diane Lane – Diane Lane deserves her own spot within the top ten for her class and style. If she never made another decent film, Under the Tuscan Sun has immortalized Ms. Lane in romantic comedy history.

#8 Winona Ryder – Winona was excellent in Edward Scissorhands and decent in Reality Bites. I don’t know why she doesn’t make more films. More recently, she did well in Autumn in New York, Girl Interrupted, and Simone. Honestly, Ryder could have ended up much higher on the list if she hadn’t disappeared from my radar for so many years.

#7 Kristin Scott Thomas: I cannot picture a better tragically romantic character actress than Kristin Scott Thomas. My favorite films with her in it are The English Patient, Life as a House, and The Horse Whisperer. In each role, she mastered the art of shame, disappointment, and desire.

#6 Gwyneth Paltrow – While it’s probably true that Gwyneth owes her celebrity to Brad Pitt, she has still made quite a stir on her own in Hollywood. She won the Academy Award for Best Actress in 1998 for her role in Shakespeare in Love – one of my top 20 all-time favorites. She starred opposite Pitt in the instant cult classic film, “Se7en.” From there, she won the hearts of millions of female fans for her starring role in Emma. Sliding Doors was her next major film, which didn’t see as much success for some reason. Gwyneth came roaring back with a vengeance with a powerful performance in Great Expectations, one of my Top 5 movies of all-time. Hush and A Perfect Murder were so-so films. Yet again, Gwyneth proves her ability to rule the silver screen in The Talented Mr. Ripley, Duets, Bounce, Shallow Hal, Possession, Sylvia, and Proof. She really enters into her own with Proof. No one can doubt that she is a serious actress, completely deserving of the acclaim and attention she has received. Lucky for us, Gwyneth appears to be keeping a busy acting schedule.
#5 Cate Blanchett – Blanchett got my attention with Elizabeth back in ‘98. I still remember exactly where I saw that film. It was a two movie special – I watched Stepmom and Elizabeth back to back. Roles in Pushing Tin and The Talented Mr. Ripley were just fillers until her stellar performance as a psychic on The Gift. She was sufficient (though not extraordinary) in The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Her most recent successes (which I haven’t even seen yet) are Charlotte Gray, The Shipping News, Veronica Guerin, The Aviator, The Good German, and Notes on a Scandal. I really haven’t seen enough of her, but she has a reputation which earns her this spot.

#4 Susan Sarandon – my favorite Sarandon film was Stepmom. It was a warm and unforgettable piece. Though she hasn’t played any extremely memorable roles recently, she has done very well in the past and will likely do so again in several of her eight upcoming projects. Sarandon was celebrated for her role in Dead Man Walking, but I prefer her in films like Anywhere But Here, Cradle Will Rock, The Client, and, of course, Thelma and Louise.

#3 Nicole Kidman – Nicole really didn’t arrive until Far and Away. She and Tom Cruise both delivered incredible performances in that film. She seemed to go downhill with To Die For. Moulin Rouge and Eyes Wide Shut were big films for her, but they were definitely not for me. The Hours is the film where Kidman earns the respect of her peers. Cold Mountain and The Interpreter were both solid performances. Honestly, she wins major cred for her fole in Far and Away. She just doesn’t seem to get the right roles very often.

#2 Meg Ryan – There is no single actress that can draw me to a film like Meg Ryan. She is the queen of the romantic comedy. She’s cornered the Hollywood market on cute and witty. Her best films include Sleepless in Seattle, You’ve Got Mail, French Kiss, I.Q., Addicted to Love, City of Angels, Proof of Life, Kate & Leopold, and Hanging Up. Meg is not limited to comedy, as we see in City of Angels, Proof of Life, and In the Cut. She may not be the most diverse actress, but nobody nails her genres like Meg.

#1 Jodie Foster – My favorite Jodie Foster films include Panic Room, Little Man Tate, The Silence of the Lambs, and Nell. Second tier includes Candleshoe, Contact, and Maverick. She is obviously one of the most intelligent and well-rounded actresses ever. She can do comedy, tragedy, suspense, family, sci-fi… you name it – Jodie Foster can do it. There is no one who can do it better.

Is anybody really enraged by the alleged Mel Gibson controversy? Let us understand a couple basic principles from the beginning: 1) it is never justified or proper to practice anti-semitism; 2) you cannot believe everything you hear and read out of Hollywood.

I’m tired of hearing about the outrage over Mel Gibson’s behavior. Don’t believe all these outraged people’s claims that Mel is finally “showing his true colors.” That’s the kind of sensationalist trash generated by people predisposed to a certain bias.

Let’s break this down to its most simple, common denominator. This “controversy” revolves around history – the historical events of the past six thousand years. It began with the Jews being God’s chosen people. That’s not to say that Jews are superior in any way to the rest of us (I am not Jewish), but they are chosen.

For all those misguided souls out there, Jesus was born a Jew. Before you begin to reject Christianity because of historical mistreatment of Jews, know that this is absolutely true: the Christian faith is founded upon the belief that God showed favor to the Jews and chose to make his only son a Jew.

Throughout the New Testament, the Jews are blessed and loved. It is an immutable truth of the Christian faith that God has called Gentile Christians to bless and love the Jews. It is because they rejected Jesus that we as Gentiles even received a chance at the faith. It is by one nation’s failure that the world has the opportunity to be saved. We cannot hold Israel (historical or contemporary) in contempt for this opportunity. Paul, the apostle responsible for writing 2/3 of the New Testament, urges us to support Christian leaders in Israel and to speak a blessing over them.

Jewish objectors to The Passion of the Christ take offense to an absent anti-Semitic message they have read into the script. Such a message simply isn’t there. It’s not anti-semitic to state that a Jewish man was rejected by his countrymen and crucified. It would only be anti-semitic if we were to conclude that the only race capable of such impropriety and malice is the Jew. But that simply isn’t true. Jews are not unfairly singled out in the film. It is a Jewish story. The characters are by necessity Jews. The protagonist and the antogonists are Jews. You cannot be much more balanced than that.

That is not the true source of today’s objections, however. The source of today’s Jewish objections to The Passion of the Christ and Mel Gibson is the actual mistreatment of Jews by self-proclaimed Christians in the centuries between the Apostle Paul and today.

People claiming to be Christians (though practicing very little of the doctrine and lifestyle illustrated by Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles) began to harbor bitterness towards Jews because they had crucified Jesus. It was a completely senseless thing to be angry over. In essence, the Gentile “Christians” were blaming the Jews for providing Gentiles with an opportunity for salvation. They were so angry by this opportunity that they felt the need to slander, attack, and destroy the Jews for such heinous behavior.

I doubt that history could point us to another people group more oppressed than the Jews. It always came from somewhere. But even the mistaken beliefs of thousands cannot create truth out of thin air. The scriptures still read the same as they did before any Christian anti-semitism existed. We are commanded to love, to serve, to lay our lives down for our neighbor.

I cannot speak for every self-proclaimed Christian. As people, we are entitled to believe whatever we want or have been trained to believe. I do not know what was in Mel Gibson’s heart when he made those statements. What I do know is that he had endured slander and pressure from Jews to alter or simply scrap The Passion of the Christ before completion. Mel Gibson dealt with a lot of people saying harsh things to him.

Perhaps Gibson’s critical words stemmed from resentment born towards those who had made the making of this film into a painful ordeal. Perhaps he truly does harbor some racism in his heart. I cannot know. But I definitely cannot take someone’s word that Mel Gibson is a hateful man simply because they now have some ammunition to use against him.

I have said many hurtful things to people in my anger and pain. Lashing out is a defensive stance. My point is simply that there are many reasons to account for why a person says what he or she says. We simply don’t know the issues of a person’s heart. We never do. We either believe or disbelieve what we hear. That is all.

Please be careful who you choose to believe. Mel Gibson’s work speaks of beliefs far more noble than those which he has been recently accused.

Can someone please explain to me the purpose of library fees? The public library is still supported by tax dollars, right? Then why am I funding the DVD department of my local library? Obviously, some smartass out there is responding with, because you didn’t turn your stuff in on time, duh. Thank you for that brilliant piece of deduction. Now can you explain to me why I have to pay for something I have essentially already paid for? Taxes we paid purchased those wonderfully “free” DVDs at the library. But just because I can’t make it to the library on time doesn’t mean I should have to buy it again, right?

In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have library fines. We wouldn’t have to pay for being a day late. I’ve literally spent more than $50 in late fees over the past year. Unfortunately, due to the sinful human condition, not many of us would return the book or movie until much later if fees were not assessed. Some people still don’t. But it is the penalty which drives us to be responsible citizens. It is not the desire to make sure other people have access to the same materials we have.

In a perfect world where I am not king (because having to be kind would cause it to no longer be a perfect world), I would pay no late fees and fear no penalties. I would return my books and DVDs on time because I had spare time (which I do not have) and because I care about whether another person gets to view this material (I am not really this caring).

That’s in a perfect world. This is decisively NOT a perfect world. In THIS world, I should receive at least three DVDs to own from the library as compensation for all the fees they have so unnecessarily charged. Until this occurs, we can safely assume that the perfect world is in no danger of taking the place of this one.