Review: B+
I haven't heard a negative review from anyone who has seen this film.  I personally found it a little Kitschy.  If I were able to discuss the ending right now, I would, but I felt there were different options for the story that could have still created the same overall meaning and feel without being as predictable and convenient.  Regardless of my issues with the film, I found it entertaining and relatively uplifting.  Cinematography was incredible.  There seemed to be a real knowledge of the setting to create an interesting backdrop for the stories told (movie definitely benefited by having a co-director from India).  The theme of the story was standard, but the presentation felt new enough to keep the story fresh.  Even with the R rating, I would recommend this movie for any mature teenager.  The content was much more PG than most PG-13's.

Director: John Patrick Shanley

Writer: John Patrick Shanley (screenplay & theater play)

Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Meryl Steep, Amy Adams

Release Date: 12 December 2008

Genre: Drama

Plot: Set in 1964, Doubt centers on a nun who confronts a priest after suspecting him abusing a black student. He denies the charges, and much of the play's quick-fire dialogue tackles themes of religion, morality and authority.

Review: B+
I would recommend this film to anyone who has had any conflict in their life where they have felt powerless, or to anyone how has been in a relationship where they felt they were manipulated.  (That probably covers 99% of the population)  Yet, wouldn’t make a strong recommendation for this film unless you have interest in the subject matter.  Still, I would urge every moviegoer to see it.  

In my experience I have found that there are a lot of truths out there.  Many of which are coupled with manipulations or advertisements in order to further one’s interest.  Truth is rarely void of any agenda.  And man is without complete truth due to his imperfect form.  Yet, seeking after truth should be and fervent, genuine, and honest as one can strive.

The subjects of religion and of humanity have no equal in my jambalaya of interests.  One might think that this film is an attack on the Catholic Church or their methodology of education, but I did not see it that way.  I thought it was much more a look into humanity, and each of our responses to that which we know --and what it means to “know”-- that which we do not know, and the rest in which we doubt.

Doubt sparked an interesting conversation with my wife, and I would expect it to do the same with any group of people who go to see it.  I jotted down some additional thoughts when thinking about the film.  “We must be careful of telling the truth according to our own created reality or by the dictates of one’s established convenience or mapped out, divisive rationale.

The movie moves like a play, as it was also written for the stage.  The story and dialogue as not as gripping as Lars Von Trier’s “Dogville,” but I would highly recommend this film if you enjoyed that one.
(Note: If you haven’t seen Dogville or Von Trier’s Dancer In the Dark, you are doing yourself a disservice.  Also prepare yourself for ‘Antichrist’ which is also written by Anders Thomas Jensen)

Director: Charlie Kaufman

Writer: Charlie Kaufman

Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Catherine Keener, Tom Noonan, Samantha Morton, Hope Davis, Jennifer Jason Leigh

Release Date: 5 February 2008

Genre: Comedy | Drama

Rating: R

Plot: A theater director struggles with his work, and the women in his life, as he attempts to create a life-size replica of New York inside a warehouse as part of his new play.

Review: B+

A reliable movie source says this is the best film humans have ever produced.

My review is as follows:
I often argue or complain after seeing a film that I could not relate, that the film was not real enough, or that I need more honest conflict.  What I realize after seeing Synecdoche, New York is that I my own personal tastes require there to be a very thin, vague line between the medium of film and the realities of life.  I mean, at some point a director is going to get me to experience a character by following him/her to the bathroom, through day to day chores, into paying the bills, mowing the law, driving to work…etc.  A film may mirror life enough that I can’t recognize the difference between my own life that I’m living this very moment, or the one that is being portrayed on the screen.  Now, is this art?  Of course it is.  Is this something that I can appreciate, relish in, and celebrate?  Maybe.  Is this something that may cause me to ponder and think, and maybe even evaluate my own life and how I am living it?  Sure, probably in the same way as I evaluate things moment by moment and day by day.

The tension that existed in this film, the way that is was made, the score, the music/sounds that came in and out through the film that truly opened up my consciousness, the set and props, the visual scenes (except for a couple obvious green-screen parts I didn’t enjoy), the make-up, the interesting elements of time its relation to events and its different speeds pertaining to each character, as well as many other elements of this film were all impressive and thought-provoking.  But, it has to ultimately come down to whether or not I want to watch it.  In this case, even in its brilliance, my answer is no better than “sorta.” 

It’s too much, really.  Too much for what I seem to experience day to day, too relatable to mundane tasks that keep a house clean, and a body living.  Too much to be a movie.  A film, yes.  A movie, no.  And I like film, but I realize today that even in film, I want some movie.

This movie to me was like Brown Bunny with complexity, or Broken Flowers with intelligence and style.  If and when you do see this film, please give me your thoughts, I am sure I missed or didn’t understand important elements.  I was distracted by the people talking throughout the movie beside me. 
Please remember when going to the theater…if someone asks you to be quiet or “shushes” you, it’s not because you’re talking at that moment, it’s because you have been talking for many moments and you have become so incredibly disturbing that someone has to say something to you even when they really don’t want to.  And chances are that even if you only hear one person shushing you, that persons is probably representing the whole theater who is so annoyed with you that they’d prefer you’d leave and the movie be rewound to the beginning so everyone can see and hear what they missed by your distracting and resounding lack of consideration and etiquette. 

It must be noted that the "B" grade given is the strongest B of its kind.  No B could ever be stronger.  I just felt that for Charlie Kaufman, he missed a masterpiece by a whole grade, though the elements did exist for unmatched greatness.