From the start of Half-Nelson, Ryan Gosling as Dan Dunne exudes the type of purposeful energy that characterizes all great leaders. His eyes are able to connect to each student as he lecture his class. Moreover, his usually reticent middle school schools respond with contained enthusiasm when he asks then to think deeply about the causes and after-effects of the civil rights movement. Here is a man that is going to change the world, one poor, African-American child at a time.

Unfortunately, the savior of American public education has a problem — he’s a crack head and he’s stuck in a long, meandering movie where he can never fully express his intentions.

In Half-Nelson, director Ryan Fleck sets up a great premise. What if one of the few teachers making a difference in an inner city school can’t help himself? What if his savior is one of his students — a mouthy, intelligent 13-year old who appears to be headed down the wrong path herself?

Although these are very interesting questions, they never get resolved. Instead, we get a few brilliant scenes interspersed with two hours of blurry cinematography. Fleck and his co-writer Anna Boden have created characters that are never fully able to express themselves because of Half-Nelson’s lacking script.

Yet, despite these weaknesses, Gosling and his co-stars are able to make something magical out of a bad situation. Gosling and Shareeka Epps in particular each deliver performances that should be remembered come Oscar time.

Gosling shines as a man coming to terms with his own inadequacy. It is almost as if he is two people at once - an idealistic teacher and a disturbed addict. When one character possesses him, the other is right below the surface, pushing for equal air time. Yet, each movement, squint, and bead of sweat feels authentic.

In contrast, Epps as Drey, the 13-year-old student who befriends Dunne, exudes calm. She seems to know that she is in a bad situation — her brother is in prison and her mother works around the clock as an EMT. Yet, while Gosling’s character appears to have lost his battle for self-control, Drey is on the path to winning hers. She is able to convey subtle emotion at just the right time with the flick of an eyelash. However, she is not just a pre-naturally old adult. When she deviates from her stoic gaze and smiles or laughs, the character still feels authentic. There are a lot of school movies with stoic, noble black students as characters — Dangerous Minds, Lean on Me, Music of the Heart, etc. Yet, what makes Epps’ performance so special is that she is able to take the stock movie role and make the character feel like a real person and not a Hollywood stock role.

Although Gosling and Epps face an uphill battle garnering nominations due to the small distribution of their film, if nominated, they both have an excellent chance of winning. Gosling is the second legitimate best actor candidate this season behind Forest Whitaker. Epps is the only true supporting actress contender so far this season. They both deserve to be on the red carpet February 25th.

Kate Winslet’s character Ann Stanton lies in bed, voluptuous and vulnerable, her exquisite face flushed, her hands bashfully covering her naked breasts. She looks over expectantly at Jude Law’s Jack Burden, her eyes offering him the world. But Burden demurs. Later, he explains, in one of the film’s many ponderous voice overs, that he chose to deny himself the fleeting pleasure of a romantic tryst, so as to preserve their friendship.

This scene, in one dull thud, sums up the primary weakness of Steven Zaillian’s handsomely mounted, but emotionally inert adaptation of the classic novel, “All the King’s Men.” Zaillian really should have surrendered to his baser instincts. There is an undeniable joy in watching a “rise and fall” movie, in which the young idealist achieves his lofty goals only to lose himself along the way. From Robert Redford’s befuddled senate candidate in “The Candidate” to Charlie Sheen’s stock-broker-turned-swindler in “Wall Street” to Peter O’Toole’s beautiful dreamer in “Lawrence of Arabia” who eventually stumbles out of the vast desert, defeated, moviegoers love to watch idealism incrementally surrendered in exchange for wealth and status.

It is shameful, but undeniable; we love to see the do-gooder do wrong. But Zaillian is too coy to provide his audience with such a vulgar pleasure.

Instead, he shows us idealistic crusader Willie Stark’s (Sean Penn) rise from small town treasurer to governor, then skips ahead to five years after the election, at which time he is teetering on the brink of an impeachment on corruption charges. We do not know with what he is specifically charged or even whether he is corrupt at all. If he is corrupt, was he just cutting corners to further the public good? Did he become corrupt overnight or did he slowly sink into the murk? Or were these corruption charges invented by the conservative legislature in order to stymie Stark’s costly public works initiatives?

Rather than focusing on Stark, the story turns on Burden, Stark’s political operative, and his efforts at digging up dirt on Judge Irwin (Anthony Hopkins). Irwin, a respected public figure and a father figure to Burden, has called for Stark’s ouster, and Stark hopes to use whatever smears Burden can unearth to blackmail Irwin into opposing the impeachment.

Because Zaillian is so withholding as to Stark’s true nature, it is hard for the audience to decide how we feel about Stark and Burden’s scheme. Stark, at least in the beginning, seems genuinely committed to the state’s desperate have-nots. If Stark is trying to survive the impeachment in order to build roads, schools and a full-service hospital for the poor, then perhaps these noble ends justify Burden’s blackmailing means. However, if Stark only sees these public works as an opportunity to line his pockets and further his career, then Stark and Burden’s actions are truly despicable. The audience never knows Stark well enough to know what is at stake.

Even more baffling is why Burden is in league with Stark in the first place. If Burden is from a privileged family, why is he working for a rabble-rousing hick like Stark? Likewise, why does Burden participate in a blackmail scheme meant to advantage aforementioned hick at the expense of Irwin, a deeply moral man who raised Burden like his own son?

While the film tells the audience too little, the film’s score tries to tell us too much, as if trying to make up for the script’s failings. Horns swell, strings moan, all in a manipulative effort to inform the audience how to feel about every character, every scene, every line.

Sadly, several top drawer performances are wasted in this muddled effort. Penn’s Stark is magnetic, a perfect mix of backwoods backslapper and arrogant political puppeteer. His stump speeches are eloquent populist screeds, delivered in a ferocious howl… I would vote for him. Patricia Clarkson’s performance as a political fixer crackles with intelligence and verve, and Anthony Hopkins underplays Irwin, radiating a quiet integrity that serves as the film’s ethical core. Jude Law is at his best in the film’s beginning when Burden is a cynical wag, more amused than outraged by the political machinations that surround him. But, as he is drawn deeper into the blackmail plot, his twinkling eyes turn beady and bloodshot, and his sneer turns to a pout. It is as if Zaillian’s chief direction to his star is “seethe, damn you, seethe.”

Law’s very capable seething aside, the audience is left to fight off sleep and wish that they could have, at the very least, seen Law and Winslet get it on.

Well by now, you all have heard that Ben Affleck captured Best Actor honors at the Venice Film Festival. No, it is not a misprint. The Italians apparently really love him. But how does this bear on his chances for an Academy Award? Is he automatically in the running for a nomination, or should we simply chalk this up as a fluke?

The short answer is that Big Ben should probably not be making tuxedo reservations for next March. At least not yet. First of all, Affleck’s portrayal of George Reeves in Hollywoodland is clearly a supporting, as opposed to lead role. Adrien Brody, who plays the investigator attempting to unravel the mystery, is the central character of the film and commands more screen time. Speaking of which, on a unrelated note, doesn’t it just make you chuckle to hear promoters tout Hollywoodland as featuring “Academy Award winner Adrien Brody AND Academy Award winner Ben Affleck? One won for his brilliant portrayal of a doomed pianist in a Holocaust drama. The other happened to be buddies with Matt Damon.

Back to the subject at hand. Assuming Affleck gets correctly slotted in the supporting actor category, he will face some stiff competition. Eddie Murphy has already been receiving tremendous buzz for his turn in Dreamgirls. You have an entire boatload of promising young actors vying for their breakout performance in Eastwood’s Flags of Our Fathers. And well respected actors like Jack Nicholson, Christian Bale, Tobey McGuire, Jude Law, Robert De Niro, and Tim Robbins all have movies coming out. Can the personable Mr. Affleck really put himself in the same league as these heavyweights?

To answer that question, we have to look more closely at Affleck’s actual performance. In Hollywoodland, Affleck assumes the role of Superman George Reeves. In the beginning of the film, he’s a young actor struggling with whether or not he has the actual talent to make it in Hollywood. Later on, once he lands the role of Superman, he is forced to deal with the price of fame. Toward the end of the film, his career is on a downward spiral, and he tries his best to ignore the criticism and snickering from people around him. Hmmm. Do a few things sound familiar here? You think there is a reason Eminem didn’t get nominated for playing a white rapper in 8 Mile?

In all fairness, Affleck’s performance is not bad. In fact, it is pretty good. But that begs the question: compared to what? Had Affleck ran around in tights for 90 minutes without uttering a word, he would probably top his performance in Gigli or Surviving Christmas. Paycheck and Reindeer Games didn’t quite involve a ton of dramatic interpretation. Pearl Harbor? Well, let’s just say there’s something amiss when your co-star is Josh Hartnett and he gets all the buzz. Bounce was a vastly underrated film and critics praised the connection between Affleck and the character played by Gwyneth Paltrow. Seriously though, how hard is it to have chemistry with someone you used to seriously date?

Finally, the quality of the film itself often determines whether or not performances are singled out for recognition. In this regard, Affleck better be pleased he’s received any award at all. Hollywoodland is a mess. The film is a maze of various subplots and storylines that don’t amount to anything. The deliberate pacing of the film is worse than if it were directed by Robert Redford. And there is absolutely no payoff in the end. Basically, it’s two hours (which feels like four) and you’ve learned nothing more than when the opening credits appeared.

Perhaps this is still hope for Ben Affleck. After all, he is only in his early thirties and you never know - the role of a lifetime may be just around the corner. Maybe it will come from Matt Damon’s computer again, once he decides to stop making a half dozen movies a year. But for now, when it comes to this year’s Academy Awards, we’re not dealing with no ESPN boxing reality series. Sorry Ben, but you’re just another pretender.