You might notice a film in theatres tomorrow that proves otherwise, but Julianne Moore is normally dynamite on screen. Following her first critically noteworthy performance as Marian Wyman in Robert Altman’s “Short Cuts” in 1993, Moore went on to star in countless memorable roles: “The End of the Affair’s” Sarah Miles, Linda Partridge in “Magnolia”, Julian in “Children of Men” and Nancy Donovan in NBC’s “30 Rock”.

Kristen Stewart as Lydia (left) and Julianne Moore as Alice, give compelling performances in “Still Alice”, a film about a woman’s struggle with Alzheimer’s disease. (photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Classic)

And her Oscar-nominated role as Alice Howland, a linguistics professor suddenly diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease, continues her long tradition of amazing performances. Based on Lisa Genova’s 2007 novel of the same name, “Still Alice” is a remarkable story about one woman’s struggle to maintain her identity amid one of the most tragic diseases. But like most stories about Alzheimer’s, family members seemingly suffer the most. The first casualty is eldest daughter, Anna (Kate Bosworth), who doesn’t know how to cope with any of it.

Even Alice’s loving husband, John (Alec Baldwin), finds his marriage vows tested. The one truly heroic family member is the daughter with whom Alice often butted heads, Lydia (Kristen Stewart). While the film mostly focuses on Alice, the two share some compelling moments on screen.

High praise doesn’t quite cover Moore’s acting chops here. But she has always known how to transform herself on screen. It’s just much more biting in such a heavy film. She is a clear favorite for the Academy Awards, but Rosamund Pike, in “Gone Girl”, would be my top pick, because she portrayed such an obscure character.

Be warned, “Still Alice” isn’t an easy film to watch. But unlike others that focus on the pain of such conditions — 2012’s Best Picture nom “Amour” still traumatizes me — this isn’t just a story of tragedy. The filmmakers strike a pleasant balance, resulting in something that is challenging but ultimately remarkable. No spoilers, but the ending is truly incredible.

I didn’t expect to enjoy “Wild” at all. Reese Witherspoon is always adorable on screen, but she rarely leads the show to lasting effect. I was mistaken, but I shouldn’t be surprised since the film is directed by Jean-Marc Vallée, the brilliant mind behind 2013’s “Dallas Buyers Club”.

If you saw the trailer, you probably shared my disinterest. In response to recent tragedy, Cheryl (Witherspoon) embarks on a solo hike across more than 1,000 miles. In such a grand solitude, she has no choice but to face personal demons thanks to infidelity and drug addiction and what led her to several bad life choices. Why did her marriage to Paul (Thomas Sadoski) fail? Where’s her estranged brother, Leif (Keene McRae)? And how can she live a fulfilling life without her mother (Laura Dern)? She has several months of travel to contemplate it all.

I’m not convinced Witherspoon truly earns the Best Performance nom. She’s adequate, but the top performers here are both the director and screenwriter, Nick Hornby. This could have been a very dull affair indeed, but Hornby’s writing, brought to life by Vallée, transforms into visual intrigue.

The flashbacks and voiceovers, two of the most contrived tools of lazy filmmakers, work well here. They don’t merely explain what the film can’t visually show, they accentuate Cheryl’s journey like the first-person narration of a novel.

Side note: If Hornby is a new name, go buy “High Fidelity” or “About a Boy”, two of his novels adapted into rather charming films. He doesn’t write many screenplays, but he does already have one Oscar nom under his belt for “An Education”, and he deserved another one this year over at least two current picks, namely “The Theory of Everything” and “American Sniper”.

No offense to those flicks, but “Wild” is a far better piece of writing.

You might break into tears a few times throughout “Wild”, but it’s far easier to enjoy than “Still Alice”. I’d even say it’s a far better crafted film, though Moore’s performance is incomparable.

The only real criticism I have for “Wild” might seem harsh; it’s not worth seeing more than once. Well crafted, acted and edited –– but Jungian stories of individuation in which protagonists must leave society and learn to survive alone before returning to civilization as fully realized agents aren’t always captivating.

They’re educational and thoughtful, but they’re rather like Cheryl’s 1,000-mile trek: once is enough.