Matt vs. the Academy

2006 - Babel

2012-01-23T16:38:00.001-05:00

Well, that was an unexpectedly lengthy hiatus. Late December contained a fair bit of catering work for me, plus a new job that was initially intended to be part time, but somehow took over every waking moment of my life until this past weekend. The timing couldn't have been better, though, since tomorrow morning the Oscar nominations will be announced, allowing just enough time to get my predictions in order. If you're interested, here are my somewhat educated guesses as to which films will be cited by the Academy.

The Best Supporting Actor contest was by far the toughest to figure out. It could go a number of different ways. If I were braver, I would have backed Jim Broadbent to upset Jonah Hill by taking that final spot ... but I'm not brave. And keep in mind, the Best Picture category will have somewhere between five and ten nominees. I have listed ten predictions in order of nomination likelihood. I'll let the rest of the predictions speak for themselves for now, and over the next month, leading up to the ceremony, I'll discuss the race in more detail.

Meanwhile, to kick us off for the new year, we take a look at the first of 2006's Best Picture contenders...

Babel
Director:
Alejandro González Iñárritu
Screenplay:
Guillermo Arriaga
(based on an idea by Arriaga and Iñárritu)
Starring:
Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Gael García Bernal, Kôji Yakusho, Adriana Barraza, Rinko Kikuchi
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
1 win, for Best Original Score

With interconnected stories taking place across three continents in several languages, Babel is certainly diverse. In Morocco, a goat herder buys a rifle, giving it to his two young sons and instructing them to kill jackals. The boys test out the weapon's range by taking pot shots at a tour bus in the distance. Meanwhile, Richard (Pitt) and Susan (Blanchett) are vacationing in Morocco as a way to deal with the sudden death of their baby a few months ago. The trip is anything but healing, however, when Susan is unluckily shot in the shoulder while on the tour bus, the nearest hospital four hours away. In the USA, Amelia (Barraza), Richard's and Susan's nanny, is now left to take care of their two children despite needing to attend her own son's wedding in Mexico. After several unsuccessful attempts at finding someone to watch the kids, she has no option but to bring them across the border with her. In Japan, Chieko (Kikuchi), a troubled deaf-mute girl, is desperate for a sexual awakening. She is coping with the tragic suicide of her mother almost a year ago and a strained relationship with her father (Yakuhso), who, as it turns out, recently took a hunting trip to Morocco, gifting his rifle to his guide.

Babel is high-stakes drama at its most intense. From being stranded in remote Morocco without the necessary medical assistance to being stranded in the Southern Californian desert with two young children, the picture unfurls one life-changing (and life-threatening) scene after another. The urgency is conveyed expertly by the film makers, creating an edge-of-your-seat, involving cinematic experience.

In a way, all the major events that occur in the Morocco and US/Mexico stories might make Chieko's story seem frivolous. But far from being a tale of a young girl who just wants to get laid, hers is perhaps the most intimate exploration of the human condition since there is more time in her story thread to dig deep. She doesn't have the same urgent necessity that befalls the other characters in the film, who are often literally scrambling for their lives, yet her desperate need for male attention could be seen as her attempt, however misguided, to save herself from suffering the same fate as her mother.

The main theme of the film, as I see it, is the unfortunate lack of compassion we all have for other people's problems. The title seems to reference the Tower of Babel, the biblical story of how mankind was given myriad languages, thus preventing us from understanding each other. Yet in this story, language is ultimately not the barrier to understanding. While speaking different languages makes things more difficult, it's a problem easily overcome by translators (or notepads in the case of the deaf characters). The real obstacle to understanding is inconsideration. Each character is so caught up in his or her own issues that they are unable to see the problems of others, no matter how much more or less significant they may be. Despite their desperation to be understood, they rarely attempt to understand, often resulting in actions that merely blow situations unnecessarily out of proportion.

Shot on location in the four countries depicted, there is a genuineness to Babel, enhanced by the use of local actors, who are all simply amazing. Brad Pitt (pictured) delivers a superb performance in an intensely challenging role. But it was two supporting actresses who received Oscar nominations, Rinko Kikuchi and Adriana Barraza, both deservedly cited for their excellent work.

Best Picture of 1929/30

2011-12-11T17:07:00.000-05:00

One of the things I'm enjoying about this silly little project is the opportunity to watch some of cinema's early offerings, an activity that I previously did not engage in very frequently. While it is clear to me that my tastes lie with slightly more modern filmmaking, I am always pleasantly surprised by how fascinating I find some of these vintage pictures, and even more surprised when I come across a forgotten gem. I may not have uncovered one of those gems with the current crop of films under review, but they each contained elements worth appreciating and I'm genuinely glad to have experienced them.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1929/30 are:

All Quiet on the Western Front
The Big House
Disraeli
The Divorcee
The Love Parade

When sound was introduced to moving pictures in the late 1920s, it forced a change not only in the obvious technical aspects of filmmaking but also in the conventions that cinema used to tell a story. It took a few years for those conventions to be perfected - in fact, the style and form of cinema is constantly evolving - and the five films up for Best Picture here unfortunately show some signs of that lack of experience. Technique issues aside, however, they each manage to offer an engaging story.

The Love Parade includes many funny moments but its main flaw is that it is musically dull, rather a fatal issue for a musical. Disraeli is a fascinating study of a political figure but its wordiness can be a bit trying at times, especially in light of its mostly static staging. Prison genre pioneer The Big House possessed the potential to be far more gripping but it nonetheless includes an exciting climax.

The two nominees left to duke it out are the straightforward storytelling of The Divorcee, a personal exploration of a troubled relationship, and the epic storytelling of All Quiet on the Western Front, a personal exploration of troubled soldiers. The latter was the Academy's choice and, perhaps not coincidentally, is the only film of the five that has retained any decent recognition among modern audiences. As an epic, it is arguably the most theatrical of the nominees, but in spite of that - or perhaps because of it - it is also the most emotionally powerful. Thus, as so often is the case, the bigger film wins out. All Quiet on the Western Front shall be named my favourite Best Picture nominee from 1929/30.

Best Picture of 1929/30
*Academy's choice:* All Quiet on the Western Front	Matt's choice: All Quiet on the Western Front

Your choice:

I suspect many of you may not have had the chance to see all five of these films, but it seems incredibly unlikely that every Academy member sees all the nominees before they vote so I'm certainly not going to disqualify you from taking part in the irrelevant poll above. Next up, we move back to much more recent times with fine selection of modern cinema.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 2006 are:

Babel
The Departed
Letters from Iwo Jima
Little Miss Sunshine
The Queen

Unlike the previous year of review, all of these films are very easily accessible so why not follow along with me. In fact, all five of the 2006 nominees are available to watch instantly on Amazon. Just click on the links below.

1929/30 - The Big House

2011-12-06T21:23:00.000-05:00

I'm very happy to report that The Artist is a fantastic and innovative film, certainly worthy of its recent recognition. Thoroughly enjoyable, the film makes clever use of its genre and, let's face it, it's difficult not to be unique when you make a film in a genre that hasn't been around for 80 years. Anyway, you should do whatever you can to see The Artist. Undoubtedly, this clever film will be mentioned a lot in the coming months.

As we wind down the current year of review, don't forget to cast your vote for the next one. The poll is in the sidebar on the right hand side of your screen. But you knew that already.

The final film for us to have a look at from 1929/30's slate of Best Picture nominees is...

The Big House
Director:
George Hill
Screenplay:
Frances Marion, Joe Farnham, Martin Flavin
Starring:
Chester Morris, Wallace Beery, Lewis Stone, Robert Montgomery, Leila Hyams, George F. Marion, J.C. Nugent, DeWitt Jennings
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
2 wins, including Best Writing

Kent (Montgomery) arrives in prison for his first day of a ten year sentence for manslaughter after a drunk driving accident. His cellmates are two hot shots of the block, the intelligent and level-headed Morgan (Morris) and the uneducated murderous thug Butch (Beery). Kent struggles to fit in at first and finds himself further ostracised when he sets up Morgan to take the blame for a hidden knife. The incident results in Morgan being sent to solitary the day before he is due to be released on parole. He vows to get even with Kent and, after cleverly escaping prison, he tracks down Kent's beautiful sister Anne (Hyams). However, his desire for vengeance slowly dissipates as he falls for Anne and realises how important Kent is to her and her family.

While an engaging story, The Big House has some pacing issues. Potentially gripping dramatic conflicts are often glossed over far too quickly, occasionally leaving the feeling that we are merely watching a series of plot points. It would be far more interesting to see the characters struggle with their decisions and actions but too often they are given a less than appropriate time frame to do so.

It's actually quite a shame because the narrative otherwise holds our attention well and the climax is incredibly exciting. So, if there had been more emotional depth to the way the characters were written, this picture could really have been a classic. As it stands, however, the film still holds a place in film lore as being somewhat responsible for the popularity of the prison genre. It was one of the first of its kind to explore the harsh conditions of prison life and, in that regard, it is successfully fascinating. Nonetheless, some of the questionably superficial dialogue doesn't help its cause. When the warden tells his assistant that the inmates are planning an uprising at noon, the assistant checks his watch and exclaims, "Noon? That's one minute!"

Chester Morris (pictured, with Beery) is the stand out among the cast with his confident presence as Morgan. Wallace Beery's constant "Who? Me?" catchphrase is mostly caricature but he is appropriately cast, earning the film's only acting nomination. And Robert Montgomery is effective as the foolishly naive Kent. Both Montgomery and Morris also appeared in fellow 1929/30 Best Picture nominee The Divorcee, playing roles with interestingly similar social statuses to their characters here. Incidentally, after I downloaded this film from iTunes, I noticed they had incorrectly listed the director of The Big House as George Roy Hill (famed for helming The Sting and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid) rather than its actual director, known simply as George Hill.

1929/30 - Disraeli

2011-11-30T16:08:00.000-05:00

Awards season has begun, which unashamedly makes me giddy. I've already seen a lot of the films that could potentially be recognised over the coming months but there are still plenty to go. One that I am particularly looking forward to is The Artist, especially after being named the favourite of the New York Film Critics yesterday. I'll be attending a screening of it (sadly, sans Q&A) on Friday, and will report on its merit soon.

Time now to discuss another nominee from the 1929/30 Best Picture contest...

Disraeli
Director:
Alfred E. Green
Screenplay:
Julien Josephson
(based on the play by Louis N. Parker)
Starring:
George Arliss, Joan Bennett, Florence Arliss, Anthony Bushell, David Torrence, Ivan F. Simpson, Doris Lloyd
Academy Awards:
3 nominations
1 win, for Best Actor (Arliss)

19th century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (Arliss) is having a tough time of it. His political rival, William Gladstone, has helped to undercut Disraeli's plans for a more far-reaching British Empire. But when Egypt puts the Suez Canal on the market, Disraeli sets his sights on purchasing it in order to secure control of India. Only trouble is the head of the Bank of England (Torrence) won't release the needed funds. Not one to give up, Disraeli calls upon wealthy Jewish banker Hugh Meyers (Simpson) for a loan and, with the help of his aide Charles (Bushell), Disraeli makes every last effort to ensure the transaction is successful.

With a generous helping of dialogue, the film's genesis as a play is unmistakable. There is very little action among the mostly political discussions until at least an hour into the story when a sense of urgency is finally introduced. At this point, the tale becomes exponentially more involving. Interestingly, the plot devices used are incredibly similar to those of farce, just without the humour. Disreali observes a foreign agent sneak an important piece of paper into her sleeve and excuse herself so she can secretly read it. Our inimitable hero ushers one of his allies to pester the rival, making sure she is not alone. It's like a doorless version of Noises Off. While exciting, this sequence is clearly far from historically accurate, along with much of the film's story, I imagine. The spy element, in particular, seems rather unlikely. Nonetheless, the picture is certainly not intended to be a documentary.

One of the more realistic elements of Disraeli, namely his apparent struggle against anti-Semitism, is treated with subtlety. The film does, however, present an interesting take on women's rights. Disraeli seems somewhat enlightened in terms of allowing women to remain present when political secrets are being discussed, yet his wife tells the story of how she suffered in silence after having her finger slammed in a door. She stifled her anguish, not wanting to bother her husband. With no sense of irony, everyone agrees that this was a "wonderful thing" for her to do.

You will probably find parts of this picture dull, but it is certainly worth watching, if for George Arliss's (pictured) intelligent performance alone. He became the first British actor to win an Oscar, and was arguably also the first to benefit from the Academy's penchant for transformational character work.

1929/30 - All Quiet on the Western Front

2011-11-22T20:40:00.000-05:00

As a member of the Screen Actors Guild, I get invitations to all sorts of special screenings during awards season, no doubt intended to influence my vote at the SAG Awards. Idealistic as I am, I remain staunchly subjective, despite being offered free popcorn and soft drinks. I mean, I'll take the free popcorn and soft drinks - and anything else you're willing to offer me, for that matter - but no amount of bribery will make me write your film's name down on my ballot ... except, perhaps, if you offered me a role in your next film. That might do it.

In the last couple of weeks, I've heard fascinating insight into the makings of three films vying for accolades this season. First, Albert Nobbs, a moving but rather contrived film. Its flaws are forgiven, however, due to impressive performances by Glenn Close and Janet McTeer, both present for the Q & A. Next, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, a complicated and moody spy thriller, made all the more complicated by a terrible viewing perspective in the front row. Some faces were seemingly distorted so drastically that it was difficult to distinguish actors from each other. Nonetheless, a front-row seat meant that, during the Q & A, I was closer to the cheekily relaxed Colin Firth and the surprisingly stuttering Gary Oldman. Finally, Hugo, a visually breathtaking 3D extravaganza that is part children's movie, part homage to early cinema. Clearly, the producers took out all the stops for this screening. It was held at the magnificent Ziegfeld in Manhattan, where guests were treated to free popcorn and drinks, followed by a Q & A attended by no less than five of the cast - Ben Kingsley, Sacha Baron Cohen, Emily Mortimer, Chloe Grace Moretz and Asa Butterfield - plus the screenwriter, John Logan.

We now take a look at the Academy's pick for Best Picture of 1929/30...

All Quiet on the Western Front
Director:
Lewis Milestone
Screenplay:
George Abbott, Maxwell Anderson, Del Andrews
(based on the novel by Erich Maria Remarque)
Starring:
Louis Wolheim, Lew Ayres, John Wray, Arnold Lucy, Ben Alexander, Scott Kolk, Owen Davis, Jr., Walter Rogers, William Bakewell, Russell Gleason, Richard Alexander, Harold Goodwin, Slim Summerville
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
2 wins, including Best Picture and Best Director

Paving the way for many anti-war films that followed, All Quiet on the Western Front is the story of a bunch of German high school boys who enlist in the army at the outset of World War I after an impassioned and patriotic speech by their teacher. At basic training, the young men are naively itching to get to the action, but once on the front, they quickly discover that war is not in the least bit exciting. It is tedious and dirty and psychologically damaging. The men are often hungry and tired, continually questioning the purpose of their exhaustion.

From the opening caption, there is no question as to what message this picture conveys. There is a veritable onslaught of "war is bad" moments and the poignancy with which that message is presented is rather overt. Nonetheless, it is indeed poignant. It is difficult not to be moved by the plight of Paul (Ayres), who after stabbing an enemy soldier in a foxhole, is forced to watch him die over the next few hours.

For a film of its era, it is commendably realistic in its portrayal of warfare. The in-your-face style of its battle sequences surely makes it the Saving Private Ryan of its day. The realism is, however, almost shot to pieces by the simplistically written characters. All the new recruits are naively idealistic and barely distinguishable from each other. So much so that they often behave as one, ducking in unison at the sound of artillery shells and complaining of hunger in a simultaneous barrage. In fact, when a couple of characters eventually become recognisable as distinct personalities, their most distinguishing trait is that they are not dead.

Furthermore, the performances are largely over the top, even for 1930 standards. Ayres (pictured) is particularly exaggerated, though he redeems himself late in the film during a touching scene in the classroom. Louis Wolheim and Slim Summerville deliver the most memorable performances for my taste, possibly because the humour of their characters allows them to get away with more theatricality.

Despite my criticisms, All Quiet on the Western Front is a thoughtfully directed and provocative film with many significantly powerful moments. Its issues may simply be a sign of its times.

1929/30 - The Divorcee

2011-11-13T23:50:00.000-05:00

More celebrity shoulder-rubbing stories from this past week at work. I poured some water for Andie MacDowell, was thanked by Jimmy Fallon, and witnessed a live performance by Coldplay. Other attendees that I spotted at these events were Julianna Margulies, Taraji P. Henson, Alec Baldwin, Steve Martin, John McEnroe, Lorne Michaels, Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. Here endeth the name-dropping.

Don't forget to vote for the next year of review for Matt vs. the Academy. The poll is in the right sidebar.

Next up in the contenders vying for 1929/30's Best Picture prize is...

The Divorcee
Director:
Robert Z. Leonard
Screenplay:
Nick Grindé, Zelda Sears and John Meehan
(based on the novel "Ex-Wife" by Ursula Parrott)
Starring:
Norma Shearer, Chester Morris, Conrad Nagel, Robert Montgomery, Florence Eldridge
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
1 win, for Best Actress (Shearer)

You would be hard pressed to find another film with such a spoiler for a title. The leading lady, Jerry (Shearer), doesn't actually become a divorcee until two-thirds of the way into the story. After marrying former lothario Ted (Morris), she is devastated to learn of his infidelity. Ted is remorseful, asserting that his fling meant nothing and that an affair need not end a marriage. His opinion is quickly reversed, however, when Jerry confesses to an affair of her own. They are summarily divorced and Jerry must now figure out what she really wants out of life.

The Divorcee is melodrama, but it is good melodrama. One might even say that it is restrained melodrama, if that's not an oxymoron. Granted, it is laboured at times. There are even a couple of instances in which dramatic pauses have been quite obviously inserted artificially by the editor. However, the result is a healthy amount of dramatic tension that, for the most part, remains subdued. Yes, the characters are emotionally volatile but there is a pleasing lack of over-the-top explosive arguments.

With a mostly straightforward storyline that grows a little more complex in the final act, The Divorcee is essentially an in-depth exploration of a relationship tainted by infidelity. The script itself is cleverly written and infused with wit. Note, for example, the way in which Jerry admits her adultery by using the phrase, "I've balanced our accounts." Then again, that wit is occasionally offset by some downright strange lines, such as the romantically intended, "I'd like to make love to you 'til you scream for help."

On DVD, The Divorcee is featured in a collection entitled Forbidden Hollywood (which you can buy by clicking on the Amazon link below - pardon the seamless plug), a set that includes films with subject matter that would undoubtedly have been unacceptable once the Motion Picture Production Code was enforced in Hollywood in the mid-1930s. However, as far as Pre-Code films go, this picture is relatively tame. In fact, director Robert Z. Leonard utilises some clever visual techniques that were in abundant use once censorship outlawed anything sexual. When Jerry commits her unfaithful deed, all the audience sees is a curtain closing over the bedroom window. Later, when Jerry is enjoying her bachelorette lifestyle, there is a montage which consists solely of close-ups of her hands being held by a series of different men. Of course, while these scenes themselves may have satisfied the Code's guidelines, the promiscuous behaviour enjoyed by the main character would certainly have been a no-no. Particularly since that behaviour goes unpunished.

Norma Shearer (pictured) won a Best Actress Oscar for her astute portrayal of a woman dealing with life's punches. Her supporting cast delivers a number of intelligent performances, but my favourite is Robert Montgomery, who is shrewdly funny as the calmly neurotic (another oxymoron?) Don.

1929/30 - The Love Parade

2011-11-09T18:34:00.001-05:00

Last Friday, I finally got around to redeeming a gift certificate that my darling wife had given me for my birthday in February. Yes, I am the king of procrastination. The gift certificate entitled me to a full body massage at a local spa, which, through no fault of the massage therapist, turned out to be an entire hour of cringing discomfort. To be fair, that's essentially how I've felt every time I've received a professional massage. It's not that I'm prudish. Oddly, lying almost naked while a stranger rubs his hands all over me doesn't really bother me. It's the pain that bothers me. The digging, the pinching, the grinding - all actions I'd rather not experience. You might ask, "Well, Matt, why don't you just ask the massage therapist to give you a softer massage?" Well, that would involve confrontation, silly. Instead, I just lie there with my face, hidden from my tormentor's view, scrunched in near agony. And when it's not unbearably painful, it's unbearably ticklish. For some reason, the backs of my knees are unusually sensitive. But, again, rather than risk the inevitable embarrassment of flinching when his hands tickle my knee-backs, I concentrate with every fibre of my being to remain uncomfortably still. The entire experience is, in a nutshell, full of tension, both physically and metaphorically, which is surely the exact opposite of the intended result. I am possibly the only person on the planet who requires some relaxation after a massage.

Kicking off our look at the Best Picture contest of 1929/30 is...

The Love Parade
Director:
Ernst Lubitsch
Screenplay:
Guy Bolton and Ernest Vajda
(based on the play "The Prince Consort" by Jules Chancel and Leon Xanrof)
Starring:
Maurice Chevalier, Jeanette McDonald, Lupino Lane, Lillian Roth, Eugene Pallette, E.H. Calvert, Edgar Norton, Lionel Belmore
Academy Awards:
6 nominations
0 wins

Paris - the most romantic city in the world. Perfectly suited to the philandering lifestyle of Count Alfred Renard (Chevalier), the military attaché to the Sylvanian Embassy. His womanising exploits cause much scandal, however, eventually boiling over when he is caught in a romantic encounter with the Ambassador's wife. He is sent back to Sylvania to answer to Queen Louise (McDonald), who is conveniently unable to find a suitable husband for herself, mostly because no man desires to live in deference to her. Alfred and Louise quickly fall for each other, but making a royal marriage work proves difficult for the former Casanova, especially as he is given little respect and no power.

There are several genuinely funny moments in The Love Parade, beginning with a chuckle-worthy opening scene involving a fake suicide. The rest of the film features some great visual gags (an entire military squadron ordered to tiptoe as they march so they don't wake the Queen) and even some clever wordplay (Alfred's ludicrous explanation of why he has a French accent). Thus, as a comedy, The Love Parade succeeds quite well. As a musical, however, not so much.

Even taking into account the fact that the musical film genre had not quite perfected itself yet, there is something unsatisfying about most of the musical numbers. The lyrics are almost at the level of a Gershwin or a Berlin, but the music is bland and not at all catchy. Plus, the static visual style in which the songs are presented is a missed opportunity. I understand that, at a time when talking pictures were still a novelty, simply hearing people sing on film must have seemed interesting enough, but in this case, the audience might as well have been listening to a gramophone. It is perhaps not surprising to learn that this film is director Ernst Lubitsch's first foray into sound. The only exception to all this musical drabness is the number Let's Be Common, which features the humorous acrobatics of an energetic Lupino Lane.

Maurice Chevalier (pictured) exudes a boyish charm that is hard to dislike and his comic talents are finely displayed, earning him a Best Actor nomination. Jeanette McDonald is surprisingly natural in her debut film, after several years in the theatre. Here, she is provided with the opportunity to showcase what an amazing set of pipes she has. Also of note is Lupino Lane, who is as funny as he is agile.

All in all, The Love Parade is a relatively simple story that, despite some slow points, is worth viewing. If you can get past the flat musicality and the questionably chauvinistic resolution, you will more than likely find plenty to make you laugh.

Best Picture of 1998

2011-10-29T01:57:00.000-04:00

I remember the 1998 Best Picture race well. Saving Private Ryan was the hot favourite to win for most of the season, right up until just before the ceremony. I recall reading the predictions of a possible upset by Shakespeare In Love but couldn't believe it would happen. The Spielberg film was my pick, both for my own personal favourite and for the Academy's favourite, and it just made no sense that a light-hearted period rom-com would best it. Having watched all five nominees again over recent weeks, let's see if my feelings have changed.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1998 are:

Elizabeth
Life Is Beautiful
Saving Private Ryan
Shakespeare In Love
The Thin Red Line

Two of these contenders take place during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, but that is about all they have in common. The other three take place during World War II, two of which are ripe for comparison. Both The Thin Red Line and Saving Private Ryan deal with the personal journeys of soldiers in battle, and somehow these two films created a pseudo-rivalry for film buffs. You're either a Thin Red Line kind of movie lover, or you're a Saving Private Ryan kind of movie lover. Whatever the implications, I think I can attest to the fact that I am not the former. I struggled with The Thin Red Line. It contained some gripping sequences but it's rambling nature left me wanting. Elizabeth is next to be removed from the running. While still a fascinating film with terrific production values, there is something about it that doesn't quite hit the spot. Not a particularly intelligible reason, I know, but nonetheless, we are left with three.

Due to my support of Saving Private Ryan, I think I may have irrationally held a grudge against Shakespeare In Love for many years. Watching it again, I am happy to be reminded of what a charmingly enjoyable film it is. While I still wouldn't select it as my favourite, I am content with the Academy's decision. The year's Best Foreign Language Film winner, Life Is Beautiful, is next to go, despite being a superbly unique film that is both hilarious and heartbreaking.

I must point out how close both Life Is Beautiful and Shakespeare In Love came to taking my top prize, much closer than I remembered. Ultimately, however, I am sticking with my pick from 13 years ago and calling Saving Private Ryan my favourite from 1998. Although heavy with sentimentality, the D-Day sequence alone is almost enough for me to declare it the winner.

Best Picture of 1998
*Academy's choice:* Shakespeare In Love	Matt's choice: Saving Private Ryan

Your choice:

What kind of movie lover are you? Vote for your favourite 1998 Best Picture nominee above. I'm very interested in the results of this one. Next, we head back to the early days of the Oscars.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 1929/30 are:

All Quiet on the Western Front
The Big House
Disraeli
The Divorcee
The Love Parade

Some of these titles are a little harder to find than others. They're all available from Amazon in some form or another (just click on the links below), but undoubtedly, there are other places to go if you don't want to buy a box set just for one movie.

1998 - Saving Private Ryan

2011-10-25T12:08:00.000-04:00

As a waiter for a catering company, I am not usually called upon to do anything too tricky. I don't have to balance several plates along my forearm and I don't have to memorise a table full of orders. On the whole, the service is relatively simple. Occasionally, however, a client will request French service for their event, which requires a little more effort. Last night, I worked on one such event.

French service is inefficient, inconvenient and wholly unnecessary. Instead of sensibly serving plates with the food already placed on them by a professional chef, French service begins by serving empty plates to the guests. Then, the waiter carries a bulky tray of food and, while awkwardly squeezing between the seated guests, serves them individually at the table. In order to achieve this, it is necessary for the waiter to twist the fingers of one hand around two oversized serving utensils in a sort of demented chopstick fashion and scoop the food directly onto the guest's plate. It's awkward and uncomfortable for both server and guest. Just ask the lady into whose lap I placed a lamb chop.

The final nominee to review from 1998's Best Picture list is...

Saving Private Ryan
Director:
Steven Spielberg
Screenplay:
Robert Rodat
Starring:
Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore, Edward Burns, Barry Pepper, Adam Goldberg, Vin Diesel, Giovanni Ribisi, Jeremy Davies, Matt Damon, Ted Danson, Paul Giamatti
Academy Awards:
11 nominations
5 wins, including Best Director

When three brothers in the same family are killed in action during World War II, the US Army decides to give a reprieve to the fourth brother in the family, Private James Ryan (Damon). But first they have to find him. Heading the mission to locate Ryan is Captain Miller (Hanks), fresh from helping to secure Omaha Beach on D-Day. To achieve his mission, he brings along a diverse mix of soldiers, including his second in command (Sizemore), three riflemen (Burns, Goldberg, Diesel), a sniper (Pepper), a medic (Ribisi) and a translator (Davies). As they close in on Ryan's location, they deal with other deadly skirmishes, causing them to question the rationale in risking all eight of their lives in order to save one.

After a brief prologue, Saving Private Ryan begins with some of the most riveting cinema available to experience. The D-Day scene plants the audience right in the thick of the action, and subjects it to a barrage of constant intensity that does not let up for at least twenty minutes. A genuine tour-de-force of filmmaking, all the elements are brought together to create a phenomenally gripping sequence. Historically replicated art direction, unrelenting cinematography, emphatic sound design, energetic editing and harrowing special effects. The result is simply mind-blowing.

Undeniably, the picture wears its emotions on its sleeve. Right from the start, the prologue sets a particular tone, clearly intended to elicit action from our tear ducts. Perhaps not unfairly, the film has been criticised for its sentimentality - and it is, indeed, dripping with Hollywood sentiment - but those familiar with this blog will know that sentimentality goes down well with me. Besides, it is difficult to deny Spielberg's mastery, specifically his understanding of how to present a scene. And when compared to that other World War II film in competition for Best Picture in the same year - and such comparisons are rife - there is clearly a stark difference. Whereas The Thin Red Line was a rambling tale punctuated with poetry, Saving Private Ryan has a very clear story that the audience can get behind.

Tom Hanks offers a fine performance in a role which saw him nominated for Best Actor, the film's only acting citation. The motley band of soldiers are a great mix of young talented actors, a lot of whom were relative unknowns at the time - Burns, Pepper, Goldberg, Diesel, Ribisi, Davies, Damon. The underrated Tom Sizemore is terrific in a role that could be described as the sidekick. And Paul Giamatti is a treat, showing up in a small role.

1998 - Shakespeare In Love

2011-10-17T12:24:00.002-04:00

All too often, if given the choice, I would rather stay home and relax than go out and do something. Lazy? Probably. Hence, I'm always surprised at how much I actually enjoy going out and doing something. And living in New York City offers me many somethings to go out and do, and the more unique those somethings, the more I seem to enjoy them. On Friday afternoon, Kat and I took a trip to Lincoln Center to see the IBM Think Exhibit, an interactive multimedia presentation celebrating the way in which modern technology enriches our lives. Utterly fascinating. Later, we travelled downtown to catch a friend perform the title role in one of Shakespeare's most violent tragedies, Titus Andronicus. The following evening was spent attending another friend's performance of the wonderful O Sole Trio, a musical group offering a cabaret of opera, jazz and musical theatre with an Italian twist. Finally, on Sunday morning, we met some friends for brunch at the charming Silent Era-themed Astor Room, adjacent to the historic Kaufman-Astoria Studios. In fact, the restaurant stands on the site of the studio's former commissary. One can only imagine which stars passed through those walls.

Next to review of the 1998 nominees for Best Picture is the eventual winner...

Shakespeare In Love
Director:
John Madden
Screenplay:
Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard
Starring:
Gwyneth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes, Geoffrey Rush, Colin Firth, Ben Affleck, Judi Dench
Academy Awards:
13 nominations
7 wins, including Best Picture, Best Actress (Paltrow) and Best Supporting Actress (Dench)

As the title would suggest, Shakespeare In Love centres on the romantic exploits of the world's most famous playwright, William Shakespeare (Fiennes), and you know it's a comedy because our titular hero is referred to throughout as Will. As the story begins, he is suffering from a bad case of writer's block, struggling to develop his latest comedy, Romeo and Ethel the Pirate's Daughter. Philip Henslowe (Rush), the theatre owner who has commissioned Will's latest play, has some problems of his own, mostly financial, so he is in dire need of a big hit.

Meanwhile, the beautiful Viola de Lesseps (Paltrow) is simply itching to be an actress, thwarted by the seemingly insurmountable fact that only men are allowed on stage. Disguising herself as Thomas Kent, she auditions for and wins the role of Romeo, and when Will discovers this deceit, the two begin a forbidden love affair. Will is married, albeit estranged from his absent wife, and Viola has been promised to the stuffy Lord Wessex (Firth). Nonetheless, with his new muse, Will's creative spark returns to him and, with a much-needed title change, Romeo and Juliet begins to take shape.

Shakespeare In Love is undeniably fun. A light-hearted and romantic romp through the Elizabethan stage, it is filled with theatre humour and Shakespearean in-jokes, which, perhaps because I am an actor myself, I especially appreciated. (A particularly amusing moment occurs during a rehearsal, when the actor playing Tybalt swaggers in speaking his line with exaggerated vigour. Ned Alleyn as Mercutio breaks character, scoffs at his scene partner and says, "Are you going to do it like that?") While there are obviously many liberties taken with the story of Shakespeare's life, one can still glean a few nuggets of truth among the dramatic license. In fact, the entire tale is in effect a "what-if" story.

As expected with such period pieces, the design is sumptuous. It is interesting, however, to contrast this design to that of the other Elizabethan film in contention for Best Picture, Elizabeth, whose design is equally extravagant, yet with a dark focus that suits that film's mood. In Shakespeare In Love, the sets and costumes are bright and playful, adding an appropriate cheerfulness to the film.

Joseph Fiennes (pictured) and Gwyneth Paltrow are pleasant leads, lending the story an affable charm. Paltrow won the Best Actress Oscar which, in many people's opinion, including mine, should probably have gone to Cate Blanchett for her magnificent turn in Elizabeth. Still, Paltrow's performance here is hard to fault. She is warm and natural and altogether appropriate for the genre. With one of the shortest performances to be awarded an Oscar, Judi Dench was named Best Supporting Actress for her gleefully icy portrayal of Queen Elizabeth I. The only other acting nominee was Geoffrey Rush, delivering my favourite performance of the film as the sublimely goofy Philip Henslowe. The rest of the cast is filled with delightfully whimsical performers delivering delightfully whimsical performances - Colin Firth, Simon Callow, Tom Wilkinson, Rupert Everett, Imelda Staunton, Martin Clunes, Mark Williams. Even Ben Affleck successfully joins in the fun.

1998 - Life Is Beautiful

2011-10-04T23:10:00.000-04:00

Another name-dropping story: I once again had the simultaneously exciting and humbling experience of rubbing shoulders with celebrities while serving them dinner. At a charity event last night, I presented plates to both Matthew Broderick and Sarah Jessica Parker, who very politely offered a simple, "Thank you." See, kids? Fame doesn't mean you have to dispense with manners.

This past weekend, Kat and I sat down to watch another Best Picture contender from 1998...

Life Is Beautiful
Director:
Roberto Benigni
Screenplay:
Roberto Benigni
Starring:
Roberto Benigni, Nicoletta Braschi, Giorgio Cantarini, Giustino Durano, Sergio Bustric, Madre di Dora, Horst Buchholz
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
3 wins, including Best Actor (Benigni) and Best Foreign Language Film

Fun-loving Italian Guido Orefice (Benigni) and his good buddy Ferruccio (Bustric) arrive in Arezzo to try their luck in a big city ... well, biggish city. Almost immediately, Guido has a chance meeting with the beautiful schoolteacher Dora (Braschi), bumping into her (literally) a few more times before falling head over heels (literally) for her. Unperturbed by her engagement to a jerk, he rides in on a painted horse and sweeps her off her feet (literally).

Years later, the two are married with an adorable young son named Joshua (Cantarini). But their happy life is soon turned upside down by the horrific realities of World War II. Because they are Jewish, Guido, Joshua and Guido's uncle Eliseo (Durano) are taken away to a concentration camp. Dora, although not Jewish, demands to be sent with them so that she can be with her family. While at the camp, Guido insists to Joshua that the entire experience is one large game with a tank as the first prize. Through imaginative, and often brave, acts of quick-thinking, Guido attempts to shield his son from the tragic truth of their situation.

In a way, Life is Beautiful is two films in one - a slapstick romantic comedy with a drama as its companion piece. Both are equally captivating and they are perfectly matched, seamlessly switching from one to the other. The first half is unabashedly silly and romantically sweet. Roberto Benigni's old-fashioned style of slapstick is starkly Chaplinesque, as if the Holocaust-themed comedy needed another reason to be reminiscent of The Great Dictator.

At the midway point, the film takes a surprisingly smooth turn to the serious. Cleverly, though, the comedy is not entirely pushed aside. Quite the contrary. The improvisational nature of Benigni's character, that was so delightfully set up during the opening scenes, pays off dividends in the film's latter half. In fact, the entire premise succeeds precisely because of Guido's personality. He is essentially the glue that sticks the two potentially incongruous genres together.

Any film in a language that is foreign to me - which, embarrassingly, is every language other than English - has the unavoidable setback of requiring me to read the dialogue. In this instance, it is particularly unfortunate due to the loquaciousness of the main character. I'd much rather be looking at Benigni's face than at the bottom of the screen. It is, then, a testament to the power of the film that it is still so remarkably effective on an emotional level.

Benigni won the Academy's Best Actor prize for his buffoonish performance (delivering an equally buffoonish speech when he accepted the film's Foreign Language Film win). But his buffoonery is just so ridiculously charming, and he is extremely adept at recognising when to turn it off. His face when he realises Dr. Lessing's nervous discomfort is only due to a particularly hard-to-solve riddle is nothing short of heartbreaking. Benigni's real-life wife Braschi serves well as his foil in the comedic moments of the first half, even if she is mostly relegated to longing looks in the second. And what a find is Giorgio Cantarini, the adorable young boy who plays Joshua. Praise clearly needs to be given to Benigni yet again for directing such a young child to such an amicable performance.

1998 - Elizabeth

2011-09-30T12:39:00.000-04:00

Since I last wrote, two rather major (and hopefully, fruitful) career accomplishments have occurred. I joined Actor's Equity, the prestigious performer's union with jurisdiction over theatre. Plus, I have finally signed with my first American talent agent. I'm pretty sure this now means I'll be on Broadway next month. That's how it works, right?

The next on 1998's list of Best Picture nominees is...

Elizabeth
Director:
Shekhar Kapur
Screenplay:
Michael Hirst
Starring:
Cate Blanchett, Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes, Richard Attenborough, Kathy Burke, John Gielgud, Fanny Ardant, Vincent Cassel
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
1 win, for Best Makeup

Queen Mary I (Burke) is reigning over a religiously divided England in the 16th century. She's Catholic and she's dying. Her advisers urge her to order the execution of her half-sister Elizabeth (Blanchett), the next in line to the throne, because of her Protestant sympathies. Fortunately, Mary saves her head and Princess Elizabeth becomes Queen Elizabeth I, much to the annoyance of the Duke of Norfolk (Eccleston), who remains staunchly opposed to her. Once on the throne, Elizabeth takes the ruthless Francis Walsingham (Rush) as her main adviser and the only person she truly trusts. But her troubles are far from over. She contends with assassination attempts and disrespectful counsellors. She carries on a secret love affair with Lord Robert Dudley (Fiennes) while rejecting the French Duc d'Anjou (Cassel). All the while, she is determined to unite England.

Elizabeth is a private look at a very public figure. While the production is a grand one, it maintains an intimacy as it explores the life of a powerful woman in a man's world. But it is, by no means, one of those quiet, upper-class, tea-and-scones types of period piece. In fact, all the elements of an intense drama are present - passion and lust, power struggles and corruption, violence and murder. And what use is a story about British royalty without a good beheading or two ... or three.

Undeniably, the film is very artistic. Not only are the sets and costumes extravagant and the cinematography exquisite, as you would expect for a film set in Elizabethan England, but also director Shekhar Kapur has composed each shot like a painting - interesting angles, candles in the foreground, half-hidden faces. It is genuinely a feast for the eyes.

Speaking of eyes, many of the cast engage in a great deal of steely-eyed acting, particularly Eccleston and James Frain. French footballer turned actor Eric Cantona seems somehow out of place. And there are an inordinate number of scenes in which Rush creepily sneaks into shot from behind a pillar and stares at something. However, in the role that introduced her to international audiences, Australian Cate Blanchett (pictured) is divine, carrying the film superbly and earning a well-deserved Best Actress nomination.

1998 - The Thin Red Line

2011-09-15T13:25:00.000-04:00

Perhaps I should have reconsidered attending a screening of Contagion while suffering from a cold. My coughs and sneezes may have offered those in my vicinity a whole new level of interactive experience.

Though I enjoyed the topically fascinating film, I was not entirely taken by the script. However, the fantastic cast and impressive direction did well to suppress those niggling doubts.

But what I really want to discuss is Jude Law's attempt at an Australian accent. It's disastrous. Perhaps non-Australians won't appreciate the full extent of its disastrousness, but trust me, disastrous it is. What's interesting, though, is that there doesn't seem to be any reference whatsoever to his character's nationality, which begs the question: why bother? I'm hesitant to suggest that a naturally Australian-accented actor should have been cast in the role. After all, my own opportunity for work in this country would be severely limited if actors were never allowed to play characters with accents that differed from their own. However, if the otherwise talented Mr. Law was incapable of perfecting an Australian cadence, then surely it would have been more prudent to simply make his character English.

In Law's defense, the Aussie drawl does seem to be one of those accents that is simply too difficult for a foreign actor to master. Robert Downey, Jr. came close, and Meryl Streep was moderately successful, but even those two accomplished performers didn't quite nail it. Unfortunately, though, Jude Law's effort has to rank as one of the worst.

Beginning our tour of the Best Picture nominees from 1998, we take a look at...

The Thin Red Line
Director:
Terrence Malick
Screenplay:
Terrence Malick
(based on the novel by James Jones)
Starring:
Sean Penn, Adrien Brody, Jim Caviezel, Ben Chaplin, George Clooney, John Cusack, Woody Harrelson, Elias Koteas, Nick Nolte, John C. Reilly, John Travolta
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
0 wins

As Edwin Starr asked and then immediately answered: War. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. That seems to be the message in Terrence Malick's meandering The Thin Red Line, a World War II story whose primary focus is the Battle of Guadalcanal. Brigadier General Quintard (Travolta) orders C Company to seize a hill on which the Japanese have set up a bunker. Lt. Colonel Tall (Nolte) is the bad-tempered commanding officer determined to succeed. Captain Staros (Koteas) is the disobedient captain looking out for his men. Private Witt (Caviezel) is the unenthusiastic soldier recently put back into service after going AWOL. Private Bell (Chaplin) is the depressed soldier, only surviving by daydreaming about his wife back home. And that's not even half of the characters we meet and follow. They each have their own back stories and perspectives, but one thing is common to them all - the recognition and disdain of the unpredictability of war.

The artistry within The Thin Red Line is difficult to deny. Assisted by some breathtaking locations - many of which are to be found in Australia, I might add - the cinematography is exquisite. Nature plays a big role in the film and it is captured beautifully. Juxtaposing that beauty are the plentiful components of a bloody war. A violent explosion in the middle of a reedy hill is a gruesomely fascinating image. The stunt team are also to be congratulated for creating incredibly convincing effects. There are moments when it appears the stunt performer is literally in the middle of the explosion. Along with these aesthetically pleasing aspects of the film, there is a cerebral element that gives the picture a sense of poetry. In fact, the voice over narration, which is shared by several characters, is undeniably poetic, complementing the film's prettiest images.

However, if you're anything like me, your response to all this beauty and poetry may be limited to mild appreciation. Perhaps it is the unfair bias many of us have towards the mainstream, but sincere voices expounding on their emotions can easily come across as pretentious. (And yes, I'm aware of the irony of decrying pretentiousness with such pretentious language - just deal with it.) Nonetheless, The Thin Red Line still contains many traditionally narrative sequences amid its mostly rambling plot. In fact, the film is at its most captivating during the section devoted to the actual mission. The butting of heads between Tall and Staros is particularly gripping.

While featuring numerous characters mainly contributes to the film's tangentiality, it does offer the opportunity for a plethora of cameos. In fact, there were many more famous faces that were left out of the final cut. Suffice it to say, the picture features several powerful performances, and due to the nature of the film, many of those performances are far too brief, particularly those of Adrien Brody and John C. Reilly, both of whom I wanted to see more. Also worth individual mention is Jim Caviezel for his pensively touching portrayal.

Best Picture of 1967

2011-09-05T21:38:00.002-04:00

This is one of those nominees lists that seems overstuffed with films that have stood the test of time. Well, not completely overstuffed. There's one obvious misfit. But among the other four, it was a mildly difficult task to separate them. In the end, though, one picture pushed its nose in front.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1967 are:

Bonnie and Clyde
Doctor Dolittle
The Graduate
Guess Who's Coming To Dinner
In the Heat of the Night

One of these things is not like the other. In making my verdict, I easily set aside Doctor Dolittle from the outset. While it has a fun vibe and a few entertaining moments, it is an essentially silly movie providing little competition to the other four contenders. In fact, if ever there was fodder for those critics who decry the Academy's weakness in allowing itself to be influenced by Oscar campaigning, Doctor Dolittle and its nine nominations is certainly it.

The four remaining pictures each hold a fairly high place in film lore as well as popular culture, and my own personal ranking of them leaves little room between each one. Thus, it is only with the slightest of margins that I release the next two films. Guess Who's Coming To Dinner is incredibly endearing with a heartwarming story, and Bonnie and Clyde succeeds as an exciting action flick with a fascinating central relationship.

Coincidentally (or perhaps not), we are left with the Academy's Best Picture winner and its Best Director winner. In the Heat of the Night is a tense racially-charged drama with superb leading actors, but my pick is Dustin Hoffman's breakout film. With its witty script and subtle performances, The Graduate takes away Matt vs. the Academy's favourite Best Picture nominee of 1967.

Best Picture of 1967
*Academy's choice:* In the Heat of the Night	Matt's choice: The Graduate

Your choice:

Please go ahead and vote for your own favourite by using the poll above. Next up, we move to the 1990s to a group of films with an interesting connection. All five are period pieces and, between them, they only depict two time periods. Two set in the Elizabethan era and three set during World War II.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 1998 are:

Elizabeth
Life Is Beautiful
Saving Private Ryan
Shakespeare In Love
The Thin Red Line

If you want to play along with Matt vs. the Academy while supporting the project, check out Amazon's DVDs and Instant Videos of 1998's nominees.

1967 - Doctor Dolittle

2011-08-31T15:30:00.000-04:00

Hurricane Irene swept through New York City on the weekend and it looks like we got lucky. Kat and I in particular hardly noticed a thing. As the top of the hurricane hit, the bulk of the wind force seemed to come in from a north-easterly direction. Rather fortunately, the windows in our apartment face south and west. I imagine the other side of the building felt the barrage considerably more. By the time the wind changed direction as the tail end of the hurricane arrived later on Sunday, its strength had weakened and the rain had all but stopped. It could not have been a more convenient chain of events.

As the stores reopened and the subway trains began to roll again, I watched the final nominee from 1967's Best Picture competition is...

Doctor Dolittle
Director:
Richard Fleischer
Screenplay:
Leslie Bricusse
(based on the novels by Hugh Lofting)
Starring:
Rex Harrison, Samantha Eggar, Anthony Newley, Richard Attenborough, Peter Bull, Muriel Lander, William Dix, Geoffrey Holder
Academy Awards:
9 nominations
2 wins, including Best Song (Talk to the Animals)

In the English seaside town of Puddleby-on-the-Marsh, local Irish merchant Matthew Mugg (Newley) introduces a naive young boy named Tommy Stubbins (Dix) to the greatest animal doctor who ever lived. Doctor John Dolittle (Harrison) began his career as a regular medical doctor, but soon tired of human contact, preferring to spend time with animals instead. With no apparent formal training, Doctor Dolittle simply switches specialties and becomes a veterinarian and, thanks to the teachings of his pet parrot, he has now learned nearly 500 animal languages and can freely communicate with the dozens of animals in his care.

When Dolittle is delivered a Pushmi-Pullyu, a rare beast akin to the llama except for its two heads, the three friends trot off to the local circus to share it with the world. After a horrible misunderstanding in which two men mistake a seal for an old woman and then witness Dolittle throw it into the sea, he finds himself in court up against an unsympathetic judge (Bull) who sentences him to an insane asylum. Matthew and Tommy aid his escape and, along with the judge's pretty but brusque niece Emma (Eggar), the four set sail in search of the wandering Sea-Star Island as well as Dolittle's ultimate find, the Great Pink Sea Snail, a creature most experts believe to be mythical.

Doctor Dolittle is very much a children's movie. It's silly, fantastical and plays like a pantomime. The central conceit itself, that of a man who can converse with animals, is obviously pretty ridiculous. Peppered throughout are several childish gags, including a horse with glasses reading from an eye chart. While it would not be unfair to label this picture as immature, that is not necessarily a criticism. It's just that you may need to still have your baby teeth to get the most out of it. I mean, what ten-year-old wouldn't like a story about a giant pink sea snail? Curiously, though, with such a clever and witty rhyming scheme, the lyrics seem decidedly advanced for the little ones to truly appreciate. The Academy certainly appreciated them, however. They awarded Talk to the Animals their Best Song award.

Visually, it is an impressive film. With some aesthetically pleasing locations and a host of interesting designs, Doctor Dolittle at times is genuinely majestic. It also scored an Oscar for Special Visual Effects, and while there are indeed some effects worthy of oohs and aahs, some of the puppetry is afflicted with a slight case of lifelessness. However, the most incredible feat of the film is undeniably the animal wrangling. Kudos to the trainers who succeed in eliciting charmingly anthropomorphic performances from their pets. Animals of all shapes and sizes adorn the set, often dozens at the same time. I shudder to think of the clean-up that was required afterwards. It must have been a smelly set.

Now, what can I say about Rex Harrison (pictured) and his talky singing? It may have worked well for him in My Fair Lady, perhaps due to the loquaciousness of the lyrics he was given to perform, but it falls rather flat here. The effect is similar to watching a rehearsal, so much does it take away from the numbers' musicality and from Harrison's otherwise delightful performance. Anthony Newley - who is also known for his musical collaboration with Doctor Dolittle's composer and screenwriter, Leslie Bricusse - delivers an amiable performance as the Irish charmer. Also watchable is a young (well, younger) Richard Attenborough as the circus owner, Mr. Blossom.

Ultimately, Doctor Dolittle is a fluffy, silly movie, which makes it all the more surprising that it made the Best Picture shortlist. Mind you, they loved their musicals back then, so perhaps it's not as surprising as it would be if it were to happen today, but still a little puzzling.

1967 - In the Heat of the Night

2011-08-27T17:48:00.000-04:00

My first earthquake and my first hurricane all in the same week! While my earthquake experience merely consisted of feeling the building wobble for a few seconds, I suspect Hurricane Irene may cause a slightly larger impact. We are not in the evacuation zone, but to prepare for the impending storm, Kat and I have stocked up on groceries and have a "go bag" ready. There is one dilemma, though. The authorities tell us to stay indoors and keep clear of the windows to avoid potential flying debris. Since we live in such a small apartment, that essentially means we may have to sleep in the bathtub. But they also say to fill the bathtub in order to have water with which to flush the toilet in the event that the plumbing is shut off.

Kat and I are now preparing for the longest bath-time in history.

The Academy's pick for Best Picture of 1967 is our next film to go under the microscope...

In the Heat of the Night
Director:
Norman Jewison
Screenplay:
Stirling Silliphant
(based on the novel by John Ball)
Starring:
Sidney Poitier, Rod Steiger, Warren Oates, Lee Grant, Larry Gates, James Patterson, William Schallert, Beah Richards
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
5 wins, including Best Picture and Best Actor (Steiger)

When a dead man is discovered in the wee hours of the morning in Sparta, Mississippi, the police chief, Bill Gillespie (Steiger), orders Sergeant Sam Wood (Oates) to sweep the town for suspects. Waiting at the train station is a black man, Virgil Tibbs (Poitier), who quickly becomes suspect number one. Gillespie's suspicions prove unwarranted, however, when it becomes clear that Mr. Tibbs (for that is what they call him) is actually a police officer himself - a homicide detective, no less. When Gillespie confirms this with Tibbs' superior in Philadelphia, Tibbs is ordered to stay in Sparta to help the small town police force with their investigation. Neither man is particularly happy with that arrangement, but the two reluctantly work together, which often consists of Gillespie asserting his certainty of a suspect's guilt before Tibbs explains how he's wrong. With racial tensions high amongst the town's residents, Tibbs must try to stay safe while earning Gillespie's respect.

'Tense' is the first word that comes to mind when viewing In the Heat of the Night. Not only are there several moments of potential (and actual) violence that keep you on the edge of your seat, plus a genuinely absorbing police procedural storyline, but the main thrust of the narrative - that of the relationship between a white Southern police chief and a black city-dwelling homicide detective - is a particularly intense display of mutual obstinacy. The two men butt heads consistently, staring each other down with glassy eyes on many occasions. The film's languidly rousing music is the perfect complement to this tension - including the sultry theme song sung by Ray Charles - yet is used sparingly, allowing the tensest scenes to cleverly remain unscored.

Perhaps my only major criticism of the picture is the final moment. The gripping tension of the previous couple of hours deserves a better climax than the somewhat cheap smiles that Tibbs and Gillespie present to each other as Tibbs leaves. Sure, they have developed a mutual respect now, we get that. But I think I would have preferred a simple understated nod that at least acknowledges the history of their strained relationship rather than the Hollywood-style all-is-forgiven wrap-up that comes across as a little cheesy and unnecessary, especially considering it takes place in the space of about ten seconds. Not that Poitier's and Steiger's smiles are overstated by any means, so perhaps I'm being too harsh. It could have been a lot worse. After all, they don't actually confess their feelings in words. I suppose I just like my touching conclusions to be as subtle as possible.

Sidney Poitier's strong presence is perfect for the bullheaded Virgil Tibbs, but he unfortunately missed out on an Oscar nomination. Not so, Rod Steiger, whose gum-chewing grumblebum with the yellow-tinted sunglasses is a brilliantly fascinating portrayal to watch, very much deserving of his Best Actor win. The supporting players' performances border on stereotypical small-town hicks, but they all serve their purpose well. Beah Richards, who played Poitier's mother in the same year's Guess Who's Coming To Dinner, is superb here as a sassy back-room abortionist.

1967 - The Graduate

2011-08-21T22:56:00.005-04:00

I am now back in New York City, happy to be home with my beautiful wife once more. After months of sporadic trips to various parts of the country for work, it is nice to be settled in again. It makes for a nice change. Speaking of change (see what I did there?), you may have noticed some slight additions to the website. In a bout of enthusiasm, I created a Google AdSense account to see if this silly little hobby of mine might actually earn me some pocket money. The enthusiasm continued when I also became an Amazon Associate, allowing to me offer product links to DVDs and perhaps other appropriate items. With a recent (minor) increase in this blog's traffic, I thought I would try these things out and see how it fares. So, if you see anything interesting, go ahead and click, and I might make one-third of a cent. No need to worry, though, dear reader. Matt vs. the Academy is not going anywhere. Whether or not this little experiment is successful, the Best Picture nominee reviews will continue.

For purposes more practical and less greedy than those above, I've also added links to make it easier to subscribe to this blog, as well as to share it with your friends. In the sidebar on the right, you'll find ways to subscribe to posts and/or comments through the blog reader of your choice, or you can submit your email address to receive each post by email. Plus, at the bottom of each post, there is now a row of lovely social networking buttons.

Whew! With that administration out of the way, let's get to the next review, a classic Best Picture nominee from 1967...

The Graduate
Director:
Mike Nichols
Screenplay:
Calder Willingham and Buck Henry
(based on the novel by Charles Webb)
Starring:
Anne Bancroft, Dustin Hoffman, Katharine Ross, William Daniels, Murray Hamilton, Elizabeth Wilson
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
1 win, for Best Director

The graduate of the title is Benjamin Braddock (Hoffman), recently returned from college without a clue as to what to do with his life. His parents (Daniels & Wilson) are throwing him a graduation party and all their friends have suggestions for his future. One word: plastics. One of his parents' friends, Mrs. Robinson (Bancfroft), has a more deviant idea. She persuades Benjamin to drive her home after the party and, once inside, proceeds to seduce him. A flustered Benjamin rejects her advances but, several days (or perhaps weeks) later, his boredom and loneliness and curiosity get the better of him and he calls Mrs. Robinson to take her up on her sordid offer.

The two begin a secret affair. Soon, however, Benjamin is unsatisfied with the purely physical nature of their relationship and wants to have an actual conversation with Mrs. Robinson. That turns out to be not such a good idea, after all. Their conversation quickly turns into an argument when Mrs. Robinson gets rather agitated at the idea of Benjamin taking out her daughter, Elaine (Ross), a thought that had never crossed his mind until she made him promise not to do it. Naturally, when Elaine visits during a college break, Benjamin's parents pressure him into asking her out and he reluctantly obliges. Benjamin's idea of sabotaging the date by taking Elaine to a strip club fails miserably and he finds himself in the extremely complicated situation of falling in love with his lover's daughter.

The Graduate is undeniably a product of the 1960s. The groovy decor and fashion, the hippie music from Simon & Garfunkel, even the prolific use of the zoom lens. In fact, in his sophomore film as director, Mike Nichols - who had made Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? only one year earlier - makes good use of his camera, presenting us with some uniquely artistic visuals. Sometimes, we see characters through their reflections on a coffee table. Other times, we see characters talking but are unable to hear their words due to loud music or crowds. We feel Benjamin's isolation through a POV shot as he scuba dives into a backyard swimming pool. We feel his confinement through the now very famous shot of his body literally trapped in the frame by Mrs. Robinson's leg. Then, there is the rapid-fire series of brief shots when Mrs. Robinson presents her naked self to Benjamin, a sequence oddly reminiscent of the shower scene in Hitchcock's Psycho.

Clearly, The Graduate was written as a comedy. But what's interesting is that, despite the genuinely funny script, Nichols and the cast don't overplay it. Quite an achievement since there are some very jokey jokes in there, which would be just as at home in a Marx Brothers movie. Dustin Hoffman remains deadpan when given just one strange word of advice, "plastics". Nor does he mug when inadvertently uttering a sexual pun, "wood". And he is very much sincere when suggesting his plan of marrying Elaine is "completely baked".

This restraint is incredibly effective, allowing the film to comment on social issues with honesty. Indeed, The Graduate captures the feeling of uncertainty that is the fate of people like Benjamin Braddock, who are stepping into the real world for the first time after a lifetime of school, a feeling that probably hasn't changed all that much since the 60s. The final few minutes of the film are particularly captivating. We cheer on Benjamin and Elaine as they frantically jump on a bus laughing and smiling, on a high from their exhilarating and spontaneous moment of defiance. The camera lands on the two sitting at the back of the bus, still smiling as they look behind them at the aftermath of their actions. But the shot lingers. And their smiles slowly fade. And it is a wonderful summing up of the whole film. Three words: what happens now?

As mentioned, rising star Dustin Hoffman carries the film with understated perfection, earning his first Oscar nomination. Remaining subtle in the face of farcical elements seems to work well for him (see Tootsie). Anne Bancroft, also nominated, succeeds as the nonchalant cougar. (Iinterestingly, she was only six years older than Hoffman.) The film's third nominee, Katharine Ross, is movingly gentle. Also of note are William Daniels as Benjamin's well-intentioned father and Murray Hamilton (last seen here in Jaws) as the cuckolded Mr. Robinson. Finally, two bit part players have gone on to bigger and better things. Mike Farrell, famous for M*A*S*H, appears very briefly as a bellhop. And also from Jaws - amongst many, many other things - that's Richard Dreyfuss as the boarding house resident eager to call the cops.

----------------------------------------------
Support Matt vs. the Academy and buy:
The Graduate on DVD
The Graduate on Blu-ray
The Graduate on Instant Video
----------------------------------------------

1967 - Bonnie and Clyde

2011-08-14T18:55:00.001-04:00

Another show is over. The final performance of The 39 Steps at the Bristol Valley Theater came and went today, and I am currently packing up and getting ready to head back to New York City tomorrow. And for the first time this year, I do not have any immediate plans for any upcoming performing ventures. With an improv show in Las Vegas, an off-off-Broadway show in New York, a short film in Delaware and a play in Naples, it's been a busy year so far. Let's hope the next project is just around the corner...

Next up in the review of 1967's Best Picture nominees is...

Bonnie and Clyde
Director:
Arthur Penn
Screenplay:
David Newman & Robert Benton
Starring:
Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, Michael J. Pollard, Gene Hackman, Estelle Parsons, Denver Pyle, Dub Taylor, Evans Evans, Gene Wilder
Academy Awards:
10 nominations
2 wins, including Best Supporting Actress (Parsons)

It's the Great Depression and young Clyde Barrow (Beatty) is fresh out of prison for armed robbery. While attempting to steal a car, he is interrupted by the pretty Bonnie Parker (Dunaway). The two hit it off right away and, before you know it, they're planning bank robberies. At a gas station in the middle of nowhere, they pick up oddball C.W. Moss (Pollard), who agrees to join them on their criminal escapades. Soon, the gang grows in number again with Clyde's older brother Buck (Hackman) and his reluctant wife Blanche (Parsons). As their robberies become more violent, Bonnie and Clyde begin to attract the attention of law enforcement as well as the national media, who turn them into infamous superstars.

Bonnie and Clyde doesn't waste any time up front. The beginning moves at a swift pace with our two heroes (or, more accurately, anti-heroes) meeting in the first scene and running away together almost immediately. Even their first recruit, C.W. Moss, doesn't seem to require much time to think things through. He steals from his boss and hops into Bonnie and Clyde's car after knowing them for less than a few minutes. With such a fast-paced set-up, there is little time to familiarise ourselves with the situation but, since the couple's life subsequent to their meeting is very much the whirlwind, the speedy first act is actually quite appropriate, not to mention exciting.

What makes the story particularly interesting is its central relationship. In fact, it would be reasonable to describe the film as a story about a unique relationship, rather than a story about Depression-era bank robbers. Sure, they are bank robbers and this certainly plays a role in their relationship, but the film is clever to focus on how Bonnie and Clyde interact and grow. It is a fascinating affair - Clyde suffers from some kind of sexual dysfunction and Bonnie is bothered by the resultant lack of intimacy. In fact, with the gang always around, the two rarely find themselves alone, so it is more than merely sexual intimacy that they are forgoing.

Then there is the issue of celebrity. The newspapers write sensational stories about them, attributing far more robberies to their name than they actually committed. The hype reaches such heights that even their surviving victims are excited to be swamped by photographers and journalists listening to their tales. It seems this craving for a good story at the expense of the truth is not just a modern predicament.

Bonnie and Clyde is one of several films to share the record for the most acting nominations among its cast. Five actors received nods, the first such acknowledgement for each of them. The picture's two stars, Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway (pictured), both up-and-comers at the time, work well together, delivering a convincing portrait of the infamous couple. Michael J. Pollard snagged his only Oscar nomination in the Supporting Actor category for his suitably quirky portrayal of C.W. Moss. In the same category, Gene Hackman - who barely looked any different then than he does now - was recognised for his fine work as Buck Barrow. The only winner of the five was Estelle Parsons, who nabbed the Supporting Actress award for one of the most annoying characters ever to appear on screen. Blanche's constant screeching and complaining are played with delectable perfection by Parsons. And then there's Gene Wilder, appearing in his film debut. Wilder's piteous persona and unique delivery are superbly applied to his role as the undertaker that Bonnie and Clyde kidnap for a brief time.

----------------------------------------------
Support Matt vs. the Academy and buy:
Bonnie and Clyde on DVD
Bonnie and Clyde on Blu-ray
Bonnie and Clyde on Instant Video
----------------------------------------------

1967 - Guess Who's Coming To Dinner

2011-08-10T19:38:00.002-04:00

The 39 Steps has opened and is as much fun as it is exhausting. My lovely wife Kat came to visit on the weekend to see the show and take in Naples' sights, which consist mainly of quaint places to eat. With a couple of days off before we head into our final week of shows - yes, it's a very short run - some of the cast and crew took to the local vineyards for some wine tasting yesterday. Let me just say that I'm glad we didn't have a show yesterday...

While Kat was here, we watched the first of the nominees from 1967's Best Picture race...

Guess Who's Coming To Dinner
Director:
Stanley Kramer
Screenplay:
William Rose
Starring:
Spencer Tracy, Sidney Poitier, Katharine Hepburn, Katharine Houghton, Cecil Kellaway, Beah Richards, Roy E. Glenn
Academy Awards:
10 nominations
2 wins, for Best Actress (Hepburn) and Best Original Screenplay

With an undoubtedly topical subject matter for 1967, Guess Who's Coming To Dinner takes place in the home of the Draytons, Matt (Tracy) and Christina (Hepburn), over the course of one principle-testing evening. Their sweet young daughter, Joey (Houghton), is excited to be bringing home the man she fell in love with while on a recent trip to Hawaii. The only thing is: he's black.

While Joey is oblivious to any potential problems, her new fiancé, John (Poitier), is a little more circumspect, aware that his new in-laws may be shocked by the interracial affair. He respectfully explains to Matt and Christina that, unless they wholeheartedly approve of his marrying their daughter, he will walk away, adding that he will need an answer before he flies to Europe after dinner. Christina is for the idea, but, despite his mostly liberal attitude, Matt has a few reservations. As if the time pressures weren't enough, Matt is also forced into the role of host when Joey spontaneously and naively invites John's parents (Richards & Glenn) over, despite John's desire to break the news to them himself.

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner is a very endearing film with very endearing characters. While I'm sure interracial marriage is still taboo in many areas, the issue is certainly not as shocking as it was over 40 years ago. Back then, I imagine the film may not have seemed so endearing, or at least, the endearing tone would have been offset somewhat by the story's tackling of the tough social issues of the day. Modern audiences, however, may even describe the film as quaint. Having said all that, it is still abundantly clear how serious the issue is to the characters within the film and the whole subject is dealt with delicately and earnestly.

Featuring such an abundance of dialogue, one would be forgiven for assuming the picture is an adaptation of a stage play. Not to mention that the action takes place predominantly in one location over the course of one evening. However, William Rose wrote the script directly for the screen, winning the Academy's Best Original Screenplay award in the process. His script is at times farcical, at times sentimental, but never too much of either. And while there is obviously a sincere message, Rose cleverly manages to maintain a lighthearted attitude, mostly through the creation of such lovable characters.

Indeed, the characters' lovableness must also be attributed to a cast who deliver some delightful performances, particularly by frequent co-stars Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn (pictured). As the doddering old father, Tracy is affable, even when he's harsh. This marked his final screen performance and he was deservedly Oscar-nominated for it. Hepburn picked up her second Best Actress Oscar for her sweet and moving portrayal of the respectful mother and voice of reason. Surprisingly left off the nomination list was Sidney Poitier (who also wasn't cited for his other significant role in the same year from In the Heat of the Night - perhaps these two performances split the vote). Nonetheless, he is charming and engaging as the impossibly honest fiancé. As the happy-go-lucky daughter, Katharine Houghton is a little cheesy, but I suppose her character is intended to be naive and cheerful. Nominated in the supporting categories were Cecil Kellaway, delivering an entertaining portrayal of the Draytons' clergyman friend and Beah Richards, turning in a strong and touching performance as John's mother.

----------------------------------------------
Support Matt vs. the Academy and buy:
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner on DVD
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner on Instant Video
----------------------------------------------

Best Picture of 1982

2011-07-29T20:36:00.004-04:00

I've come across some eclectic shortlists over the course of this project, but none more so than 1982's bunch of nominees. Usually, the larger the difference between each film, the more difficult it becomes to compare them, and while that sentiment remains true here, it was, nonetheless, relatively easy to choose my favourite.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1982 are:

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
Gandhi
Missing
Tootsie
The Verdict

A science-fiction family film, a historical biopic, a political suspense drama, a legal character study and a comedy classic. A diverse group, no question. Selecting a favourite should have been complicated, yet I deliberated only briefly.

Missing was eliminated early on. Though an involving story, its overly sincere attitude gives it a conspiratorial feel. Harder to dismiss is Tootsie. Funny and poignant, it succeeds on many levels, only slightly hindered by some convenient plot points, particularly the pat conclusion.

Thus, we are left with three extremely worthy films. The least well-known of the trio, The Verdict is thoroughly engaging, containing little with which to find fault. Reluctantly, I remove it from the running for barely justifiable reasons. The Academy's choice, Gandhi, is epic yet intimate, a fascinating character study with a deservedly lauded lead performance. But my pick is the evocative and stunningly beautiful E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial. A classic loved by young and old alike, E.T. is exceptional in both its story and its technique. Cinema at its finest.

Best Picture of 1982
*Academy's choice:* Gandhi	Matt's choice: E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial

Your choice:

You may choose your favourite, too, by voting in the poll above. Next up, we examine a year of many classics from the 1960s.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 1967 are:

Bonnie and Clyde
Doctor Dolittle
The Graduate
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner
In the Heat of the Night

As I approach final rehearsals for The 39 Steps, there will undoubtedly be another short hiatus before the next round of reviewing begins. Stay tuned...

1982 - Gandhi

2011-07-25T21:14:00.004-04:00

Yet again, I am writing to you from somewhere other than New York City. (Perhaps if I updated this blog more often, this wouldn't happen as frequently.) I am currently in the very sleepy town of Naples in upstate New York, rehearsing The Thirty-Nine Steps for Bristol Valley Theater. A parody of the classic Hitchcock film, the play consists of dozens and dozens of characters but only four actors - one man to play the lead, one woman to play three female characters and two other actors (referred to in the script as Clowns) who play everyone else. I have the fitness-inducing pleasure of playing one of the madcap clowns.

On a break from rehearsals, I found the time to watch the last of 1982's nominees for Best Picture...

Gandhi
Director:
Richard Attenborough
Screenplay:
John Briley
Starring:
Ben Kingsley, Candice Bergen, Edward Fox, John Gielgud, Trevor Howard, John Mills, Martin Sheen, Ian Charleson, Athol Fugard, Gunther Maria Halmer, Saeed Jaffrey, Geraldine James, Alyque Padamsee, Amrish Puri, Roshan Seth, Rohini Hattangadi
Academy Awards:
11 nominations
8 wins, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Kingsley)

Spanning more than five decades in the life of Mohandas K. Gandhi (Kingsley), the critically acclaimed biopic certainly covers a lot of ground. In South Africa at the end of the nineteenth century, the London-trained attorney-at-law experiences first-hand the discrimination rife in the British Empire. As an Indian, he was not allowed to travel first-class or even walk on the pavement. Rather than wallow in disillusionment, Gandhi leads a non-violent campaign to protest the injustices, eventually winning some concessions from the British government. Back at home in India, he begins the arduous task of gaining India's independence from Britain. Over the years, he endures several imprisonments, witnesses horrific incidents of oppression and initiates one or two hunger strikes, yet Gandhi remains steadfast in his conviction that violence is never the answer.

Despite a running time of just over three hours, Gandhi is surprisingly concise. The narrative is consistently clear and easy to follow, giving a comfortable accessibility to our protagonist's growth. As with most underdog stories, there is plenty of powerfully emotional content and our empathy for Gandhi's plight is quickly realised through several scenes depicting his or his people's oppression. The massacre scene is particularly evocative and almost difficult to watch.

One potential pitfall of presenting a story about such a revered historical figure is the temptation to depict the subject without flaws and foibles, making him seem somehow superhuman. This picture is certainly not ashamed of glorifying its subject but, thankfully, it also allows Gandhi a few moments of hotheadedness. When he loses his temper with his wife, he becomes more of a regular guy with which we can all identify, rather than just the constantly serene nothing-ever-rattles-me saint of the rest of the film. These revealing moments are perhaps too few and too brief, but they make for a fascinating study nonetheless. Mind you, from another perspective, his moral tenacity could easily be seen as another flaw. Gandhi is so dogmatic in his pacifist beliefs to the point that he almost kills himself by refusing to eat. In any other human being, such stubborn behaviour would be considered stupidity. Again, these issues only help to create a more well-rounded character on screen, far more interesting than a cut-and-dry do-gooder.

Ben Kingsley (pictured) carries the film with a powerhouse performance that earned him the Best Actor Oscar. Playing one man over the course of fifty years is never easy and Kingsley is just as believable as the 70-something Gandhi as he is as the 20-something Gandhi. He is supported by an eclectic array of talented actors, including plenty of esteemed British greats, who pop in for a scene or two - Trevor Howard, John Mills, Edward Fox, and my favourite, John Gielgud as the peevish Viceroy of India. Ian Charleson, appearing in his second consecutive Best Picture winner after 1981's Chariots of Fire, is amiably subtle as the Christian Reverend that Gandhi befriends. Not English, but also impressive are Martin Sheen, Candice Bergen and particularly Roshan Seth, expertly portraying the love and frustration that goes along with being Gandhi's close friend and political colleague. To satisfy my penchant for picking out the yet-to-be-famous actors in relatively minor roles, the film offers several instances of such - Nigel Hawthorne appears briefly; Harry Potter fans will recognise Richard Griffiths; although not immediately discernible, Daniel Day-Lewis' trademark intensity as a South African thug gives him away; and everyone's favourite mailman from Cheers, John Ratzenberger, shows up as a military driver but his voice is dubbed (by Martin Sheen, reportedly), ironic since Ratzenberger is now also very well known for his prolific voice work, mostly with Pixar.

1982 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial

2011-07-16T01:04:00.000-04:00

Well, I'm back from a week in Delaware, where I was shooting Fridays, a short film that centres on an 11-year-old girl named Jenny, who, once a week, visits her terminally ill best friend in hospital. I play Jenny's concerned and protective father, David, who is somewhat unsure how to help his daughter deal with such a sobering predicament. It was quite a rewarding, if a little exhausting, shoot, and I will certainly keep you all abreast of the film's progress on the festival circuit.

Back in New York, our desktop computer has been rather uncooperative of late, shutting itself down at seemingly random moments. The obnoxious whirring noise that used to fill the room each time the computer was in operation has now entirely subsided. Thus, it seems relatively clear that we have a lazy fan unwilling to fulfil its cooling duties, thereby allowing the system to overheat and pack it in.

Miraculously, though, the computer survived long enough for me to watch the entirety of the next Best Picture contender from 1982...

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
Director:
Steven Spielberg
Screenplay:
Melissa Mathison
Starring:
Dee Wallace, Henry Thomas, Peter Coyote, Robert MacNaughton, Drew Barrymore
Academy Awards:
9 nominations
4 wins, including Best Original Score

After his spaceship makes an emergency take-off before he has boarded, a lonely and frightened alien is stranded in northern California. Taking shelter in a nearby backyard shed, he is soon discovered by a young boy named Elliott (Thomas), who secretly hides him in his bedroom. Elliott introduces his new friend to his older brother Michael (MacNaughton) and his younger sister Gertie (Barrymore), who begin to find ways to communicate with E.T., as they come to call him, while keeping him hidden from their mother (Wallace). As Elliott and E.T. become psychically attuned to each other's feelings, Elliott realises that E.T. pines for his own home and helps him build a communication device that will signal his people.

This is how you make a movie. The epitome of modern Hollywood, E.T. is simply captivating on almost every level and I struggle to explain why (which is horribly inconvenient since that is precisely for what this blog is intended). Despite being almost entirely wordless, the mesmerising opening sequence is crystal clear and immediately moving. It is as great an example of the cinematic style of storytelling as you are likely to find. Smartly written, beautifully shot, intricately edited.

Although I endeavour to view the original theatrical release of each nominee for the purpose of fairness, Netflix delivered the 20th anniversary edition of E.T., which includes a slightly longer cut with additional scenes and visual effects enhancements. These modern additions make for an interesting experience. On the one hand, seeing E.T. as a CGI character is a little unsettling, aware as we are that such technology was not in existence in 1982. On the other hand, it allows for a much more expressive E.T., particularly when viewed alongside the comparatively limited facial animatronics of the original. As it stands, E.T. is an immensely accessible character. One can only imagine how much more lovable he might have been were the film made today. That said, there is something mysteriously charming and perhaps nostalgic about the now seemingly primitive puppetry. These minor distractions, however, do little to disrupt the story and it all simply confirms my notion that I should always watch the original theatrical cut during this project, making such discussions moot. So, feel free to ignore this entire paragraph.

Spielberg is quite honestly at his masterful best here. In collaboration with cinematographer Allen Daviau, each shot is exquisitely composed, crafting a moody and evocative atmosphere. Toss in the delicate editing by Carol Littleton and the magical score by John Williams and the result is a masterclass in the emotionally manipulative effects of movie-making that even the best film schools would struggle to teach. Granted, there is a glossy Hollywood feeling to the picture, but it is undoubtedly intended to be a fantasy film. In that context, the pure movie magic is overwhelmingly appropriate. The important thing, however, is that it is always rooted in reality. The circumstances may be fantastical, but the characters' reactions are deeply human.

As is his wont, Spielberg assembled yet another naturally gifted cast, including many children. Carrying the film with one of cinema's most impressive child performances is Henry Thomas, finding the perfect mix of childishness and maturity. Playing the big brother, Robert MacNaughton likewise delivers a nuanced performance, mature beyond his years, while Drew Barrymore, as the young innocent sister, is impossibly cute. As the only adult face we see for the vast majority of the movie, Dee Wallace is amiable and touching. For the keen-eyed viewers, C. Thomas Howell can be seen in his big screen debut as one of Michael's friends, and also in her film debut, that's former Baywatch babe Erika Eleniak as the young girl that Elliott romances.

1982 - Tootsie

2011-07-03T22:26:00.001-04:00

In my last post, I bemoaned the tribulations of moving house. For most, the discomfort of the move is, at least, offset by the excitement of the new surroundings. However, Kat and I have unfortunately managed to experience that discomfort with no subsequent excitement. I won't bother with the frustrating - and somewhat humiliating - details, but suffice it to say, we found ourselves involved with a rather shady real estate broker. Luckily, the ordeal ended with no monetary loss on our part, but the annoying result is that we packed everything into boxes only to unpack it all at the same apartment. Yep, we're not moving after all.

I am now currently in Delaware to shoot a short film for a week (more details at a later time) but with my one day off yesterday, I shunned the Diamond State's sights to stay in my hotel room and watch the next of 1982's Best Picture nominees...

Tootsie
Director:
Sydney Pollack
Screenplay:
Larry Gelbart, Don McGuire, Murray Schisgal
Starring:
Dustin Hoffman, Jessica Lange, Teri Garr, Dabney Coleman, Charles Durning, Bill Murray, Sydney Pollack, George Gaynes, Geena Davis
Academy Awards:
10 nominations
1 win, for Best Supporting Actress (Lange)

Michael Dorsey (Hoffman) is a struggling actor in New York City, making ends meet by teaching acting classes and working in a restaurant. His desperation is apparent on audition after audition, but his reputation as difficult to work with is perhaps his greatest barrier. Even his agent George (Pollack) has all but given up, claiming that nobody wants to hire him. Almost in defiance of his agent's words, Michael boldly transforms himself into Dorothy Michaels to audition for a female role on a popular soap opera, and winds up landing the part. Keeping up the charade is a constant battle as he begins to fall in love with his co-star Julie (Lange) who only sees him as a close girlfriend.

Tootsie is a lovable film. It is at once witty and heartwarming, the perfect balance of comedy and sentiment. Perhaps some of the farcical elements are a tad on the cheap side, but somehow the slapstick never gets in the way of the film's earnestness. The humour is always rooted in truth, so we remain invested even when Hoffman's character defends his antics on the set of a commercial in which he played a tomato by remarking, "I did an evening of vegetables on Broadway."

The cheesy theme song is a little hard to bear, but it is the 1980s, after all. Also forgivable are the somewhat unrealistic depictions of the entertainment industry. Perhaps it's just me, but after many, many years of auditioning, not once have I ever heard the producer confirm that I had the part three seconds after I finish the read. As much as I wish it did, it just doesn't happen that way. Nor would a soap opera ever decide to record an episode live to air with only half a day's notice. Logistically, that would be near impossible. In any case, the overall charm of the piece easily makes up for all of these sketchy and convenient plot points. Well, all but one. The all-important climax plays out far too quickly to be believable. Then again, considering the incredibly awkward and unforgivable situation in which our protagonist finds himself, I'm not sure there is any satisfactory way to resolve this story. At least Michael himself seems aware of the depth of his predicament when he confusingly confesses, "I was a better man with you as a woman than I ever was with a woman as a man." Funny, but not really enough to make me buy that Julie would forgive such a humiliating deception so instantaneously.

Nonetheless, despite the improbable ending, the picture is delightfully appealing. And, in a rare occurrence for a comedy, the Academy bestowed ten nominations on the film. Dustin Hoffman (pictured) received a Best Actor nod, delivering a masterfully honest performance in a role that could so easily have been played for silly laughs. Both Teri Garr and Jessica Lange garnered Best Supporting Actress citations for their respectively wacky and touching portrayals, the latter winning the prize. Bill Murray turns in yet another amusing performance full of wonderfully dry wit. Not only does Sydney Pollack helm the film with aplomb, but he also appears on screen, holding his own in several word-sparring scenes with Hoffman. In her film debut, Geena Davis is quirky and cute, and see if you can spot a pre-Golden Girls Estelle Getty in a bit part.

1982 - The Verdict

2011-06-23T14:01:00.001-04:00

As I write this, I am surrounded by boxes and bags, full of Kat's and my belongings, in preparation for our apartment move next week. I cannot express how much I abhor moving, and yet somehow, I seem to have moved every couple of years. Interestingly, even though we are staying in the same neighbourhood - our new apartment is only about a mile away from our current one - the move from Australia to the States seemed somewhat easier. Sure, there were all sorts of administrative things to worry about then, but the actual transport of our belongings was rendered much simpler by the fact that we just bought all our furniture anew. Thus, all we really brought with us from Sydney were clothes. Now, we have a whole apartment of stuff to schlep. How did we accumulate so many things in just two years?

Next up in 1982's selection of Best Picture nominees is...

The Verdict
Director:
Sidney Lumet
Screenplay:
David Mamet
(based on the novel by Barry Reed)
Starring:
Paul Newman, Charlotte Rampling, Jack Warden, James Mason, Milo O'Shea, Lindsay Crouse
Academy Awards:
5 nominations
0 wins

Frank Galvin (Newman) is barely a lawyer and mostly an alcoholic. When he's not at the bar drinking and playing pinball, he scours for business at strangers' funerals. Yep, he's an ambulance-chaser, and he's not even very good at that. Fortunately, his friend Mickey (Warden) sets Frank up with a case he can't lose - a medical malpractice suit involving a young woman who fell into a coma. Both the hospital and the victim's family are keen to settle out of court, but Frank unexpectedly refuses the generous settlement to take the case to trial - something about "doing the right thing". With the ruthless Ed Concannon (Mason) as opposing counsel and the unsympathetic Judge Hoyle (O'Shea) presiding, Frank has his work cut out for him. Somehow, amid this incredible workload, he also manages to begin a relationship with the intelligent yet mysterious Laura Fischer (Rampling), who is not entirely who she seems.

I must admit, I do love a good Sidney Lumet film. The sadly Oscarless director was nominated for his deft hand here, another fine example of his subtle style. Nothing is ever forced down the audience's throat. On the one hand, he uses abundant wide shots, allowing us to witness the entire scene unfold. On the other hand, he lingers on simple yet meaningful looks, leaving us to solve the puzzle on our own. The credit for the effectiveness of those wordless moments must also be given to Oscar-nominated scribe David Mamet and his artfully expressive screenplay.

If I were to find fault anywhere in this fine picture, it would have to be with the initial stages of Frank's relationship with Laura. This subplot's connection to the rest of the narrative seemed somehow strained. I even pondered whether Charlotte Rampling's character was even necessary at all. Until, of course, the twist that makes Laura's existence in the story abundantly clear. Only then does she become a truly fascinating study. Perhaps part of the problem early on is that unusually grave and overly dramatic score underneath the scenes between Frank and Laura. So much like a horror movie score, in fact, that I almost expected Laura to peel off her face and reveal an alien underneath.

In any case, that's a relatively minor issue in what is honestly an excellent film. Paul Newman (pictured) carries the film superbly with a reflective and sensitive (and Oscar-nominated) performance. The ever watchable James Mason also garnered a nomination for himself delivering a delightfully restrained portrayal of an obstinately driven lawyer. Rounding out the cast are Charlotte Rampling, Jack Warden and Milo O'Shea, each with exceptional performances. And keen-eyed viewers will spot a pre-stardom Bruce Willis appearing as an extra in the final courtroom scene.

1982 - Missing

2011-06-15T14:23:00.001-04:00

Our friends at the Academy have announced a change to the recently-adopted rule concerning the number of nominees for Best Picture. After only two years of a ten-horse race, next year's shortlist will consist of anywhere between five and ten nominees, depending on how many films receive the requisite five percent of first-place votes during the nominating procedure. After studying the hypothetical results that this method would have produced in the past decade, it appears we may consistently have seen greater than five nominees, but fewer than ten. In other words, forcing only five nominees sometimes may have left some worthy films by the wayside, yet making it compulsory to cite ten films for the top award may have allowed one or two less than stellar pictures to sneak in.

Undoubtedly, this new change will have its critics. Some will certainly say that the Academy is changing its rules too often. Indeed, it seems plausible that this announcement is in response to criticism of its move to ten nominees two years ago. However, for me, at the risk of once again sounding like an Academy lackey, I'm going to put my hand up in support of this development. Each year presents us with a different number of excellent films, so it makes sense not to constrict the number of nominees. In that context, this approach seems the most appropriate way to gauge Academy members' opinions.

Meanwhile, we kick off our review of 1982's nominees for Best Picture with a look at...

Missing
Director:
Costa-Gavras
Screenplay:
Costa-Gavras & Donald Stewart
(based on the book by Thomas Hauser)
Starring:
Jack Lemmon, Sissy Spacek, Melanie Mayron, John Shea, Charles Cioffi, David Clennon
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
1 win, for Best Adapted Screenplay

Beth (Spacek) and Charlie (Shea) are living in a politically volatile South American country when things get shaky. With a curfew in place, Beth is unable to get back home from visiting friends when she misses the last bus. The next morning, she arrives home to an empty house and her neighbour tells her that Charlie was arrested yesterday by the country's military officers. Attempts at some answers from the U.S. Consulate prove fruitless and soon Beth is joined by her father-in-law Ed (Lemmon) who has travelled from New York to help find his son. A conservative man with little respect for his son's leftist leanings, Ed initially rubs Beth the wrong way. But the two must learn to work together to unravel the mystery of exactly what happened to Charlie.

Even before the mystery of Charlie's disappearance becomes the focus, Missing's opening act is somewhat mysterious itself. As a result of the filmmakers' attempts at avoiding explicit references to certain real-life people and places, I found myself a little confused as to where exactly the film was set and, more importantly, why on earth the protagonists were there in the first place. Perhaps it is my lack of knowledge on South American history, for only a very small amount of research is needed to discover that the film's location is Chile during the coup d'etat of 1973.

There is an overt sincerity to this picture, right from the opening caption and accompanying narration that espouses its basis on documented fact. Declassified documents released well after the film was made seem to indicate that the U.S. government did actually have some involvement in the Chilean coup and yet, the film's sincerity still resembles the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist. Most, if not all, the government types are painted as corrupt and they are alleged to be complicit in Charlie's disappearance after he learns too much about the U.S. military's presence in the region. These details may indeed be accurate - my admittedly limited research revealed some compelling yet inconclusive circumstantial evidence - but, either way, the characters are a tad too black-and-white for my liking. Despite some superficial dialogue, the intense subject matter and the captivating suspense keep the narrative dangerously engaging. A little anti-climactic, perhaps, but the Academy saw fit to bestow a Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar on the film.

Missing also boasts a superb cast. Sissy Spacek and Jack Lemmon (pictured) work extremely well together, resulting in them both being nominated for lead Oscars. Then, there is the cornucopia of well-known faces from television. As the subject of the film's title, John Shea (known to Lois & Clark fans as Lex Luthor) is charming and passionate. Melanie Mayron (an Emmy winner for thirtysomething) plays the inquisitive and supportive friend. Joe Regalbuto (famed as Frank Fontana in Murphy Brown) portrays another victim of the new regime. Finally, Jerry Hardin (known for his role as Deep Throat in the definitely conspiratorial-themed The X-Files) appears as a U.S. Army Colonel.