We start, as we often do, by analysing a trio of films from one actor who appeared in multiple movies during the decade. Our star under the spotlight in the first 1990s post is Morgan Freeman who starred in three nominated films, two of which went on to win Best Picture. Freeman is an interesting actor mainly because he only struck it big in his early 50s due to his roles in Glory as well as in the first film of this trio, Driving Miss Daisy. In the film, which was the first Best Picture winner of the 1990s, Freeman starred as Hoke a wise man hired as a chauffeur for the prickly elderly woman of the title. The film begins with Jessica Tandy's Daisy crashing her car, leading her son to hire Hoke as her driver. The relationship between the pair starts off incredibly frostily as Jessica feels that Hoke is mocking her and refuses to get him to do anything. Eventually a friendship blossoms between the pair as Daisy begins to trust Hoke more. This friendship is chronicled throughout the film which includes an undercurrent about racial tensions during the 1950s and 1960s. Along the way Daisy teaches Hoke to read and repays her by helping her out around the house once her maid passes away. Eventually the ageing process starts to creep up on Daisy and she's eventually put into a home after she starts to display signs of dementia. But the film ends with the friends still enjoying each other's company at the ripe old ages of 81 and 97 respectively.
Part of the reason that Freeman was cast as Hoke is that he played the same role in the stage version of Driving Miss Daisy. It's pretty clear from the start that the film is based on a play as most of the action takes place in the same locations, most notably Daisy's house and car. In fact very little has been done to make the piece feel cinematic, aside from letting us see the various locations that Daisy and Hoke travel to during the course of the movie. The only really memorable attribute from this screen adaptation of the play is Hans Zimmer's lively score which perfectly complements the film's awkward central relationship. In my opinion, Driving Miss Daisy's strongest element is the performances from both Freeman and Tandy. Tandy rightfully won a Best Actress award for playing the prickly Daisy, whose life is changed thanks to Hoke's influence. Tandy made me complete believe in Daisy and also later made me sympathise for a woman who wasn't always that gracious to everyone around her. Meanwhile, Morgan Freeman's joyous portrayal of Hoke was effortless and he and Tandy shared a surprising amount of chemistry. Together they portrayed the relationship between Hoke and Daisy with ease and allowed the audience to really invest in their adventures over the course of the twenty-five years that the film focuses on. Most known for his comedy work, Dan Aykroyd put in a memorable supporting turn as Daisy's son Boolie. Aykroyd portrays Boolie as somewhat of a doormat who often caves into the demands of both his mother and wife. Despite the fine performances, Driving Miss Daisy isn't a particularly spectacular film and it doesn't really feel like a Best Picture winner. The film itself is often regarded as one of the most surprising Best Picture winners, primarily as director Bruce Beresford wasn't even nominated for helming the feature. It'll be interesting to see how worthy the other films nominated against Driving Miss Daisy were, but I'm predicting that there will be at least one strong candidate which deserved the accolade more than this well-acted but unremarkable film.
Freeman's good luck would continue three years later when he again starred in an Best Picture winning film. Freeman's role in Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven was as Ned, the trusted ally of Eastwood's William Munny. Interestingly, despite acting and directing in films for over thirty years, Oscar didn't recognise Eastwood till the early 1990s. Eastwood garnered fame in the Western genre firstly as an actor and later as a director but Unforgiven was to be his last foray into the genre. Even if I hadn't known that going in, Unforgiven definitely had the feel of a final film as it demonstrated how killing for money doesn't get easier as you get older. Both Will and Ned are retired gunslingers who have settled down for a life with their respective families only to be tempted out of retirement for one last job. The job in question involves them killing the two men responsibly for the facial mutation of a prostitute in Big Whiskey, Wyoming. Standing in their way is the town's sheriff Little Bill, a man who has a stringent no guns policy although he lets his men use theirs on a regular basis. The middle part of the film demonstrated just what Bill would do to anyone who attempted to collect the ransom that the prostitutes put up. This particular sequence sees the introduction of debonair western legend English Bob whose plans are thwarted by Bill and deputies. Eventually Will's party, which also includes the kid who told him of the job in the first place, arrive in the town. Things aren't easy for them though as Will is taken down by Bill while Ned is later beaten to death after refusing to give up his allies. Although the film has a somewhat happy ending, in so far as the prostitutes have been avenged, nobody really gets out of Unforgiven unscathed.
This was my second time watching Unforgiven as I'd previously watched it as part of my film studies degree about twelve years ago. Unsurprisingly I remember very little about but I really enjoyed it this second time around partly because it felt like a very realistic western film. The deaths are few and far between and when they happen Eastwood makes sure that we see the consequences. Ned and Will are extremely shocked to find that they don't have the heart for killing any more whilst the Kid has a similar reaction to his only kill during the film. In addition the characters feel a lot more well-rounded than the majority of players you'd seen in your standard western. Will is essentially the hero of the piece but in the past he has killed purely for money and he's only recently turned his life round. Similarly the villain, in this case Little Bill, isn't purely evil and the motivation for most of his actions is to keep the peace in his town. The town itself is beautifully constructed and, as Eastwood is a legend in the genre, every scene is expertly directed. Cinematographer Jack N Green really takes us into the centre of the action and makes the town of Big Whiskey come alive. As well as proving to be an expert director, Eastwood's strong and silent persona is perfect for the role of the ageing cowboy Will. Richard Harris puts in a memorable extended cameo as the aforementioned English Bob as he is able to lend his theatrical nature to the Western genre. Unforgiven's best performance though comes from Gene Hackman who earned a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his role as Little Bill. Hackman makes you believe Little Bill as a major threat to our protagonists but at the same time makes you understand why he's doing what he's doing. As for Freeman, his role was generally to act as Eastwood's second but he did the best he could with his role as the sidekick Ned, who later became Will's motivation for his final revenge attack.
Freeman fared much better, and earned a Best Actor nomination, for his role in Best Picture nominee The Shawshank Redemption. Of the three films in this post, I believe that The Shawshank Redemption is the best so it's interesting that it is the only one that didn't win the big prize. It's also the only film in this post that I've watched multiple times and have even included it in one of my essays. The film sees Freeman star as Red, a long term inmate at Shawshank Prison who is continually up for parole throughout the course of the film. Red acts as the narrator of the film which is a role that Freeman would take on throughout the rest of his career partly due to his dulcet tones. Despite being recognised as the film's lead actor, The Shawshank Redemption is co-headlined by Freeman and Tim Robbins as banker Andy Dufrense. Dufrense enters Shawshank convicted of the murder of his wife and her lover and indeed experiences a tough time inside the jail. But through his friendship with Red, his endurance of sexual attacks at the hands of the 'sisters' and is persistance at kitting the prison library out with new reading material, Andy finds a way to survive. However The Shawshank Redemption will probably be best-remembered for the final scenes in which Andy breaks out of the prison. Upon his release Red joins him but interestingly the film was meant to end with Freeman's voiceover talking about hope. But it appears as if audiences weren't happy with this and wanted the solid conclusion that Andy and Red would be reunited in Mexico. This was the first time watched The Shawshank Redemption with this knowledge and I'll be the first to admit that the ambiguous ending probably would've worked better. That being said I don't begrudge people a happy to a film that is incredibly tough to watch at times.
The very first time I watched The Shawshank Redemption was when somebody lent me a VHS copy of it and I enjoyed it that much that I didn't want to give it back. I think the film is just perfectly paced and has a character at the heart of it that you want to root for. Director Frank Darabont really makes Shawshank one of the main characters of the piece and demonstrates how the institution has affected the prisoners in different way. There are a plenty of emotional moments for me throughout the film and I always can't help but shed a tear when the prison librarian Brooks commits suicide after being released. Similarly I always smile when Andy plays The Marriage of Figaro over the prison's PA system and every inmate is completely transfixed by the music. Tim Robbins is perfectly cast as the mild-mannered bank manager who is forced to spend his lifetime locked up for a crime that he didn't commit. Robbins portrays Andy as a smart character but also one who isn't cut out for a life on the inside. More than anything else Robbins makes you sympathise with Andy so you're cheering when he finally makes his escape from Shawshank. But I'd agree with Oscar in saying that this is Freeman's film, especially as Red acts as the movie's narrator. When we first enter Shawshank, Red's is the first face we see and his expression of joy at being reunited with Andy is our lasting memory of the film. Freeman portrays Red as a worldly-wise character but someone whose view is changed significantly thanks to his relationship with Andy. But it's Freeman's voice that really dominates the film and I bet that if you're thinking about The Shawshank Redemption then it's his voice you'll hear. I do feel that's the biggest testament to both Freeman's performance and the character of Red as a whole.
Next time our trip around the 1990s takes a rather dubious step as we look at two films which focus on characters operating outside of the law.
