Matt's Big Oscar Challenge: Reviewing the Ceremonies 72-81 (2000-2009)

So we've come to the end of our final full decade and it's been a particular joy for me to relive some of the films that got me hooked on cinema in the first place. From a personal point-of-view this decade was also when I got really hooked on the Oscars staying up late for most of the ceremonies starting at number 74.

In terms of the film themselves I think the 21st century saw the academy take a diverse view of what sort of films should be included in their line-up. There did seem to be a shift away from costume drama and war movies in favour of big-budget fantasy fare or more subtle film-making. At the same time there were still a lot of people complaining that certain bigger films were being ignored by the Oscars, especially during the latter half of the decade. That's part of the reason that, as we shall shortly see, the Academy decided to widen the field again and honour up to ten films a year.

Ceremony 72 (2000)
Winner: American Beauty
Nominees: The Cider House Rules, The Green Mile, The Insider, The Sixth Sense
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
There's no denying that American Beauty is an accomplished, well-written film filled with fine performances and therefore it's one of the better films to win Best Picture. At the same time, in my opinion, The Insider is the better film overall and ultimately deserved the win more.

Ceremony 73 (2001)
Winner: Gladiator
Nominees: Chocolat, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Erin Brockovich, Traffic
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
I think from an overall stand point Gladiator succeeded in combining stunning visuals, fine performances and a well-paced story. The only film that came close to equally Gladiator was Traffic I think that was a little much of a contemporary tale for the Academy to honour.

Ceremony 74 (2002)
Winner: A Beautiful Mind
Nominees: Gosford Park, In the Bedroom, The Lord of The Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Moulin Rouge
Did the Right Film Win? No
This was one of those rare occasions where all four films were in some way better than A Beautiful Mind. My pick would be the emotionally gripping In the Bedroom or the incredibly unique Moulin Rouge but any of the four would've been better than the long-winded biographical affair that ultimately clinched the prize.

Ceremony 75 (2003)
Winner: Chicago
Nominees: Gangs of New York, The Hours, The Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers, The Pianist
Did the Right Film Win? No
Don't get me wrong I like Chicago but there are at least two superior films in this list of nominees. Whilst overblown, Gangs of New York is at least a worthier candidate however I'd select The Pianist as a great historical film with real heart. I suspect the only reason that it didn't win on the night is that the Academy didn't want to bestow two awards on the infamous Roman Polanski.

Ceremony 76 (2004)
Winner: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Nominees: Lost in Translation, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Mystic River, Seabiscuit
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
I feel that Oscar had to honour the Lord of the Rings trilogy at some point and it was fitting that it was the franchise's final instalment that swept the board. That being said this ceremony featured a rather strong field with the possible exception of racehorse saga Seabiscuit.

Ceremony 77 (2005)
Winner: Million Dollar Baby
Nominees: The Aviator, Finding Neverland, Ray, Sideways
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
This is one of those years were I'm completely undecided on what film should have won the prize. In my opinion Sideways is the best film of the five but at the same time it doesn't feel like an Oscar winner. Whilst Million Dollar Baby was a worthy winner it's last act was a little too mawkish for my liking and it's nearest competition, the opulent The Aviator may just have edged it out in terms of quality. But I have no problem with Million Dollar Baby being that year's Best Picture recipient as it still stacks up nicely against previous winners.

Ceremony 78 (2006)
Winner: Crash
Nominees: Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Good Night and Good Luck, Munich
Did the Right Film Win? No
While not, as some claim, the worst Best Picture winner ever it's true to say that Crash wasn't the most accomplished nominee that year. In a year that was packed full of serious 'issue-based' films I'm going to have to go with the majority and say that Brokeback Mountain was the film that stuck with me the most. However, I also believe that Good Night and Good Luck felt more like an Oscar winner than Crash and would've been happy if either that or Brokeback had clinched the title in 2006.

Ceremony 79 (2007)
Winner: The Departed
Nominees: Babel, Letters from Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine, The Queen
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
Whilst there are no dud nominees this year I feel that Martin Scorsese's crime epic was the rightful winner from this group of five. It was also great to see him pick up his long-awaited Best Director Oscar after many prior nominations.

Ceremony 80 (2008)
Winner: No Country for Old Men
Nominees: Atonement, Juno, Michael Clayton, There Will Be Blood
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
I really like No Country for Old Men but Oscar's eightieth ceremony had one of its best field of contenders ever. I personally think that There Will be Blood is the better film and feels more like a Best Picture winner than No Country but at the same time I do feel that the Coens did deserve their awards.

Ceremony 81 (2009)
Winner: Slumdog Millionaire
Nominees: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
It's fair to say that, after the strong field of nominees the year before this was a rather weak offering in comparison. Despite its faults, Slumdog's feelgood ending and superb visuals best any other of its rival with Milk being the next best film on the list.

Next time I have more filling in the gaps to do as I go back several decades in more Days of Future Past specials.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 416: Coen Country

Although they've only featured once on the blog up to now, when their big Oscar moment came Joel and Ethan Cohen had already been making critically acclaimed movies for twenty years. Whilst Fargo was their biggest hit on the awards scene they'd also made big noise with such hits as O Brother Where Art Thou, The Big Lebowski and Barton Fink. However, their biggest success would come at the 2008 ceremony where they would go on to win three awards for screenwriting, directing and producing that year's Best Picture winner. 

The film was No Country for Old Men, which the Coens adapted from the book by Cormac McCarthy. The book's primary focus is on grizzled but kindly Texas sheriff Ed Tom Bell who isn't happy about the fact that his quaint town is used for big money drug deals. Although Bell's words start and the film the focus is instead on one of those aforementioned deals that went awry. Local welder Llewelyn Moss gets himself tangled up in the deal when he finds a bag of money and decides to keep it for himself. However, although he'd know that there'd be people after him, he didn't quite reckon on the ferocity of the film's antagonists. The antagonist in question is Anton Chigurh a fearsome, humourless man who uses a captive bolt pistol as his weapon of choice. Anton has been hired to recover the money and realising what Llewelyn has done tracks him across Texas in attempt to get the cash back. At times No Country for Old Men plays like a silent movie as there are five minute chunks of the film that have no dialogue at all. I feel that this makes the cat-and-mouse game between Llewelyn and Anton all the more interesting especially after both suffer serious injuries. However, even though I've watched the film a handful of times, the ending featuring Bell recounting his dreams to his wife doesn't sit quite right with me. After a shocking scene involving Anton and Llewelyn's wife, there's no denying that an old man relaying memories of his father is going to be at least a little anticlimactic. 

I think it's this ending that made some people gravitate towards No Country as they praised it for its subtle tone and character development. Whilst the ending doesn't sit well with me, I agree that No Country for Old Men is a masterclass is subtle film-making. The Coen brothers make sure that the audience has to fully concentrate on the screen in order to immerse themselves in the world of Llewelyn and Anton. For what was their eighth collaboration at the time, The Coens enlisted brilliant cinematographer Roger Deakins to capture the Texas exteriors. Deakins' style for the piece gives it the tone of a classic western, which is certainly odd for a film set in 1980. That being said there's more than a touch of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly when you think about the characters of Bell, Anton and Llewelyn. Tommy Lee Jones is perfectly cast as the laconic Sheriff Bell and he particularly comes to life every time he has to deliver one of his character's monologues. Josh Brolin brings an intensity to the role of out-of-his-depth everyman Llewelyn Moss. Despite his character being quite selfish at times, Brolin is still a brooding screen presence and therefore makes the audience care about Llewelyn's fate. Woody Harrelson livens thinks up briefly as an associate of Anton's who tries to cut a bargain with the hapless Llewelyn. However, the film does belong to Javier Bardem who makes Anton the most memorable element of the film. From the opening scene in which he chokes a cop to death with his handcuffs to how he deals with Llewelyn's wife, Bardem completely owns the screen. Bardem's performance as the intense hitman won him the Best Supporting Actor award that year and I can't say that it wasn't deserved. While this wasn't the Coen Brothers' best film it was certainly an excellent achievement as they combined the old west with a more contemporary thriller element. I think it's also good to see a Best Picture winner that presents its story in a subtle way and doesn't have to rely on special effects or big budget sets to woo the Academy. 

And with that we're done with the noughties, next time I review the ten Oscar ceremonies that comprised the decade. 

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 413-415: A Few Days in Asia

As we're nearing the end of another decade's worth of films I thought it was time for a quick holiday so I decided for a three-movie long tour of Asia. Two of the films in this triple bill are historical pieces, shot in the country's native tongue and featuring subtitles for Western viewers such as myself. The third film, for the most part, is in the English Language although the scenes in other languages aren't subtitled, but then again that's kind of the point.

We start in China in the year 1779 for some high-flying martial arts courtesy of Ang Lee's Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. The film tells the story of the sword 'The Green Destiny' and the way it unites all four of the movie's central characters. The sword initially belongs to retired warrior Li Mu Bai who gives it to his friend and fellow warrior Yu Shu Lien so that she may deliver it as a gift to their mutual acquaintance Sir Te. One of the threads running throughout Crouching Tiger is the unrequited romance between Mu Bai and Shu Lien, which is a classic cinematic love that will never speak its name. Just as Shu Lien is about to present the sword to Sir Te; it is stolen by a female warrior believed to be the elusive Jade Fox. Years before, Fox murdered Mu Bai's master and he's now out for revenge however it later transpires that his nemesis has a pupil in the form of noblewoman Jen. Jen is initially presented as the courteous daughter from a respected family but its later revealed that Fox was training her up to be another deadly warrior. Jen's other story involves desert warrior Lo, a man who she originally met after he stole her fan. The flashbacks, in which Jen and Lo's romance is detailed, signalled the moment where the film ground to a halt for me. I did feel that Lee and the three screenwriters took too long with this particular part of the story and to an extent the narrative never recovered. Thankfully Crouching Tiger's final act was full of action and emotion as the stage was set for Jen's wedding and the final showdown between Mu Bai and Jade Fox.

I remember watching Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon on VHS soon after it was released and at the time I think I rather enjoyed it. However, this time round, I did feel the film was a little patchy especially from a storytelling perspective. As I previously alluded to the pacing of the story varies throughout the film's two hour running time. Starting off at a brisk jog, things slow to a halt during the Jen/Lo flashbacks before kicking into full throttle towards the end. That being said there were several elements of the story I liked from the romance between Su Lien and Mu Bai; to Jen's attempts to get the upper hand on all the other characters. Indeed, one of the great things about Crouching Tiger is the fact that there are two strong central female characters who are well-rounded and can stand up for themselves even against the men. Whilst narratively the film may have a few issues, visually it's one of the most spectacular movies I've watched since I began. The martial arts scenes in particular are stunning especially those involving the high-flying Jen. Jen and Su Lien's final battle is especially breathtaking and I think that Lee is brilliant at capturing these battles on screen. I'm not surprised that cinematographer Peter Pau won an award for his brilliant camera work on the film whilst further honours went to Crouching Tiger's soaring score and its fantastic period art direction. Even though it didn't win the big prize, Lee's film did pick up the award for Foreign Language Feature, an honour that I'm sure it deserved. Although it did have its problems, I enjoyed the fact that Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was even nominated for the Best Picture prize in the first place. Overall it was a stunningly gorgeous film to watch and one that I'm glad is soon to get a long-awaited sequel.

Moving across the continent and through time we find ourselves in modern day Japan for a film that follows two Americans who are stuck in Tokyo. The film is Sofia Coppola's Lost in Translation which focuses on a young photographer's wife and a washed-up actor who find themselves flummoxed by Japanese culture in general. It helps that actor Bob Harris, who is in Tokyo to film a whisky commercial, is played by the brilliant Bill Murray. Murray perfectly encapsulates a middle-aged man abroad especially when he tries to negotiate his way around a power shower or a piece of gym equipment. But Bob is also lost in a different way and that's what makes him navigate to Charlotte; a recent college graduate who is tagging along with her husband who has a work assignment in the city. Coppola builds up to Bob and Charlotte's first meeting by following their individual stories with the former shooting his ad whilst the latter wanders aimlessly around Tokyo's various landmarks. They eventually meet about half an hour into the film and then a very polite romance begins which includes a karaoke party and a trip to the hospital. Lost in Translation is very subtle in the way it deals with Bob and Charlotte's relationship as they are two disparate people who've found each other at the right time. One element I wasn't sure about was the conflict that Coppola creates between the pair when Bob has a one-night-stand with the hotel's cabaret singer. This moment is also only dwelt upon briefly before the iconic final scene in which our couple embrace in the centre of Tokyo and incoherently whisper in each other's ear.

I first went to see Lost in Translation at an early morning screening in January of 2004 and ever since then it's been one of my favourite films. As you can probably ascertain by now I love films that are based around characters rather than plot and that describes Lost in Translation in a nutshell. When I first watched it I identified with Charlotte, as I myself was about to graduate from university and was having one of those 'what does it all mean?' phases. Now I'm getting to the stage where I'm hoping I don't end up like Bob trapped in a marriage with a woman who is more concerned with carpet colours than she is the welfare of her husband. The film would be nothing without the performances from both Murray and Scarlett Johansson; the latter of whom was just eighteen when filming took place. I was utterly impressed how convincing Johansson was as a character who was five years older than her and she was able to carry off the extra life experience with no problem. Murray meanwhile balanced the slapstick he's been known for with a more measured, world-weary tone that he's employed in several films since. Murray and Johansson also share perfect chemistry as there's smiles and small looks at each other are the basis of what makes Bob and Charlotte's relationship work so well. Aside from Bob and Charlotte, the other big character in Lost in Translation is Tokyo itself which comes alive in several scenes in which the couple race across the city. Cinematographer Michael Accord brilliantly differentiates between the cold machine-like interior of the hotel with the exciting, bustling world outside. Sofia Coppola was nominated for both her direction and screenplay, rightfully scooping the latter award for her tender writing. However the biggest miscarriage of justice was that Bill Murray lost out on his deserved Best Actor award. Whilst the eventual winner Sean Penn did deliver a fine turn in Mystic River it wasn't nearly as good as Murray's subtle and humanistic portrayal of a man lost in himself and in a foreign country. Lost in Translation definitely hasn't lost any of its warmth or lightness of touch and I still love it as much as I did the first time I saw it over eleven years ago.

Staying in Japan now but moving back in time to the Second World War and a film that I've never seen before in Letters from Iwo Jima. This 2007 nominee also reunites us with Clint Eastwood although unusually for the director this is a film that has very few lines of dialogue that are in the English language. That's because Letters from Iwo Jima is in fact a companion piece to Eastwood's Flags of our Fathers; a film which tells the story of the battle of Iwo Jima from the point-of-view of the Americans. Whilst Flags of Our Fathers was meant to be the big event film it was Letters from Iwo Jima that actually garnered more acclaim and did slightly better at the Box Office. I feel the point of Letters from Iwo Jima is to tell the audience that there are two sides to every story and that those who fought on the Japanese side were equally as worthy of praise as the American soldiers. The film follows the fortunes of Private Saigo; a baker who is conscripted and leaves his heavily pregnant wife to fight on the island. Saigo often finds himself tortured by his superiors but on the day in which the U.S. Marines start to attack he is the only to keep a level-head. Evading being shot by those in charge several times, Saigo later earns the respect of General Kuribayashi and ultimately being the only one to survive the horrors of the battle. The most striking thing about Letters from Iwo Jima as a whole was the fact that many of the Japanese soldiers took their own lives when they thought that there was no way back. One of the scenes that will stick with me the most from Letters from Iwo Jima is the one in which the majority of Saigo's platoon blow themselves up with grenades. It's these moments that hit home the horrific conditions that the Japanese had to deal with and I do applaud Eastwood for trying to honour them in this way.

It did take me a while to truly lose myself in Letters from Iwo Jima and I felt the film only came alive in its latter scenes which was when the action really kicked off. The cast of the movie were all utterly believable in their roles with Kazunari Ninomiya being particularly effective as Saigo. The only familiar face amongst the cast, Ken Watanabe, was perfectly believable as the sensitive Kuribayashi; who at times was the only level-headed member of the military left on the island. Similarly to Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima is shot in a faded manner which at times makes it look almost like documentary footage. Although I've not seen Flags of Our Fathers it was interesting to spot the scenes in which the two nations intersected and I'm assuming there are moments that appear in both films. I felt it was particularly brave of Eastwood to portray the Americans as the antagonists particularly in one heart-wrenching scene when a brutish soldier executes two Japanese soldiers who have surrendered. Letters from Iwo Jima was in fact a surprise entrant in the 2007 Best Picture field with many expecting the fifth nominee to be the musical Dreamgirls. However, I think it was good that the academy honoured a subtitled film which actually bucked the trend for war films by focusing on the foreign army. While I can't say I was a compelled by the film as I possibly should have been there are certain moments of it that will stick with me for years to come.

Next time we'll travel back to the States for the final film in the noughties section of the blog.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 412: My Day on Death Row

In the last post I mentioned how Morgan Freeman's participation in Million Dollar Baby was partly to do with the fact that he could provide a similarly stirring voiceover to the one he delivered in The Shawshank Redemption. That film also has a lot in common with our next nominee The Green Mile, not least because it has the same director in Frank Darabont and is based on a novel by Steven King.

In addition The Green Mile is also set in a prison, albeit a small one on death row in which several inmates await the electric chair. The story is narrated by Paul Edgecomb, who was a guard on death row in the 1930s and is currently living in a retirement home. In a nice little bit of symmetry, the first film I ever watched for the challenge; Top Hat, is referenced several times throughout The Green Mile. The film itself gets the title from the colour of tarpaulin that the prisoners walk their final mile on before they get to the chair. The main focus of the story is on the arrival of a new prisoner John Coffey, a mountain of a man who is accused of raping and murdering two young girls. Despite his hulking stature, Coffey has almost a childlike demeanour and is even scared of the dark. As the film goes on it transpires that Coffey has magical powers which allow him to cure Paul of his urinary infection, bring a dead mouse back to life and later remove the brain tumour from the wife of the head guard. I felt that Darabont balanced the fantastical elements of the story nicely with the more unsavoury nature of some of the characters. One thing he does do is set a fine line between the heroes and villains of the piece meaning that there are very few shades of grey in the film. For example both sadistic prison guard Percy and psychopathic inmate 'Wild Bill' Wharton are painted as pure villains and neither have any redeeming features to speak of. Both also get their comeuppance at the end of the film with Wharton being revealed as the man who was involved in the crime that Coffey was charged with. What I did like about The Green Mile was its final chapter in which the redemption that happened in Shawshank doesn't occur for Paul. Instead he has been given almost a curse by Coffey and as a result has had to see his loved ones die gradually over the space of fifty years.

Even though I've seen The Green Mile before I didn't quite remember the ending where we learn just what sort of effect John Coffey had on Paul. I also don't remember the film being quite as long as it was, just over three hours, however the time seemed to past relatively quickly. The fact that I was never bored is a testament to both Darabont's direction and his adaptation of King's source novel. One part of the film I did like was the fact that John Coffey was never overused and his magical powers were littered throughout the film making them more special when they did appear. Instead, Darabont's focus on the mundane nature of the mile meant that you got a real sense of what it was like to be working on death row. Tom Hanks was the perfect choice to play Paul Edgecomb as he has the everyman quality that the role requires. Hanks is surrounded by a bunch of character actors who play his colleagues including Barry Pepper, David Morse and James Cromwell. I particularly admired Sam Rockwell's performance as the certifiable Wharton as he added an extra element of crazy to an already deranged character. Meanwhile, Doug Hutchinson did his best to make the audience detest the weasel-like Percy and I felt he pulled it off admirably. However, the best performance for me came from relative newcomer Michael Clarke Duncan, who sadly passed away a couple of years ago. Cinematographer David Tattersall goes to great lengths to capture the size of Duncan on screen but I felt the actor did great at portraying his character's softer side. Duncan was in fact the only member of the cast to be nominated for his role in a film which also picked up another three nominations. Although at times The Green Mile makes you suspend your disbelief I feel you're rewarded for doing so by a magical film which is ably written and directed and that contains a number of fine performances.

Next time you'll have to grab your passports as we go on a whistle-stop tour around Asia

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 410-411: A Couple of Clint's

Back on Day 309, I mentioned how Clint Eastwood had gone unrecognised by Oscar until winning the Best Picture prize in 1993 for Unforgiven. Oscar's love affair with Eastwood carried into the next decade with three of his films being nominated for Best Picture during the ten year stretch. This post will look at two of those three movies with the third to be covered at a later date.

We kick off with a film that Clint directed but never appeared however fact fans may want to know that Mystic River was the first movie that Eastwood scored himself. Eastwood's score is just one of the many positive elements of Mystic River; a film that I enjoyed immensely on this second viewing. This Boston-set crime thriller revolves around three childhood friends; Jimmy, Sean and Dave all of whom are effected by an event from their past. The event itself is played out in the film's first three minutes in which Dave is abducted by two men that three boys believe to be cops. Flash forward twenty-eight years later and Dave's abduction and subsequent abuse have caused him to become quite a slow-witted man. Although it's clear he loves his son and wife, he's prone to moments of absence and comes home one night covered in blood. That night happens to be the same one on which Jimmy's nineteen-year-old daughter goes missing and is eventually found murdered. Jimmy, who is now one of the town's most respected citizens, uses underhanded tactics to try and discover who the perpetrator was. This annoys Sean who just happens to be the investigating officer on the case and who isn't willing to believe his partner when he suggests Dave might be the killer. Screenwriter Brian Helgeland's adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel perfectly ups the tension as the audience have to wait till the end of the film to learn who the murderer actually is. Therefore Eastwood and Helgeland create a sense of unease which I believe help to make us sympathise with the characters who aren't quite sure who to trust. This also means that Mystic River's final twenty minutes are incredibly emotional as revelation after revelation pours out and by the end I was personally left with my heart broken.

As I previously mentioned this is my second time watching Mystic River but, just like a lot of films in this decade, it's not one that I particularly remember. I'm not quite sure why that is as everything about Mystic River is perfectly delivered from Eastwood's aforementioned score to Tom Stern's cinematography which allows the small town to become a character itself. Helegland does a good job of getting through the history between the three characters quite quickly to the extent that we understand why they are how they are. The more sympathetic character is definitely Dave, who has remained almost in a childlike state since his trauma at a young age. Tim Robbins is absolutely great as Dave, capturing the essence of the character beautifully and delivering a particularly stunning turn towards the end of the film. Sean Penn meanwhile gives Jimmy a terrifying demeanour but couples this with a softer side which is on view in the scene where his character learns of the death of his daughter. This scene is particularly iconic thanks to Stern's framing of the piece and the image of Penn being held back by numerous cops. Both Penn and Robbins won Oscars for their roles in the film but I feel a little sorry for Kevin Bacon who had the job of playing the less flashy role of Sean. I felt that Bacon deserved to at least be recognised for playing an intelligent police officer who occasionally let his heart get in the way of doing his job. Also nominated at the ceremony was Marcia Gay Harden who delivered a memorable supporting performance as Dave's frightened wife. I also personally liked Laura Linney as Jimmy's wife who becomes almost like a Lady Macbeth figure in the film's final ten minutes. Absorbing from beginning to end; Mystic River works as a thriller, a character study and a mystery all at the same time.

One year later Eastwood found himself in the same position as he did twelve years earlier as he picked up Best Director and Best Picture for his boxing movie Million Dollar Baby. Here Clint was back in front of the camera as grizzled boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, a man who was living with many regrets. Frankie was presented as the kind of man who put in all the work on a fighter only to be left behind when the boxer wanted to go for the title. His only true friends were the local pastor and Eddie 'Scrap-Iron' Dupris; a former fighter who now lives and works at Frankie's gym. In an Unforgiven reunion, Eddie is played by Morgan Freeman who seems to have been hired purely to give a Shawshank Redemption-like voiceover to the film. However, if you're going to get somebody to provide a thoughtful voiceover to a film then Freeman's your man and I felt he gave Million Dollar Baby that special quality. The bulk of the film is devoted to Frankie's training of Hilary Swank's Maggie Fitzgerald; an older female boxer that he was reluctant to take on as he doesn't coach girls. However, as the film goes on the pair develop an interesting working relationship which allows Maggie to thrive in the ring. I found that Paul Haggis' script made Million Dollar Baby feel classier than your average sporting film and Maggie's fights were split up with plenty of emotional scenes between Frankie and Maggie. One brilliant set piece sees Maggie return home to surprise her mother with a new house only to find her lovely gesture spat back in her face. The element of Million Dollar Baby that I remember the most is the film's final act in which Maggie finds herself paralysed after an accident in a title match. Here I felt that Haggis over-egged the pudding a little bit as Million Dollar Baby became a different film altogether especially after Maggie asks Frankie to help her end her own life. Although I knew the ending was coming, I still found it shocking to watch and I think this sensitive storyline helped Million Dollar Baby to win Best Picture.

Alongside Eastwood's awards for Directing and Best Picture both Swank and Freeman picked up awards for their performances. Swank gave a good portrayal of an every woman who was fighting to achieve her goal however for the most part I found it to be rather unremarkable. I think that the reason she was given the award was due to the final act as Maggie finds herself unable to fight the inevitable. Freeman's wise narration was coupled with a number of fine scenes in which he finally got to have the one fight that had been eluding him all these years. Whilst Freeman did a good job in this film I feel he's been better elsewhere especially in The Shawshank Redemption and Seven. If anybody should have won an Oscar for acting in the film I believe it should have been Eastwood himself as he perfectly conveyed the evolution in the character of Frankie. Clint played to his strengths for the most part but he still conveyed Frankie's growing fatherly feelings towards Maggie. As he had done in Mystic River, Clint also provided a suitable score for Million Dollar Baby which again enhanced the overall mood of the film. I personally felt that Million Dollar Baby took a while to get going and it was only when Frankie took Maggie under his wing that the pace of the film picked up. A subplot involving the simple fighter Danger didn't do anything for me and instead proved that Paul Haggis sometimes adds too many elements to his story as he did the year later with his script for Crash. Although a solid drama, I think it's Million Dollar Baby's mawkish third act that lets it down, although I'm sure this is why the academy ultimately gave it the Best Picture award. Ultimately there's a lot to like about Million Dollar Baby, especially the performances and Eastwood's assured direction, but it just doesn't have that extra special something that a Best Picture winner truly needs.

Next time I take a magical trip down death row.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 409: Here's to you Mrs. Dalloway

As we've seen throughout the course of this blog, plenty of Oscar nominees and winners been based on well-known pieces of literature. However, the next film on hour list; 2003 nominee The Hours is rather uniquely inspired by Virginia Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway. David Hare's adaptation of Michael Cunningham's novel focuses on three women who are all touched by the book in different ways.

The first story concentrates on Woolf herself as she begins to write Mrs. Dalloway in 1923 whilst at the same time dealing with her various emotional issues. The second story is set in suburban Los Angeles during the early 1950s and deals with Laura Brown who is reading Mrs. Dalloway. Finally, in modern day New York, Clarissa Vaughan is planning a party for her dying poet friend Richard who refers to her as Mrs. Dalloway. Despite their disparate time lines and settings; all of the three women who The Hours concentrates on have plenty of similarities. All of three are suffering from mental problems of all kinds; with Virginia struggling with her countryside surroundings, Laura considering suicide and Claudia busying herself with party planning to blot out her insecurities. All three women also have feelings for the same sex whether it be on show, such as Claudia's lesbian relationship with her long term partner, or kept behind closed doors. What I liked about Hare's screenplay was the fact that he kept all three storylines ticking along nicely and made sure that we didn't forget about any one thread. If I'm honest, the least interesting of the three stories was that of Woolf herself who was a little bit too precious to ever care about that much. I enjoyed the subtlety of the Laura storyline and its exploration of the dark underbelly of 1950s suburbia. Meanwhile, Claudia's tale was full of regret and had a rather shocking scene towards the end of it. One element of the final scenes I wasn't particularly keen on was the way that Claudia and Laura's scenes linked together however it did make sense to the overall tale.

Interestingly all three of The Hours' lead actresses were nominated at that year's ceremony however only two of them were representing that film. Despite giving the weakest turn of the three, Nicole Kidman's portrayal of Virginia Woolf netted her that year's Best Actress prize. I would agree with those who theorised that the reason that she was given the award was for putting on a prosthetic nose that made her look only slightly detracted from her overall beauty. Kidman did little to make me care about the Woolf scenes which only perked up with the arrival of Miranda Richardson as her lively sister. Even though she was on screen longer, Julianne Moore was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her tender portrayal of Laura Brown; a woman who was on the verge of ending it all. Moore was also nominated for Best Actress that year for a similar turn in Far From Heaven however I think her performance in The Hours was slightly better. Oddly the best performance of the trio, which came from Meryl Streep, failed to garner a nomination with the actress instead being recognised for her turn in Adaptation. I think that Streep delivered one of her greatest performances as the bisexual Claudia who was hanging on to the one summer she spent with the love of her life, Richard. As Richard, Ed Harris was a revelation and I feel that he should have won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar that year that ultimately went to Streep's Adaptation co-star Chris Cooper. Aside from the fine performances and well-paced plot, Philip Glass' ever-present score deserves a mention even if it did make some of the scenes feel slightly overblown. This was my first time watching The Hours and I have to admit that I rather liked it even if Kidman's scenes as Woolf bored me a little. It was great to see a female-centric tale garner so much acclaim and I found it to be an easy-to-watch, well-written film.

Next time we return to the work of a director who had somewhat of a resurgence in the early 21st century.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 407-408: George, by George

We first met George Clooney back in the 1990s when he was one of many actors who had a bit part in The Thin Red Line. At the time Clooney was beginning to breakthrough into movies after coming to prominence as Dr. Doug Ross in E.R. Finishing his tenure with the show at the end of 1999; Clooney ascended to movie star status during the early 21st century. In 2002 he directed his first film, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and three years later would helm his second feature which netted him a Best Director nod.

That film was Good Night and Good Luck; which earned six nominations in all including two for Clooney in both the directing and screenwriting categories. Clooney also starred in the film as Fred Friendly the co-producer of notorious broadcaster Edward R. Morrow. The story focuses on Morrow's various attacks on Senator Joseph McCarthy and in particular his criticism of the scaremongering tactics that were being employed by his administration. The war begins when Morrow criticises McCarthy's prosecution of a young officer without having any proof of his wrongdoings. Their battle intensifies when McCarthy outright accuses Morrow of having communist leanings to which the host of 'See it Now' totally denies. Clooney and co-writer Grant Heslov's script looks at the effects of this war of words on both the CBS network and Murrow's colleagues on the 'See it Now' show. These include Joseph and Shirley; a married couple who have to keep their relationship a secret from their colleagues due to CBS guidelines. Also featured heavily is CBS journalist Don Hellenbeck, who is criticised in the press for being a 'pinko' and who ultimately commits suicide. In my opinion it's the relationship between the staff members that makes Good Night and Good Luck so successful especially when you come to realise they're like a little family. I especially liked the loyalty displayed by CBS Boss William Palley, the father figure of the group, who defended Murrow's actions to the advertisers who were worried about his barbed attacks. I also liked the way in which the film's narrative was book-ended by Murrow's speech to the Radio and Television News Directors Association in which he condemns the way in which TV is dumbing down.

It's clear that in both his writing and direction of Good Night and Good Luck that Clooney has a particular affinity with the 1950s. I wasn't surprised to learn that Clooney's father was a TV news journalist as there seems to be a certain respect of the profession running throughout the film. Indeed Murrow's words about the descent of TV in general looked to be Clooney's critique of the reality-heavy output of 21st century television. The script was just one of the things that made Good Night and Good Luck a solid piece of factual drama that obviously struck a chord with the academy due to its political message. The fact that the film was shot in black and white made it stand out from the colourful films that were nominated alongside it. The decision behind the colour scheme was to do with the fact that Clooney wanted to use black and white archive footage of McCarthy. Interestingly some audience members thought that McCarthy was being played by an actor and actually criticised the authenticity of the performance. However, the acting from top to bottom in Good Night and Good Luck is outstanding and it's hard to pick a weak link from the bunch. I particularly liked the tender turns given by Patricia Clarkson and Robert Downey Jr. as the married couple who had to hide their relationship at work. Ray Wise as the tragic Hellenbeck and Frank Langella as the strong-willed Palley were also on top form. But the stand out turn has to be the one given by David Strathairn as Murrow himself a fact the academy recognised by awarding the star with a Best Actor nomination. Strathairn portrays Murrow as a reserved individual whose passion kicks in as soon as he is able to talk about things that matter. I really liked the fact that the ensemble shared a great chemistry which made the character's family dynamic all the more believable. Whilst Good Night and Good Luck didn't win any of the six awards it was nominated for, Clooney did pick up his only acting Oscar to date for his role in Syriana.

Whilst Clooney did indeed pick up an acting award for Syriana it was in the supporting category and the actor would have to wait another two years to be recognised in the lead actor field. That recognition came for his performance as the eponymous anti-hero in Michael Clayton. Although Clooney had delivered fine performances up to that point he brought an extra tinge of vulnerability to the titular legal fixer. Director Tony Gilroy's script for Michael Clayton was brilliantly structured as he briefly tore away the layers of each character to reveal their true nature. In brief the film sees Clayton called to action by the head of the law firm for which he works when one of their senior litigators has a breakdown during a high profile deposition. Although the troubled Arthur Eden had been dealing with bipolar disorder, Clayton believes that his latest outburst is bigger than simply his illness. Gilroy later reveals that Arthur's paranoid suspicions are valid as he is being followed by goons hired by U-North; the agricultural company that the legal firm were defending. Halfway through the film Arthur is murdered however everyone bar Michael believes that he took his own life. From that point on, the film becomes a conspiracy thriller as Clayton tries to follow in Arthur's footsteps whilst evading suspicion from the U-North group. The unscrupulous U-North is represented by Karen Holder, a brusque general counsel who herself is suffering from mental difficulties. Events come to a head during the film's most iconic scene in which Michael's life is essentially saved by a group of horses. Although the film's ending is a little too neat, I did enjoy the fact that Michael decided to opt on the side of self-preservation while at the same time revealing the truth about the villainous U-North.

Usually I don't like dramas which start halfway through before flashing back to the beginning of the tale. However, in the case of Michael Clayton I think this worked as Gilroy makes the audience anticipate the events that we witnessed during the opening ten minutes. Gilroy's script is perfectly paced as he takes his time to let us get to know the characters before plunging us into the world of conspiracy. The character of Clayton himself isn't every inch the smooth-talking charmer that Clooney had been known for portraying up to this point. Indeed he has his demons which include a serious gambling habit and a recent bankruptcy caused by a bad investment in a bar. Clooney is great at portraying the infallible nature of the character as well as he is when conveying the cool, calm and collected part of Clayton's personality. Giving a similarly brilliant turn was Tom Wilkinson as the troubled Arthur Eden, who may be more sensible then everyone gives him credit for. Wilkinson seemed to be having an absolute hoot playing Arthur, especially when he went off the rails and stripped naked at the deposition. Wilkinson's ability to make us care for Arthur before his eventual demise meant that we then were rooting for Clayton to expose the truth behind his murder. Oddly, although both Clooney and Wilkinson were nominated for Oscars, the only winner on the night was Tilda Swinton. This decision struck me as a little odd as Swinton didn't make any big impression on me mainly as her character Karen Holder isn't on screen for a great deal of time. It almost felt if the Academy were honouring the film as a whole by letting Swinton win one of the seven categories in which Michael Clayton was nominated. Even though I've watched Michael Clayton before it didn't make as big an impression on me as it did this time round. I found it to be an intensely gripping thriller that revealed its hand gradually and was all the better for doing so. However I'm not shocked that it didn't win Best Picture and in a way I'm surprised that it was even nominated in the first place.

Next time we look at a film that occurs over three different timelines that are linked by one specific piece of literary work.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 405-406: Cowboys and Indians

People who've followed this journey from the beginning will know that, when I can, I like to group two or three nominees together. This time the films in the double bill have certain things in common such as their romantic nature and the fact that they netted Best Director and Best Score Oscars at their respective ceremonies. However, if I'm honest, the reason that Brokeback Mountain and Slumdog Millionaire are in the same entry is due to the fact that I liked the title of the post.

We start with Brokeback Mountain whose lead characters Jack Twist and Ennis Del Mar are technically sheep herders rather than cowboys but lets not bogged down in semantics. Even if they haven't seen the film most people will have an idea about Brokeback Mountain's plot as the film's title has become synonymous with dubious male relationships. What I can say about Brokeback Mountain is that it has incredibly slow start in which Jack and Ennis meet herding sheep upon the eponymous rock. Eventually realising their feelings for one another, Jack and Ennis begin sleeping together before they go their separate ways over the summer. Where the film got more interesting for me was in director Ang Lee's portrayal of the years following the couple's first meeting where they had to handle their secret whilst trying to go about a normal daily routine. The more reserved Ennis started got married quite early and started a family with the likeable Alma. Meanwhile, Jack took to the rodeo circuit eventually marrying the daughter of a wealthy farming supplies company. However, the pair participated in a number of lengthy fishing trips in which they reigniting their passion for one another. Although Jack wanted to start a new life on a ranch with Ennis he wasn't convinced and was worried that he'd eventually be caught out for his feelings towards a fellow man. Eventually the meetings became more infrequent and the final scenes revealed that Jack died possibly due as the result of a beating. However, the film's closing shot was beautifully realised as Ennis realised that he couldn't let Jack go even in death.

At the time Brokeback Mountain was released on DVD I was working at a video store and rented it out several times but I have to admit that I was never really as crazy about it as other critics. But watching with my 2015 eyes I appreciated the beauty of the film a lot more and feel it was almost criminal that cinematographer Rodrigo Prieto didn't win an award for his capturing of the Canadian landscape. That being said I still hold that the sheep herding scenes were quite slow and I feel that I would've still understood that Jack and Ennis' work was incredibly dull without having to witness it myself. However, I liked following the characters over a number of years and I also enjoyed how the timeline could be best ascertained by how old Ennis' daughters were as well as by the size of Anne Hathaway's hair. The fact that we didn't know exactly what year we were in helped screenwriters Diana Ossana and Larry McMurty to create a timelessness to Ennis and Jack's relationship with their fishing trips becoming more and more infrequent. On this viewing of Brokeback Mountain I really began to understand the characters and their differences between the quiet brooding Ennis and the boisterous Jack. This understanding was bolstered by a duo of fantastic turns from the late Heath Ledger as Ennis and Jake Gyllenhaal as Jack. Interestingly Ledger was nominated as Best Actor whilst Gyllenhaal was in the Supporting category however I think that both should have been put on equal pegging. That being said I feel that Ledger's performance was better as he perfectly portrayed the feelings of a man who said very few words. Michelle Williams was also given a Supporting Actress nomination as Ennis' heartbroken wife Alma; a role that cemented the actress' standing in Hollywood.

All in all Brokeback Mountain won three Oscars including ones for Ossana and McMurty's adapted screenplay and Ang Lee's fantastic direction. Also honoured was the Gustavo Santaolalla's iconic score which is one of the most memorable elements of the film. Going in to that year's Oscar ceremony, which I stayed up to watch live, Brokeback Mountain was the clear favourite to scoop Best Picture. There was surprise then when it went to rank outsider Crash; a film that hadn't even been nominated for a Best Picture Golden Globe the month before. Upon watching both films in quick succession, I have to concede that Brokeback is the better film however I'm not sure if I agree with the conspiracy theorists who blame the right-wing leanings of the Academy members on that year's Best Picture result. However, maybe neither film deserved to win and instead Crash triumphed over a more deserving nominee. Whilst you'll have to wait a bit longer to find out my verdict on the result as a whole, there's no denying that Brokeback Mountain is a beautifully constructed film about unrequited relationships. To me I don't think it mattered too much that the lead characters were gay but instead that these were two people who clearly loved each other deeply. Jack's line 'I Wish I Knew How to Quit You' perfectly sums up the film's central relationship in which neither member could escape their feelings for the other even after death.

While Brokeback Mountain didn't triumph in the Best Picture category the other film in this double bill, Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire, garnered the big prize during the last Oscar ceremony of the noughties. As well as winning multiple Oscars, both films have an episodic structure in which they follow the lead characters over a number of years. Both are also based on best-selling novels, with Slumdog's source material being the book Q&A by Vikras Swarup. It was the interest in adapting Swarup's book that first got Simon Beaufoy interested in the idea and he later took several trips to India; where the film is set. Eventually teaming up with director Danny Boyle the two set about creating a film that has a very complicated narrative structure. The modern day part of the story sees the adult Jamal Malik being questioned by detectives after being suspected of cheating whilst taking part in the Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? The film then uses the police interrogation as the basis for a series of flashbacks as Jamal explains in detail why he knew the answer to each individual question. I think the level of enjoyment one gets from Slumdog Millionaire comes from how easy you find it to suspend your disbelief. For example it's interesting how the order of the questions allow Jamal to tell his story in a chronological manner. Despite being a contrived story, Slumdog Millionaire at least tells a powerful tale of street children, prostitution and organised crime. At the time one review described Slumdog Millionaire as 'a feelgood film' which is laughable in a movie that contains a cavalcade of bleak moments. However, the film does have an incredibly feelgood ending before concluding with a Bollywood dance routine that feels out of place.

I think it was almost impossible for Danny Boyle to make a film about Indian slums without garnering some criticism from the country itself and indeed that's exactly what happened. Many members of the Indian film industry have criticised Boyle for presenting a westernised view of their country. It's true that at time Slumdog Millionaire does resemble an advert from the Indian tourist board however I do think that Boyle tried his best to create a somewhat accurate depiction of the country. What I really care about when watching these films is how well they're made and if they entertained me sufficiently. I think Slumdog Millionaire did both as Chris Dickens deftly edited the multiple timelines together whilst Anthony Dod Mantle's cinematography was utterly breathtaking at points. The plot structure, in which each part of the film is divided into an explanation of Jamal's reason for knowing a certain answer, didn't bother me as much as it did some others. I also found the character of Jamal an endearing one and therefore his various traumas were easy to sympathise with. In the lead role of the adult Jamal, I think that relative newcomer Dev Patel did his best to anchor the film as he brought a certain naivety to the character. Seasoned professionals such as Anil Kapoor and Irrfan Khan were on hand to bring a bit of experience to the film as the quiz show's host and the lead detective respectively. Praise must also go to the young actors who were absolutely brilliant as the younger versions of Jamal, his brother Salim and the love of his life Latika. Although it possibly dilutes a lot of the issues that it focuses on, Slumdog Millionaire is an entertaining film that's easy to watch. Well-shot, directed and edited with a strong storyline to boot I can't help but admit that I thoroughly enjoyed the film even it doesn't quite have that quality that I believe a Best Picture winner should contain.

Next time we focus on an actor who found success on both sides of the camera.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 404: A Star-Studded Murder Mystery

Even though he'd been working constantly in the decades since we met him last, it's odd to think that we haven't seen director Robert Altman on the blog since the 1970s. Although he continued to make ensemble pieces that were critically lauded, the Academy never honoured one of his films after Nashville. That was until the 2002 ceremony when one of Altman's final movies was nominated for several Oscars and even picked up a Best Screenplay award. However, if you didn't know who was calling the shots, you may be mistaken for not knowing that Gosford Park was an Altman film at all. 

That's because, unlike the Altman films I've seen up to this point, Gosford Park was a very British movie set in the titular estate. The film began life as an idea that actor Bob Balaban, one of the only Americans in the cast, had and pitched it to Altman. After introducing Altman to screenwriter Julian Fellowes; the three decided to create an Agatha Christie-style murder mystery. Like previous Christie adaptations; Fellowes' film featured plenty of characters who had motivations to finish off the arrogant Sir William McCordle. Those on the guest list include his aunt Duchess Trentham, his sisters and brother-in-laws as well as his daughter's suitor. What makes Fellowes' country house script stand out from the crowd is that it follows the downstairs servants as much as it does their masters. As Sir William had a penchant for affairs with his maids there were one or two grudges leaking below stairs so it's no surprise when he's found poisoned and stabbed at the end of the film's second act. Whilst the oafish Inspector Thompson attempts to solve the murder; Duchess Trentham's lady's maid Mary does a better job herself. From the start of the film, Mary becomes our surrogate as she is new to the service industry and doesn't know her way around Gosford Park. However, mainly based on listening in to various pieces of gossip, Mary works out who it was that both poisoned and stabbed the victim. Whilst we don't ultimately know whether the culprits will get arrested, I found the ending to be an interesting twist where the murderer was presented in a more sympathetic light than the victim. 

Although the two share no similarities when it comes to their setting, both Nashville and Gosford Park had similar story structures. Both feature numerous subplots that tie together by the end of the film which, in the case of Gosford Park, happens when the murderer is revealed. Like Nashville, not all of Gosford Park's side stories work and as a result some of the characters were surplus to requirements. I got the feeling that Fellowes and Altman had a lot more time for the servants than they did for their masters. That's why I felt that Helen Mirren's housekeeper, Eileen Atkin's cook and the two maids played by Emily Watson and Kelly MacDonald were possibly the most sympathetic characters of the bunch. Mirren gave a particularly memorable turn as the housekeeper who had given up everything in order to be the perfect servant. Mirren was nominated in the Supporting Actress category alongside co-star Maggie Smith who looked like she was having a hoot at portraying Duchess Trentham. However some of the other members of the cast were less lucky with the parts they were handed with Derek Jacobi, Charles Dance and Richard E. Grant three examples of actors with thankless roles. Fellowes' script was nicely paced with the suspects being build up gradually until the murder itself finally occurred. One element of the film I didn't like was the introduction of Stephen Fry's incompetent detective who threatened to turn a likeable drama into a farce. I'm not sure why Altman and Fellowes thought that they needed to change the tone of the film but Thompson's arrival did nothing for me. What makes Gosford Park so likeable is its witty script coupled with some lovely shots of the British countryside by cinematographer Andrew Dunn. Whilst it never has any particular Earth-shattering revelations to make, Gosford Park is still an entertaining watch that includes a fine ensemble cast. It's just a shame that Altman isn't still around making films like this as he sadly passed away in 2006.

Next an odd double bill of films that both earned wins for Best Director and Best Original Score. 

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 402-403: Michael and Peter's True-Life Tales

In 2003; actor Michael Sheen, director Stephen Frears and screenwriter Peter Morgan all worked together on a TV film called The Deal. Sheen starred as Tony Blair in the story of the future Prime Minister's infamous deal with his eventual deputy Gordon Brown. Three years later Sheen reprised his role as Blair for another film, this time on the big screen, which again was directed by Frears and written by Morgan.

That film was The Queen; a dramatic account of the royal family's reaction to the death of Princess Diana on the 31st August 1997. Although a lot of films I've watched so far have touched on modern history I can't really relate to them as I have no recollection of the events. This isn't true of most of what happened in The Queen as at the time I had a paper round and had to deliver the updated papers that carried the news of Diana's death. Morgan's script looks specifically at how the Royals wanted a private funeral whilst the general public instead wanted to mourn the woman that they'd taken to their hearts. In the middle was the newly elected Tony Blair who appreciated The Queen's wishes but at the same time was keen to offer a sympathetic message himself. The famous 'People's Princess' line is one of the many moments in the film that I remember seeing on TV at the time. Although at the same time I can't remember the reaction to the royal silence being so bad that there were calls to abolish the monarchy all together. What I liked about Morgan's script was the fact that neither Blair nor The Queen were portrayed as the villain of the piece. Both were doing what they thought was best and Blair in particular was eager to stick up for a woman who he had great respect for. Instead the evil forces were instead the members of the press who used the public grief to stir up outrage among the general public. The film's finale is the hint that one day the same thing that happened to Queen Elizabeth in this film would happen to Blair himself. This was obviously a knowing line as Blair was suffering press scrutiny at the time of the film's release and stepping down as Prime Minister soon after The Queen was released.

The fact that The Queen was co-produced by ITV studios suggests to me that the original plan was for it to be screened on the TV. There is in fact very little about The Queen that is particularly cinematic save a couple of nice shots of the Scottish countryside and an iconic shot of the monarch and a deer. My theory about why the film was eventually put on the big screen can be summed up in two words; Helen Mirren. Mirren's performance as Queen Elizabeth was so fantastic that I'm sure someone quickly noticed that it would garner a multitude of awards if it was screened in cinemas. This notion is completely understandable as Mirren's turn is one of the best Best Actress performances of all time and one that was destined to earn the star as many gongs as possible. Mirren's skill is to totally convince us the audience that she is Queen Elizabeth and I think she pulls it off expertly. Not for one moment did I feel like I was watching Mirren on screen and felt she delivered a brave portrayal of a woman during a week in which she'd felt she'd lost everything. I wasn't so convinced by the actors who were playing her other family members, most notably American star James Cromwell who appeared to be an odd casting choice as Prince Philip. Luckily Michael Sheen was on hand to deliver a similarly stellar performance as the ambitious yet thoughtful Prime Minister who was forced to make his first monumental decision. Just like Mirren, Sheen never lets his performance as Blair slip into caricature and as a result turns the Prime Minister into a three-dimensional character. The combination of Mirren and Sheen's performances, Morgan's measured script and Frears' assured direction turns The Queen into an enjoyable factual drama. At the same time there was nothing particularly remarkable about it perhaps aside from the tour de force performance given by its lead actress.

Four years later, Sheen and Morgan would team up again for the final part in the informal Blair trilogy, 'The Special Relationship' which explored the Prime Minister's friendship with Bill Clinton. However, Morgan and Sheen would also team up for Frost/Nixon; initially a play exploring David Frost's infamous set of interviews with disgraced President Richard Nixon. The play was so successful on both sides of the Atlantic that it was eventually made into a film which starred Sheen and the play's other lead actor Frank Langella. Unlike with the events in The Queen, I knew little about the basis of Frost/Nixon so had to take Morgan's words as fact. The way Morgan presented the interviews they seemed more like a set of sporting fixtures or boxing matches that would be the breaking point for one of their participants. Having funded the interviews almost single-handedly, Frost would lose his reputation and go bankrupt if the broadcasts didn't go his way. Meanwhile Nixon, who never formally apologised for his actions during the Watergate Scandal, was conscious that Frost would try to go for the jugular. Both surrounded themselves with crack teams however Frost's big mistake was in underestimating Nixon who run rings round him in the first couple of interviews. The film's turning point is a very odd late night call about cheeseburgers which is quite evidently a work of fiction but is a nice narrative move by Morgan as it changes the whole tone of the film. Obviously with a film that has quite a dry subject matter, Morgan has had to be quite liberal with the facts and reading round the subject it appears that he has done just that. It's certainly clear to see that, aside from Frost and Nixon; all of the other characters are quite broadly drawn and wear their political leanings firmly on their sleeve. Thankfully Morgan's crafting of the titular characters and the performances by the leading actors save the film being too clichéd.

I found Sheen to be even better as David Frost than he was as Tony Blair as he delivered another barnstorming performance. He played Frost as a jovial sort of chap who didn't take anything at all seriously but was secretly harbouring a fair amount of insecurities. Sheen conveyed Frost's fears perfectly as for the most part he let his character be as animated as possible but every now and then the smile slipped. However, just like with The Queen, it was his co-star that was given all the plaudits whereas Sheen was left without a nomination. I think in terms of both films the Academy struggled to know where to place Sheen especially with Frost/Nixon where he shared equal billing with Langella. I personally wouldn't have minded if both men had been nominated for Best Actor as they deserved it more than Brad Pitt for his make-up aided turn in Benjamin Button. However it was Langella who gave the flashier turn albeit one that showed a more sensitive side to the once great president. It was quite easy to tell that Frost/Nixon had started life as a stage play as at times it did feel as if Howard had just brought a camera to the theatre. The majority of the film, especially the portion of it that focuses specifically on the interviews, was very dry and was only slightly spiced up by the actors. Therein lies my major problem with Frost/Nixon as I don't believe that it should ever have been turned into a film in the first place as the story really doesn't suit the cinema screen. Whilst I feel it's an interesting story, it doesn't make for a particularly entertaining film and Howard certainly doesn't utilise the cinema screen to its fullest potential. However, due to the fact that it covers a major event in U.S. history, it's still easy to see why the Academy heaped five nominations upon Frost/Nixon. While it's not necessarily a bad film it's not one that ever drew me into its story and the only really compelling elements of it were the performances given by both Langella and the sadly overlooked Sheen.

Next time we travel back to Britain where an array of famous faces are suspected of murder.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 401: A Deathly Twist (Spoilers)

Over the 400 plus films I've seen some of them have included some memorable twists including the revelation of Rosebud as a sleigh or the fact that the majority of the characters in A Beautiful Mind. But of all the great movie twists one stands head and shoulders above the rest, that being the final revelation in The Sixth Sense. Obviously to talk about in some detail would require some plot spoiling so if you haven't seen this film that was released over fifteen years ago then I suggest you either watch it or move on.

The Sixth Sense stars Bruce Willis who was on a second career resurgence following his downward trajectory post-Pulp Fiction. Willis plays Dr. Malcolm Crowe, a child psychologist who is shot in the opening scene by a former patient who believed that his former doctor failed him. Several months later Dr. Crowe is tasked with taking on a new case in the form of nine-year-old Cole Sear. From the outset, writer/director M. Night Shyamalan presents Cole as an outsider by having picked on at school both by the pupils and the teachers. Meanwhile Cole's mother Lynn starts to worry about her son's state of mind and starts experiencing odd occurrences in the house. Things come to a head in a classic scene where Cole informs Crowe that he sees dead people. From this moment on we get to see things from Cole's perspective and learn that he tries to help people cross over to the other side by helping them in some way. This is seen via a subplot involving a dead girl who wants her father to know that her stepmother's poisoning was the reason she passed away. Although the hints were there, Shyamalan eventually lets the audience in on the film's major twist; that Malcolm himself is actually dead. His reason for staying on Earth is to understand how he failed the man who fatally shot and also to make sure his wife knew that he loved her. I think, in the year's since its release The Sixth Sense has sort of become synonymous with this twist ending. That's why I tried to be more subjective in my judgement of the movie and looked at it as a whole.

For a movie that is essentially a psychological thriller with elements of a horror film, I'm surprised that The Sixth Sense garnered a Best Picture nomination to begin with. This surprise comes from the fact that the film is set in the present day, features no 'issue-based' characters and doesn't contain any flashy set pieces. Instead, it's quite a traditional character-led piece that has several chiller-esque elements which build up to the big reveal. I can't remember if I actually spotted the twist the first time round, but every repeat view of The Sixth Sense makes it more and more obvious that Malcolm is a ghost. Disregarding the twist, I think that Shyamlan's script is at its strongest when we follow the tortured Cole; who is one of the best written young characters that I've encountered so far. The portrayal of Cole is enhanced due to the outstanding performance by Haley Joel Osment; who was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his role. Osment gives an incredibly tender portrayal of a boy who is struggling in his personal life due to his extraordinary ability to communicate with the other side. Despite its silly premise, I don't think The Sixth Sense ever really loses any credibility and instead the latter scenes fill in the gaps of Cole's character. Alongside Osment, Toni Collette also was nominated for a Supporting Actress Oscar for her assured turn as Cole's worried mother. Bruce Willis anchored the whole film together well and, as someone who's best known for his action roles, I found him perfectly convincing as a mild-mannered child psychologist. Shymalan showed throughout The Sixth Sense that he knew how to perfectly build-up to a killer reveal and he punctuated the film's many shocks with some real human emotion. Unfortunately, with the exception of his second feature Unbreakable, every Shyamlan film has significantly dipped in quality with his latest offering After Earth being a prime example. However, The Sixth Sense does demonstrate how good a storyteller Shyamlan was when he first appeared on the scene and I'm hoping that one day we'll see this brilliance at work once again.

Next time we see a British actor and writer team up for two true life tales that garnered numerous nominations at separate Oscar ceremonies.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 401-402: A Musical Revival

Back on Day 290 of the Oscar Challenge I looked at the last live action musical that was nominated for an Academy Award, that being All that Jazz. Since then the only musical film to bother the Best Picture category has been the animated Disney classic Beauty and The Beast. However, in the early 21st Century, the musical suddenly became cool again although the first entry into this double bill would hardly be recognisable to fans of the classic movie musical.

That film was Baz Luhrmann's Moulin Rouge which received eight nominations at the 2002 Academy Awards. It's no surprise that Moulin Rouge's two wins were in the production and costume design categories as it's a film that's been styled within an inch of its life. Lurhmann's aim was to recreate what it felt like to be in the titular French venue during the late 1890s. To do so he used a cavalcade of contemporary pop tunes and framed the majority of the film's numbers so they looked like music videos. With a variety of recognisable songs littered throughout Moulin Rouge, Lurhmann spent almost two years securing the rights to the soundtrack which included a tango version of The Police's 'Roxanne' and a high-kicking musical imagining of Madonna's 'Like a Virgin'. As with the majority of the musicals I've covered on this blog, Moulin Rouge's story is very slight indeed. It's told from the point-of-view of penniless writer Christian who is reflecting on his brief romance with the Moulin Rouge's star turn Satine. Satine and Christian fall in love over one night as he convinces her to star in a musical which is very much based around their own story. Standing in the way of the young couple's romance is a pompous duke who wishes to be Satine in order to give the Moulin Rouge's owner Howard Zidler the funding to turn his club into a theatre. Although it features plenty of plush musical scenes, the content of Moulin Rouge is quite dark as it deals with themes of prostitution, rape and terminal illness. The final twenty minutes, all based around the show within a show, are a dazzling treat for both the ears and the eyes and sort of distract from the film's many minor problems.

Moulin Rouge is definitely an enjoyable movie and you can't help but like a film that plays around with the very idea of the musical itself. Every scene, costume and character is well-designed with Donald M. McAlpine's cinematography varying throughout the piece. Nicole Kidman's performance as Satine was the only turn in the film to be nominated for an Oscar and I think it was more than deserved. Kidman's balanced Satine's on-stage persona brilliantly with the more fragile elements of the character's personality and she really made me care about her deteriorating health. As Harold Zidler, I found Jim Broadbent to be utterly magnificent as at times his character was very dark and at other times provided some great comic moments. Similarly great was John Leguizamo as Toulouse-Letrec; the character who the 1950s film version of Moulin Rouge was based upon. On the other hand I didn't think Ewan McGregor had the requisite amount of passion to play Christian and I don't believe he and Kidman sparkled on screen as much as they could. The biggest issue though was the character of The Count who felt like something out of a pantomime whilst actor Richard Roxbrough didn't just chew the scenery but devoured it as a three course meal. However I don't think this ultimately mattered in a film that is so joyous and basically reintroduced the musical for a modern audience. If Moulin Rouge hadn't been as successful as it was I don't believe that recent film musicals would've made such a big impact at the box office. But thankfully Luhrmann's vision struck a chord with movie-going audiences around the world and this montage of music videos strung together by a loose plot became one of the best films of the year.

Even with Moulin Rouge's success I don't think many would've predicted that a musical would win Best Picture the following year. Rather than another film crafted in the same postmodern style of Moulin Rouge, it was a rather traditional musical that ended up claiming the big prize at the 2003 awards. The film in question was a screen adaptation of popular Broadway show Chicago; which was actually the show that Roy Scheider's director was working on in All that Jazz. Though it's structure is very much in the style of an old-fashioned musical, Chicago does share similarities with Moulin Rouge in the way that it lays out it's numbers. Each performance is laid out as if the characters were singing directly to an audience and are strung together by introductions by Taye Diggs' piano player. In fact Diggs' supporting turn put me in mind of Joel Grey's Emcee in Cabaret as both serve a similar purpose. However, each performance in the film is intertwined with characters acting out the plot whether it be a press conference or a murder trial. The basic plot of Chicago revolves around Roxie Hart; a naive Chicago residence who dreams of being a star and who kills her lover after he insults her lack of talent. Roxie's subsequent arrest puts her in Cook County Prison alongside her idol and fellow murderess Velma Kelly. The rest of the film then becomes a power struggle between Roxie and Velma as both try to garner the interest of the press ahead of their respective trials. Playing both women against each other is slick lawyer Billy Flynn, whose titular 'Razzle Dazzle' style is the focus of one of the musical's more famous tunes. Just like Moulin Rouge, Chicago uses its stylish musical numbers to cover up rather dark subject matter in this case infidelity and murder. However, in my opinion, Chicago doesn't really warm the heart in the way that Moulin Rouge does.

I feel part of the reason for this is due to Renee Zellweger's central turn as Roxie as I never really cared about her in the way I did Kidman's Satine. In fact Chicago suffers from a lack of sympathetic characters with the only person who deserved any sort of sympathy being Roxie's cuckolded husband Amos. The ubiquitous John C Reilly was absolutely great as the almost invisible Amos and particularly shone during his character's 'Mr. Cellophane' number. Earning the Best Supporting Actress award for her performance in the film, Catherine Zeta-Jones gave a deliberately over-the-top turn as the pampered Velma. Zeta-Jones at least went for it full throttle though in a way that I don't think Zellweger ever did. Meanwhile Queen Latifah added a bit of musical depth as Cook County's matron Mama Morton and Richard Gere looked like he was enjoying himself as Billy Flynn. Whilst some of the musical numbers most notably 'The Cell Block Tango' and the finale hit the mark others did nothing for me. I did however like the way that each number was introduced and found that director Rob Marshall laid everything out perfectly. But Chicago's ultimate problem was that there wasn't a lot going on beneath the surface and this was a film whose only purpose seemed to be to entertain. I certainly don't think the film has taken on classic status since its release and it never screamed out Best Picture winner to me when I watched it at the cinema the first time round. That's not a knock against a very fun and enjoyable musical but instead against the Academy who felt that this was more deserving of the big prize than some of the better films that were released in the same year.

Next time we look at a film which contains one of the most famous movie twists of all time.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 399-400: Winslet Wins It

We first met Kate Winslet back in the 1990s when she made her first impact on the Academy in Sense and Sensibility before wowing in the lead role of Titanic. Throughout the 2000s she was awarded with three more nominations and finally won the Oscar that had eluded her with her sixth nomination.

Before we look at that film we'll look back at some of the actress' other nominations as she followed on from Sense and Sensibility and Titanic with a Supporting nod for her role as a young Judi Dench in Iris. Three years later she was nominated for a Best Actress Oscar for her role in Michel Gondry's quirky romantic drama Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Although that film was overlooked in the Best Picture category, Winslet's other starring role that year was in a movie in contention for the main prize. That film was Finding Neverland, Marc Forster's film about the creation of Peter Pan in which Winslet played Sylvia Llewelyn Davies mother of the boys who would become the muses of author J.M. Barrie. In the role of Barrie, Johnny Depp brought his trademark innocence but also portrayed the Scottish playwright as quite immature. The film begins with the opening of one of Barrie's plays which ultimately ends in disaster and forces him to create a new production. At this time he also meets the Llewelyn Davies family with middle son Peter being the boy who intrigues Barrie the most. From there on David Magee's screenplay looks at the time Barrie spent with the family as well as his construction of the oddest play ever to grace the stage. Magee mixes fantasy sequences with real life drama as Barrie tries to bring out the boys' imagination whilst at the same time dealing with problems in his own marriage. As with any good Oscar film, Finding Neverland also features a character with an incurable disease with Sylvia passing away in one of the film's final scenes. However one of the film's strengths is that it never deals with death in a mawkish way and instead Sylvia's death makes way for a new chapter in her son's lives.

 I have an incredible soft spot for Finding Neverland and it's one of those films that just makes you feel warm inside. Whilst it wasn't Winslet's best film released that year, it's easy to see why the Academy lapped it up as much as they did. From Roberto Schaefer's brilliant cinematography to Jan A.P. Kaczmarek's Oscar-winning score everything about Finding Neverland was utterly joyous. Following on from his debut nomination the year before, Depp's second nod was arguably his most deserved as he played Barrie perfectly. Combining a childlike innocence with a knowing look, I felt that Depp led the film throughout and gave a thoroughly charming turn. As the young Peter, Freddie Highmore stayed on the right side of saccharine whilst Radha Mitchell gave a grounded portrayal of Barrie's naive wife. In supporting roles I found Julie Christie and Dustin Hoffman to add a bit of substance to the film with the latter popping us Barrie's financier. If there's one let down in the cast then it's Winslet herself who doesn't ever seem to have much to do. Her role is to almost act as the damsel in distress and the facilitator of Barrie's relationship with her sons. One of Finding Neverland's great assets is its fantasy sequences in which the boys and Barrie imagine various scenarios. My particular favourites would have to be the one in which Barrie turned his dog into a dancing bear and later when he let the boys believe they were on a pirate ship. Though Finding Neverland doesn't have any depth to speak of, I think it's an utterly beautiful piece of film-making with a story that's worth telling. With stories that speak to adults and children alike, I think that Finding Neverland is the perfect family film and was definitely worthy of its place in that year's Best Picture category.

Two years later, Winslet was nominated for another Best Actress Oscar this time for her role in suburban drama Little Children. She also appeared in an episode of Ricky Gervais' sitcom Extras in which she claimed that actors who play Nazis often go on to win Oscars. Someone somewhere was obviously watching this episode as, a couple of years later, Winslet was cast as former Auschwitz guard Hanna Schmitz in Stephen Daldry's The Reader. The film is mainly split into three parts as we follow the relationship between Hanna and the initially 15-year-old Michael Berg. The first act of the show sees the somewhat gawkish teenage Michael meeting Hanna for the first time as he experiences the onset of scarlet fever. Michael and the older Hanna spend a lot of time together with her demanding more of him and as a result alienating him from his friends. Eventually tiring of their liaisons, which involved sex and him reading to her, Michael ends things and subsequently goes to law school. Michael encounters Hanna once again when his law professor takes a group of students to learn from the war trials that are currently taking place in Berlin. It is here where Michael learns that Hanna was a guard in Auschwitz and also that she is illiterate hence her obsession with hearing others read. Winslet scored the Oscar-winning triumvirate, not only playing a Nazi but also one with a disability who physically ages on screen. This ageing process happens in the film's third act where the now married, and later divorced, Michael teaches Hanna to read using books from the library and a tape recorder. Michael, now played by Ralph Fiennes, encourages his former lover to finally own up to her mistakes and the two eventually meet up just before she's released. As The Reader never pretends to be a romantic film as such, Michael and Hanna aren't given their happy ending and instead he has to wrap the story up himself.

As the film divides itself into third acts, I will attempt to do the same with my review as I found The Reader to be three entirely different movies. At the start, The Reader feels like a film about forbidden romance as we follow Michael and Hanna's illicit trysts. For a film with so many sex scenes, I found The Reader to be incredibly passionless as there was never really any chemistry between Winslet and young actor David Kross. The second part of the film, involving the war trials, was more engaging and this to me was when Winslet's performance was at its strongest. The involvement of Bruno Ganz, as Michael's Holocaust surviving law professor, added to the quality of this segment as did David Hare's adapted screenplay. Moving on from the courtroom drama of the second act, the third part of The Reader almost felt like The Shawshank Redemption as Hanna finally overcame her illiteracy with Michael's outside help. After a strong second act, The Reader lost me once again as I felt that Daldry and Hare packed too much in to a short amount of screen time. Michael's marriage, the birth of his first child and his divorce were all skipped over at such a quick pace that nothing really had a chance to sink in. One of the brightest spots of these final scenes was Ralph Fiennes who was perfectly cast as the somewhat emotionless Michael. Fiennes and Winslet's only scene together was one of The Reader's strongest and I personally wished that they could've shared more screen time together. Alas this wasn't to be and after the end credits rolled I felt incredibly unaffected what I'd seen in the last two hours. It's very rare that a film leaves me so emotionless but, save Winslet's above average performance, there wasn't a lot to care about in the film. That's why I'm so surprised that it was nominated for Best Picture and I feel that Winslet's win came due to the fact that she was due a win. It's a shame that The Reader is the film that Winslet won her Oscar for as she's been so much stronger elsewhere and, due to the fact that the superior Revolutionary Road was released around the same time, Daldry's movie wasn't even the actress' best that year.

Next time we see the revival of a genre that has laid dormant since the early 1980s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 398: What's the Story?

After watching three fairly epic Scorsese films in a row I was ready for a little bit of a break and thankfully there was a little bit more refinement waiting for me in my next selection of Joe Wright's Atonement. However, though it initially looks sedate, Atonement deals with some rather shocking themes and ends with a rather heartbreaking admission.

The majority of Atonement is devoted to the story, and the storytelling ability, of Briony Tallis who we first meet as a thirteen-year-old in the summer of 1935. Almost the entire first half of Atonement takes place over the course of a single day as Briony's lies have far-reaching consequences. What I found clever about Atonement was the way we see events from Briony's point-of-view and then we flashback to see how they came about. So for example we spy her sister Cecilia emerging from a fountain in front of the dashing Robbie before finding out why. It's Robbie's feelings for Cecilia that land him in trouble when Briony finds an explicit letter from him meant for her sister. As revenge she tells the police that she saw Robbie force himself on her cousin Lola. This accusation, combined with Robbie's letter, means that he's sent to prison where he stays for four years. The action then flashes forward where Robbie is now a soldier in World War II after agreeing to join the army as a way out of prison. The majority of Robbie and Cecilia's interaction in the film's second half comes via letters which are read in some incredibly well-edited set pieces. Elsewhere, the now eighteen-year-old Briony has realised just what she's done and is attempting to make amends with both Robbie and Cecilia. After an excellent reconstruction of the war-torn scenes on the sea at Dunkirk; we see what we believe happened to the film's tragic couple. However the epilogue, featuring a much older incarnation of Briony, reveals what truly happened to her sister and Robbie. It ends with the news that the modern day Briony has finally written her own book; Atonement, based on the events of the film.

Christopher Hampton's adaptation of Ian McEwan's novel puts Atonement's focus fully on storytelling and he and Wright definitely demonstrate this throughout the course of the film. I personally loved seeing the narrative from different angles and also the way in which Seamus McGarvey framed Robbie's letter writing so we could see the rude word that his correspondence contained. The film plays with narrative conventions and, when I first saw the film back in 2007, I was shocked by the older Briony's final confession. Watching it now, I have to say that I enjoyed the first half of the film much more than the second. The lust-filled summer night was to me a much more engaging proposition than another film set during World War II. However, I feel that it's the war portion of Atonement which piqued the interest of the Academy. To his credit McGarvey's five-minute sweeping shot of the Dunkirk beaches were superbly handled. I personally also enjoyed Dario Marianelli's Oscar-winning score which enhanced the drama perfectly and was at its best when it included the ominous typing of Briony's typewriter. Of the cast only young Saoirse Ronan was Oscar-nominated for her role as the youngest incarnation of Briony. To her credit the then unknown Ronan was utterly engaging as a young girl who'd just seen her first love in a compromising position with her sister. Ronan definitely gave the strongest portrayal of Briony which is surprising seeing as the oldest version of the character was played by Vanessa Redgrave. Meanwhile Keira Knightely and James McAvoy shared a heated chemistry as Cecilia and Robbie, a fact that made their romance all the more believable. Although not on the level of some of the epic films I've watched recently, Atonement is definitely a well-produced grown-up drama. Whilst I personally enjoyed its first half a lot more, there's no denying that Joe Wright's film more than deserved its place among that year's five Best Picture nominees.

Next time we focus on a much-nominated actress who finally got her hands on an Oscar during the noughties.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 395-397: Marty & Leo Go for Gold

It's fair to say that Martin Scorsese and Oscar have had a pretty good relationship as he's found one of his films in the Best Picture category in the last three decades. These films; Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas, all starred the great Robert De Niro and propelled the actor to stardom. In the early 21st Century, Scorsese all but ditched De Niro in favour of another star; Leonardo DiCaprio. We first met DiCaprio as a young actor who just happened to be cast in the lead role in one of the biggest films of all time; Titanic. Although the film itself was visually spectacular, I didn't really rate DiCaprio's performance and found him a little immature. However, as the noughties rolled on it appeared as if Scorsese and DiCaprio brought out the best in each other and their partnership finally saw the former pick up his well-deserved Best Director Oscar.

Scorsese's first collaboration with DiCaprio was Gangs of New York a film that the director had been working on for several decades. Based loosely on Herbert Asbury's non-fiction work of the same name Gangs of New York looks at the 19th century conflict between Irish immigrants and American natives as they fought for supremacy over several decades. I found that Scorsese dragged you into the picture kicking and screaming with an opening fight between Irish Priest Vallon's Dead Rabbits and the merciless Bill 'The Butcher' Cutting's Natives. This opening fight scene ultimately sees Vallon murdered by Cutting and his son Amsterdam being shipped off to an orphanage. DiCaprio then appears as the older incarnation of Amsterdam whose set on revenge against the man who killed his father. Instead of waging war against Cutting straight away, Amsterdam instead infiltrates his gang and at one point even saves his life. Cutting eventually begins to look upon Amsterdam as a son and therefore feels even more betrayed when he finally learns the truth. The film's third act sees Amsterdam's recovery from Bill's attack on him and his attempts to gain power in the city. It's in this third act that DiCaprio comes alive as Amsterdam empowers his Irish brethren and in doing so appoints one of his father's old allies as the town's sheriff. The film ends with another incredibly engaging fight sequence as Amsterdam takes the place of his father in the new incarnation of The Dead Rabbits. However, this fight plays out slightly differently as it coincides with the New York City Draft Riots and means that Cutting and Amsterdam have to contend with another conflict going on behind them. I found that this final sequence was a fitting end to a film that was problematic but ultimately satisfying.

It's clear to see that Gangs of New York was a labour of love for Scorsese and it apparently took him several years to complete. Part of the reason for this was his struggle to make the piece as authentic as possible down to making sure that each character's accent was spot on. One of the most impressive elements of Gangs of New York was its production design, which shockingly didn't win the Oscar in that category. Production designer Dante Ferretti recreated over a mile of mid-nineteenth century buildings in Rome where the filming took place. Ferretti's design is eye-catching from the initial scene which focuses on Cutting and The Priest's battle for the Five Points. Everything about Gangs of New York is designed within an inch of its life from the outstanding costumes to the perfectly coiffed moustached of Daniel Day-Lewis, who plays Bill 'The Butcher' with great aplomb. In fact Day-Lewis holds the film together at times and his performance earned Gangs of New York its only acting Oscar. Day-Lewis dominates the screen and showed us glimpses of There Will be Blood's Daniel Plainview; a role that snatched him his second Best Actor Oscar five years after Gangs of New York. The decision to cast Cameron Diaz as Amsterdam's love interest Jenny was an interesting one and I personally felt she fell short of the mark. Meanwhile, I found DiCaprio's acting style to be rather petulant and didn't think he was a match for Day-Lewis' scenery chewing. At the same time there were hints that Scorsese was bringing the best out in DiCaprio as his performance was certainly more assured than when we saw him in Titanic. As a whole I found Gangs of New York to be overly long and there was at least half a dozen scenes that were surplus to requirements. But it's hard to knock a film to which the director has clearly devoted so much time to perfecting. The combination of exquisite production design, a fine supporting cast and Day-Lewis' turn as The Butcher means that Gangs of New York is an enthralling watch even if it isn't the masterpiece that Scorsese intended it to be.

Two years later, Scorsese found himself at the Oscars once again with his Howard Hughes biopic The Aviator being nominated for Best Picture. In contrast to Gangs of New York, The Aviator didn't start of as Scorsese's baby and instead had been an idea floating around Hollywood since the 1970s. The Hughes biopic finally gained legs in the late 1990s with DiCaprio signed on to star whilst Michael Mann was set to direct. However, Mann was later dropped by the studio and replaced by Scorsese; partially due to his prior working relationship with DiCaprio. It was certainly clear that in the two years since Gangs of New York DiCaprio had come on leaps and bounds as an actor. It was also evident that he'd done his research into Howard Hughes' OCD; a condition that made him unable to deal with germs of any kind. If I had a particular issue with The Aviator then it was with John Logan's screenplay which I felt was rather episodic. The first act dealt with Hughes' creation of Hells' Angels before going on to look at his relationship with Katherine Hepburn. It was the Hughes and Hepburn story that really captured my imagination, partially as I'd followed the latter's career throughout the course of this blog. The film then follows Hughes' continued problems with Pan-Am and his eventual trial by the Senate. I thought that this latter half of the film was a lot less interesting with the trial scenes feeling rather clichéd. Additionally, I believe that Ava Gardner wasn't as compelling a female lead as Hepburn had been during the film's earlier moments. However, at least Logan ended the film superbly with a small victory for Hughes being followed by the suggestion that his mental health may be at its worst.

If I remember correctly, The Aviator was the definite favourite to win the Best Picture prize going into the 2005 Oscars. Although it ultimately didn't triumph in that category, it did go on to pick up an impressive five statuettes on the night. Winners included cinematographer Robert Richardson and editor Thelma Schoonmaker both of whom made the aerial scenes absolutely stunning. Dante Farretti was also rewarded with an Oscar for his recreation of Hughes' many aircrafts as well as recreating classic Hollywood landmarks. Most deserving of all was Cate Blanchett who, in my humble opinion, stole the show as the feisty Katherine Hepburn. As somebody who has watched a large amount of Katherine Hepburn films in the last few years, I can say without a doubt that Blanchett captured the actress' key mannerisms to a tea. It's a telling sign of Blanchett's skill that after she leaves the film the quality dips with Kate Beckinsale's Ava Gardner being incredibly inferior in comparison. Alan Alda was given a Best Supporting Actor nod for his role as the corrupt Senator Brewster, who attempted to bring down Hughes in order to help his friend at Pan-Am airways. However, the most impressive turn came from DiCaprio himself who I felt perfectly anchored the film as the troubled Hughes. One of Logan's strengths was to gradually build up the theme of Hughes' OCD which was aided by Schoonmaker's editing of certain situations. DiCaprio was therefore able to hint at his character's downfall before he descended briefly into madness. Although DiCaprio lost that year's Best Actor award to Ray's Jamie Foxx he still demonstrated for the first time that he was capable of leading an epic such as The Aviator. Whilst I wasn't a fan of the film's episodic structure, Scorsese once again put together a classic Hollywood epic that looked fantastic. Unfortunately it was yet another film that failed to net him that elusive Best Director prize.

That prize would finally come his way two years later in yet another film that featured Leonardo DiCaprio in one of the lead roles. This time it was The Departed; an adaptation of the Korean Infernal Affairs series which saw the action transplanted to downtown Boston. As well as teaming up with DiCaprio for the third time, The Departed also saw Scorsese work with blog favourite Jack Nicholson in his most recent Oscar-nominated film to date. The film saw Nicholson play Boston mob boss Frank Costello, who was based on real-life Boston gangster Whitey Bulger. The early scenes of The Departed focus on Costello's mentoring of the impressionable Michael Sullivan who would later go on to become an officer in the Boston PD. Sullivan, played by Matt Damon, uses his new found position to feed information to Costello in order for him to evade detection. At the same time the Boston Police Chief enlists DiCaprio's police cadet Billy Costigan to go undercover in Costello's gang in order to feed them information. The film then follows Sullivan and Costigan's stories as they attempt to evade detection in the organisations that they've found themselves in. Another connection between the pair is police psychologist Madolyn Madden, who begins a relationship with Sullivan and eventually becomes his live-in girlfriend. At the same time Madden treats Costigan as a patient and the two begin an affair behind Sullivan's back. Like Gangs of New York and The Aviator before it, The Departed is a little overlong and like Scorsese's previous two Oscar contenders it clocks in at two and a half hours. However, after a slow start, The Departed finally gets going in its final hour where revelations are thrown out at an alarming speed. The finale is especially breathtaking and I remember being taken aback the first time I watched it over seven years ago.

When Scorsese won his Oscar for The Departed, which itself was that year's Best Picture winner, it was said that it was like him being awarded a Lifetime Achievement award for an inferior film. Although The Departed is far from Scorsese's most accomplished film it's still an interesting crime picture which has a lot to say about identity and what truly defines us. Screenwriter William Monahan's screenplay was definitely the strongest of the three films in this post and all of the major characters' motives are perfectly explained. Though it doesn't look as good as the two prior films, I believe that The Departed is Scorsese at his best as it's a grimy film that explores the underbelly of city life. Boston appears as a character in its own right thanks to Michael Ballhaus' fantastic cinematography. Meanwhile Leonardo DiCaprio shines once again as the conflicted Costigan who is constantly looking over his shoulder just in case he gets rumbled. Costigan is definitely the most interested role that DiCaprio has played up to this point although he wasn't awarded with a Best Actor nomination for this particular film. However DiCaprio did feature in that year's line-up for his turn in another film; Blood Diamond and I think this is possibly due to the fact that he and Matt Damon share equal screen time. I was also impressed by Damon's turn as the quick-witted Sullivan who ultimately destroys the man he work so hard to protect. Elsewhere Nicholson gives a scene-stealing turn as the terrifying Costello and Vera Farmiga held her own as Madolyn; the only woman to really feature strongly in the film. It was odd then that none of these performers earned an Oscar nod with The Departed's only acting nomination being given to Mark Wahlberg as the foul-mouthed Staff Sgt. Dignam. The Departed also utilised popular music well with The Rolling Stone's 'Gimme Shelter' and Dropkick Murphys' 'Shipping Up to Boston' being used several time throughout its run time. Ultimately, though not Scorsese's best work, The Departed deserved the plaudits it garnered thanks to its enthralling final act and a fine ensemble cast. It also proved that DiCaprio and Scorsese were a winning partnership and I think this post proved that they definitely brought out the best in one another.

That's not the end for Scorsese and DiCaprio whose partnership would result in another Oscar-nominated film in the following decade but that's another story. Next time however we look at a little British film that struck a chord with audiences and critics alike.