Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 457-458: Carry on Clooney

We carry straight on from the last post with two more films that involved George Clooney both in front and behind the screen.

We start with Up in the Air, the film which earned Clooney his second Best Actor nomination and was possibly the film that capitalised on his old-school movie star charm. Up in the Air is directed and co-written by Jason Reitman who we first met when he helmed Juno with this film sharing a similar tone with his previous Oscar winner. Just like with Juno, Up in the Air deals with quite a serious subject matter in this case mass redundancies; quite a pressing topic during the recession in the late noughties. The film sees Clooney play Ryan Bingham, a man who fires people for a living and spends most of his time in planes going from different destinations in America. Ryan's life is devoted to racking up 10 million air miles and to presenting his self-help course known as 'the empty backpack'. Up in the Air sees Ryan experiencing two changes in his life, firstly the prospect that he made be grounded and sent back to his office in Omaha. This is due to the fact that whiz kid recruit Natalie has set up a new video conferencing firing system which enables all employees to do their job from the office. Annoyed at this idea, Ryan takes Natalie on the road in an attempt to show her that firing people isn't as simple as she believes. At the same time Ryan encounters Alex, who is also a frequent flyer and the two share a mutual attraction as they marvel at each other's air miles. As the film progresses the commitment-phobic Ryan realises that he might be falling for Alex in a big way. However, in a similar manner to Juno, Up in the Air doesn't finish in the way you think it might and instead there are a few twists littered before the finale.

Whilst promoting Up in the Air, Reitman said that he wanted to make Ryan a likeable character who fires people for a living and to do that he had to cast the most charming actor possible. It's Clooney's charm that makes the film in my opinion and in particular it's the fact that he's now an ageing heartthrob that gives Ryan that extra bit of sympathy. Clooney is great at delivering Reitman and Shelton Turner's fast-paced dialogue and is equally adept at presenting the plot of the film without his lines every feeling particularly expositional. Clooney is fantastically supported by Vera Farmiga as Alex, who more than holds her own in his company and the two form a believable chemistry throughout the film. Similarly great is Anna Kendrick who gave a breakthrough turn as the ambitious but insecure Natalie whose relationship with Ryan is equally as important as his romance with Alex. Reitman added a tinge of realism to the piece by interviewing numerous people who had recently been made redundant and adding their experiences into the film. Reitman asked them to think back to when they were let go and so their responses to Natalie and Ryan's appearance feel totally natural. Juno's JK Simmons also gives a memorable if brief turn as one of the fired employees in a pivotal scene in which Ryan demonstrates to Natalie that the job isn't as easy as she initially believed. Everything about Up in the Air is well-styled from the business suits that the characters don down to the loyalty cards that turn both Ryan and Alex on. If I were to have one criticism of the film it would be that the pace dips briefly when Ryan and Alex attend his sister's wedding however the subsequent final act of Up in the Air more than makes up for it. Despite being nominated for six awards at the Oscars, including honours for the three lead performers, Up in the Air failed to secure one win. This is a shame as I feel it's an incredibly relevant film with three fantastic performances and a brilliant director at the helm.
Three years later, Clooney finally made it to the stage as part of the team of that year's Best Picture winner Argo. Argo was based on the hostage crisis in Iran's American embassy in the early 1980s and more specifically the six 'houseguests' of the Canadian ambassador who'd fled their workplace just before the rioting took place. To get the six out of Iran, CIA operative Tony Mendez came up with an elaborate story to create a fake sci-fi movie, the titular Argo, and pass the Americans off as a film crew scouting locations in Iran. Clooney first learnt of this bizarre story after reading an article about it and so set about producing the picture. Clooney eventually hired Ben Affleck to both direct the piece and star in the role of Mendez; however Clooney himself would only be credited as a producer. Since we last saw him in Good Will Hunting, Affleck's career trajectory had been precarious to say the least initially starring in several flops and being more famous for his relationship with Jennifer Lopez. However, in 2007, he began directing films and earned rave reviews for his first two features; Gone Baby Gone and The Town. His roles both behind and in front of the camera were equally impressive here as Argo was visually impressive and had a fantastic lead turn. As the film goes on Mendez turns to make-up artist John Chambers for help in creating the fake movie who in turn introduces him to veteran producer Lester Siegel. The scenes featuring Chambers and Siegel are where Argo turns itself into somewhat of a black comedy however the balance between these scenes and those of the hostages is excellent. In its third act, Argo becomes somewhat of a thriller as Mendez travels to Iran and attempts to extract the houseguests from Iran. This is easier said than done and I was personally on the edge of my seat to see if they would actually make it through the airport without getting rumbled.

It's easy to see why Argo won Best Picture as it is both based on a real life story and features some lines that feel like they'd been written by a Hollywood insider. I was quite impressed with Chris Terrio's screenplay which, as I previously mentioned, was well-balanced making the film feel both comedic and dramatic at the same time. One of the odd things about Argo's presence at the Oscars was the fact that Affleck didn't even get a look in when it came to the Best Director category. This is partly to do with the fact that not all of the directors of the nine nominated films could feature in a category which only honoured five film-makers. However, I do believe that Affleck's fine direction of the piece should have at least received a nomination over say Tom Hooper's helming of Les Miserables. Affleck himself proved to be a fine lead, here presenting Tony as the harassed everyman who found himself carrying out somewhat of an impossible task. Of the cast, only Alan Arkin was nominated for an Oscar for his role as sharp-tongued producer Lester Siegel. Indeed Arkin's interplay with John Goodman's John Chambers were some of the highlights of the film and I personally loved his rather foul-mouthed explanation of Argo's plot. Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography gave the Iranian scenes an extra sense of dread as he presented the siege at the embassy in a rather dramatic style. Argo managed to keep my attention due to its fine pacing and it's mixture of Hollywood satire and edge-of-your-seat thriller. It also represents the fact that the Academy were selecting more interesting films to win Best Picture as I don't think a film like Argo could ever have won the award twenty years prior. Whether it's win was ultimately the right choice is an interesting debate and you'll have to find out my verdict in my review of the most recent Oscar ceremonies.

Up next we have a look at two films that explored the way that technology was starting to take over our lives in the second decade of the 21st century. 

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 328-329: The Two Faces of Elizabeth I

Even in the early days of Oscar, the academy loved British films that focused on the Tudor Monarchy. In fact the first ever British film to be nominated for an Oscar was The Private Life of Henry VIII for which Charles Laughton won a Best Actor statuette. At the 1999 Oscars, Henry's daughter Elizabeth featured in two films which focused on different stages of her reign. Although Elizabeth was played by different actors the pair of movies did share a pair of actors who featured prominently throughout. 

The imaginatively named Elizabeth was the first of these two films and saw Cate Blanchett take on the role of the titular Queen. Shekhar Kapur's film was based around Elizabeth's ascent to the throne following her sister Mary's death and her struggles to gain the respect she needed. It didn't help matters that everybody around her was trying to marry her off every five minutes or get her to declare a war on some country or other. It really seemed to me as if Elizabeth would've been better off continuing to dance round that field with Joseph Fiennes' Dudley rather than committing herself to running the country. Obviously things got a bit more complicated when it turned out when Dudley was married and plotting to have her removed from the throne. But the only other alternative was Vincent Cassel's hilariously campy cross-dressing French King who was flanked by an intimidating Eric Cantona. On the performances front, Elizabeth really belonged to Cate Blanchett who became an overnight sensation after appearing in the film. Elizabeth's transformation is the key aspect of Michael Hirst's script and Blanchett deals with this perfectly. She is convincing as the naive exile in the aforementioned dancing scenes but is equally great commanding rooms full of sceptical men. I feel the turning point in the film is Elizabeth's appearance in front of the bishops which Blanchett plays incredibly well, initially seeming nervous before becoming the strong-willed woman we know she will be. Geoffrey Rush puts in a supporting turn as Elizabeth's devious supporter Walsingham who ends up being her biggest ally. Rush is brilliant as he utilises a number of inquisitive facial expressions and tries to get the audience to second guess his actions. Christopher Eccleston's Norfolk is an incredibly brooding villain as he uses his cunning rather than any sort of brutality to get what he wants. The film is give an air of legitimacy via the inclusion of veteran performers such as Richard Attenborough and John Gielgud whilst at the same time introducing some new faces like Daniel Craig and Emily Mortimer. 

It's this use of new faces and exciting visuals that sets Elizabeth out from the standard costume drama. I was personally won over straight away when the incredibly modern title card sequence flashed across the screen. The intrusive camera work in some scenes helped make the audience part of the action and livened up an occasionally dull story. I was surprised that, among the seven Oscar nominations the film received, the innovative editing wasn't even recognised. I felt that several of the film's key sequences relied on some great editing to make them feel important and give Elizabeth the modern twist it deserved. Additionally, the film was unflinching in its depiction of violence, which I feel was another positive attribute to Elizabeth's overall success. From the burning of the protestants at the beginning of the film right up to Norfolk's beheading, Elizabeth set out to show us that life in the Tudor court wasn't all bonnets and balls. Up to this point I feel most of the period dramas have kept the violence and bloodshed behind closed doors but Elizabeth swung those doors wide open. The narrative of the film was well-paced and the two hour runtime perfectly suited the story of a Queen struggling to rule her nation. My main disappointment was that the film didn't pick up as many Oscars as it should have done, only winning the award for Best Make-up. Whilst I felt that the Tudor faces were well realised, Elizabeth was much more than just your standard costume drama. But the reason for its failure at the awards can be attributed to the next film on my list. 

The film was Shakespeare in Love, which won that year's Best Picture and a further six Oscars including one for Judi Dench as Queen Elizabeth I. Dench's role in the film was minimal and therefore some sniped at her Oscar win. I have to admit at the time I was one of them but after seeing the likes of Beatrice Straight and Maureen Stapleton win Best Supporting Actress with minimal screen time I changed my mind. Dench's Elizabeth was definitely a scene-stealer and she portrayed the Queen as somebody who was frustrated by those who stood on ceremony. Dench dealt well with the comic nature of the screenplay and was convincing as the legendary virgin queen. The link between the two performances is the line in which Elizabeth talks about being a woman in a man's profession, something she's had to cope with since her reign began. Dench wasn't the only actress to win an award for the film as Gwynth Paltrow triumphed, playing theatre-fan Viola De Lessops. Viola's romance with Shakespeare during the rehearsals for Romeo and Juliet is the basis of the film which is odd seeing as she poses as a man for large portions of the movie. Gwyenth does put in a lively turn but does nothing to convince me that she should've beaten Blanchett at that year's Oscar ceremony. Geoffrey Rush and Joseph Fiennes do double duty in this entry as they play theatre owner Henslowe and the titular playwright respectively. Fiennes is a perfectly serviceable leading man and shares fine chemistry with Paltrow which helps to make their on-screen romance convincing. Rush meanwhile is the perfect comic foil for the rest of the cast and his harassed Henslowe is the stand-out turn of a great supporting cast. One of my favourite performances in the film came from Tom Wilkinson as Hugh Fennyman, a loan shark who gets enraptured by the theatre after bankrolling Romeo and Juliet. 

I don't personally feel that there's that much wrong with Shakespeare in Love and it's not particularly offensive. Instead it just feels a little unremarkable and too whimsical to ever be taken seriously as a Best Picture contender. Tom Stoppard and Marc Norman's script is a little knowing and overly comic for a film that I feel should be a little bit more serious. That being said I did enjoy some of the little touches; most notably the fact that the rowers are presented like modern-day taxi drivers. I have to admit that I did enjoy the film's final act as the performance of Romeo and Juliet itself was the highlight of the film. But it was the journey to the theatre that was the problem and I found plenty of the film's characters uninteresting or unlikeable. Stoppard and Norman don't appear to have put in a lot of work into making Colin Firth's Wessex a serious enough threat to Viola and Shakespeare's relationship. Even though she ultimately travels to America with him her heart will always be with the romantic playwright. I do feel it's a little mean to constantly cast Firth as the cuckold as he played a similar third wheel as Kristin Scott Thomas' husband in The English Patient. So how did a lightweight comedy costume drama come to be the last film to win Best Picture in the twentieth century? Well that's down to its involvement with Harvey Weinstein's Miramax studios which are notorious for aggressively campaigning for their films to win awards. Weinstein's campaign for Shakespeare in Love's win including holding a party for director John Madden and inviting several of the academy's key voters. He put millions of dollars into securing the film won in as many categories as possible and he was ultimately successful. However, after watching these two films back-to-back, its clear that Shakespeare in Love wasn't even the best Elizabethan film to be released that year. It's just a shame that politics and campaigning can get in the way of the right film winning the Best Picture and I feel that the 1999 ceremony exemplifies that point perfectly. 

Next time we stay with costume drama as we focus on the continued success of Merchant Ivory. 

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 318-320: Williams the Conqueror

When his career first started Robin Williams was best known for his role in sitcom Mork and Mindy as well as for his stand-up. Then he appeared in Good Morning Vietnam in which he used his comic skills and mixed them with a more dramatic side. He earned a Best Actor Oscar nomination for his role in the film and throughout the 1990s would feature in three more best picture nominees. He himself would find luck as well with another two Best Actor nominations and a win in the Best Supporting Actor category, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

In Dead Poets Society, Williams still hasn't completely lost his comic roots but gives his most dramatic turn to date. The film sees him play John Keating, an unorthodox English teacher who shakes things up when he starts to teach at the stuffy Dalton Academy. Set in 1959, Dead Poets Society primarily focuses on a group of boys who Keating takes under his wing and who are all influenced by his words. The society of the title is a group that Keating himself set up when he was at Dalton and which the boys in his class resume upon meeting him. Keating's words about seizing the day speak to one of the boys, Neil, who decides to audition for a local play even though he knows his father wouldn't approve. Neil eventually wins a part but forges his father's signature on a consent form in order to take part. Meanwhile, new classmate Todd is struggling to live in the shadow of his academically gifted brother especially seeing as he's quite slow. Keating takes Todd out of his shell and allows him to express himself more freely. One of the other classmates, Knox, falls in love with a girl who is going out with a much more athletic guy from another school. Despite this Knox wins her over with his poetry and she agrees to go on a date with him. After a film that looks at coming-of-age and finding your way in the world, the final third of Dead Poets Society becomes increasingly dark. But there's a final heartwarming moment that anybody who has seen the film will remember.

I myself had previously seen Dead Poets Society at least once before and remember enjoy it immensely. On second viewing however I found that I didn't always believe in the characters and felt that Tom Schulman's Oscar winning screenplay was inconsistent. There's no denying that Williams' performance is the driving force of the film and definitely showcases that he's a fine dramatic performer. But in the classroom scenes I felt that Williams lapsed into his stand-up persona and goes for laughs over believable humour. Despite his Best Actor nod, I don't really consider Williams to be the star of the show as Keating is only on screen for a limited amount of time. Instead I think that Dead Poets Society is more about Neil, Todd, Knox and the other boys who are trying to find their way in the world. The stories about trying to find your way in the world, exploring your own identity and experiencing love for the first time all have universal appeal for audiences everywhere. Of the young actors, Ethan Hawke really lights up the screen as Todd as he gives a subtle portrayal of somebody who lacks confidence and feels inferior to his over-achieving brother. Hawke is able to convey emotion through facial expressions alone and I think he gives an incredible effort for one so young. Josh Charles puts in a spirited turn as the lovelorn Knox whilst Gale Hansen is full of energy as the rebellious Charlie. I was personally less impressed with Robert Sean Leonard's turn as the conflicted Neil and I didn't believe in him as much as I did the rest of the cast. Dead Poets Society was beautifully shot by John Teale and the period detail of the movie was well realised throughout. However, although I got the same goosebumps during the film's final scene, as a whole I believe that Dead Poets Society isn't as great as I remembered it to be.

Williams toned down his comedy routine completely in Awakenings to play a fairly withdrawn character albeit one who ends up doing miraculous work. In the film Williams plays Dr Malcolm Sayer who, in 1969, discovered that the catatonic patients in the hospital he worked in responded to certain stimulants. Director Penny Marshall is keen to portray Sayer as somebody who doesn't like human contact and he almost turns down the job at the hospital when he realises he'll have to work with patients. Although Sayer's superiors are sceptical of his findings he does have a supporter in Nurse Costello who tries to coax him out of his shell. After conducting a number of experiments, Sayer convinces his bosses to put one of the catatonic patients on a new drug to see if it will lull him out of his current state. The patient in question is Leonard Lowe a man who was just a child when he entered his current state and who has been communicating with Sayer via a Ouija Board. The drug is a success and Leonard eventually regains all his faculties much to the delight of his mother who had been faithfully attending to her son. However Leonard later opposes the fact that he's imprisoned in the hospital and wants to be free to do what he wants. These feelings are intensified when he meets Paula, the daughter of one of the patients, and falls in love. Meanwhile Sayer raises the funds to put all the former catatonic patients on the drug and they all experience similar recoveries to Leonard's. But not all of them are happy about their new awakening and one man in particular feels that he's been cheated by life. In the end it's revealed that the drugs are simply a quick fix and that most of the patients returned to their original state after a short while. Although this revelation his heartbreaking, the experience inspired Sayer to live his life a little bit more.

Of the three films in this post, Awakenings is the only one that I'd never seen before. It's also the only film of the trio that I never really relaxed into as I felt it contained Williams' weakest performance. I just feel that he's too reserved and that quality of Sayer's character makes it hard to care about anything he does. Although Sayer is an admirable character, I think that Williams doesn't make the most of the part and therefore I didn't really connect with the film whenever he was on screen. Despite this being the film in which Williams had the most screen time, it was Robert De Niro who was nominated for his role as Leonard. I think that De Niro's performance in the film demonstrates how much of a versatile actor he can be when given the chance. In comparison to the other film he starred in that year, Goodfellas, his performance as Leonard is a complete revelation. I completely believed in his childlike state and he brilliantly conveyed the innocent nature of Leonard coupled by his new adult feelings. Even in the scenes where we see Leonard in a catatonic state De Niro lights up the screen and gave one of the best performances of his I'd ever seen. Julie Kavner gives an incredibly sweet turn as Nurse Costello and makes you feel that her character could bring some life to the detached Sayer. Steve Zaillian's dramatisation of the film's events allows the supporting characters to really come alive and the majority of the catatonic patients are given their own identity. Zaillian adds enough factual material to make the film interesting while at the same time giving us characters that we care about. I personally found Marshall's direction quite safe and there was nothing visually stunning about Awakenings. At the end of the day Awakenings was a fairly standard tale about an extraordinary event which was completely unremarkable aside from De Niro's memorable turn.

From playing a teacher and then a doctor, Williams combines both to play lecturer and therapist Sean Maguire in Good Will Hunting. Although Williams receives top billing he is a definitely a supporting player down to the fact that he won Best Supporting Actor at that year's Oscars. Instead the film is all about Matt Damon's Will Hunting an angry young man with a superior intellect who frequents bars with his best friends including Ben Affleck's Chuckie. The film has become famous for launching the careers of Damon and Affleck, who co-wrote the film's screenplay and won an Oscar for their script. The films story sees Will gain notoriety after serving a particularly hard maths problem at the university where he works as a janitor. One of the professors at the institution agrees to bail him out of prison on assault charges along as he agrees to a number of conditions. Alongside regular lessons with Professor Lambeau, Will is forced into attending therapy with Sean being the only shrink who'll put up with his behaviour. Widower Sean had previously been a classmate of Lambeau's and the pair had fallen out over that time which makes their time with Will all the harder. Sean and Will's budding friendship is one of the film's key strengths as the therapist finally gets the youngster to open up about himself and in turn decides to start living his life again. Alongside this relationship is Will's romance with student Skylar who seemingly grows to love him over time. But Will's self-destructive nature seemingly ruins the relationship when he refuses to tell Skylar that he loves too. The final scenes of Good Will Hunting are a little mawkish but at the same time I can't help but sob every time I see Matt Damon drive off in that car and Elliot Smith playing over the end credits.

As you can probably tell from that statement, I've seen Good Will Hunting countless times before and I feel it's definitely a film that stands up to repeat viewings. The storyline is pretty predictable which probably demonstrates the immaturity of debut screenwriters Affleck and Damon. At the same time Good Will Hunting survives thanks to the well-observed scenes most of which feel true to life. Will and Chuckie's scenes in particular are realistically drawn and the banter between friends Affleck and Damon feels genuine. Similarly the relationship between Sean and Will isn't the same that John Keating had with the boys of Dead Poets Society and instead is a lot harder to take at times. You also believe in the romance between Will and Skylar and I always find their date in the joke shop to be a realistic scenario. Even the more emotional moments are well-handled and I still find Sean's 'it's not your fault' scene to be particularly moving. Though he doesn't appear until the half hour mark, Williams really steals the show as the down-to-Earth yet damaged Sean. His performance here is a brilliant combination of naturalistic humour and a lot of pathos which really helps in the final scenes. Damon leads the film ably and is a charismatic enough presence to make you want to care about Will throughout. Minnie Driver gives Skylar her own personality and makes sure that she's not just playing the stereotypical girlfriend role while Stellan Skarsgard is on fine form as Lambeau. Even Ben Affleck shines however I feel that the role was written specifically with him in mind and I don't think he had to work very hard to perfect the Bostonian accent. The music in the film is beautifully scored by Danny Elfman and the aforementioned original song by Elliot Smith was also Oscar nominated. Good Will Hunting is ultimately a very human film about finding your place in the world and for that reason I think most of us can relate to it.

Next time I look at an all-star war film from a director that I've never been a fan of.