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.
Showing posts with label Frank Langella. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Frank Langella. Show all posts
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 407-408: George, by George
Tuesday, 24 March 2015
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)