Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 470-471: The Oscar's Guide to Survival

In this post we present two Best Picture nominees that demonstrated just how to survive some fairly perilous situations. Whilst it's very unlikely that you'll be in the same predicament as either of these film's protagonists I think it's still very handy to know what to do in times of crisis no matter how bizarre the situation.

But perhaps handy is a bad term to use when describing 127 Hours, which showed just how to cope if you find yourself wedged in a ravine. The film was Danny Boyle's follow-up to his Best Picture winning Slumdog Millionaire and showed just how versatile the director could be. Boyle also assembled the majority of the team that worked on Slumdog including screenwriter Simon Beaufoy, cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle and composer A.R. Rahman. The film tells the story of thrill-seeking engineer Aron Ralston who travels to Utah for a spot of canyoneering. Unfortunately for Ralston, he slips down a canyon with a boulder trapping one of his arms making it impossible for him to escape. The 127 hours of the title refers to the time that Ralston was trapped down in the canyon with his survival based on his collection of water and keeping himself relatively sane by narrating his stories to the video camera he had on his person. With more than half of the film being devoted to Ralston's dilemma, it's a testament to Boyle and Beaufoy that 127 Hours is never dull. Instead the footage of Ralston's hopeless situation is interspersed with memories of his family as well as fantasies about the two girls he met just prior to his fall. The editing in 127 Hours is certainly impressive with Jon Harris cutting between Ralston's current position and other points in his life. Mantle's cinematography enhances the narrative as we see the situation from several perspectives, perhaps most memorably from inside Ralston's water bottle. Possibly the most memorable part of 127 Hours occurs in its final few scenes as Ralston finally frees himself by hacking off his hand. Whilst this isn't the most practical of survival tips it saved Ralston's life and the final montage; which features the real Ralston more than proves that.

Having now watched two Boyle films for this project, it's clear that he's someone who's interested in character rather than plot. The character of Aron Ralston is an interesting one as initially he's presented as a free spirit who doesn't care about anything but finding his next thrill. This is perfectly represented in the opening sequence where Ralston takes two girls on an adventure who then realise that they didn't figure into his day at all. However, as Ralston's situation worsens, we see another side to him as the caring son and loving brother. Throughout the film it feels as if Boyle and Beaufoy strip away Aron's cool exterior to reveal a man with plenty of anxieties but someone who is resourceful enough to survive his extraordinary circumstances. Making Ralston even more likeable is actor James Franco, who we previously saw give a show-stealing performance in Milk. Here Franco continues to grow as he utilises his cool guy persona to full effect but also employs his dramatic abilities and as a result makes us sympathise with his character. Rahman's score is also worthy of a mention as it lends itself well to the tone of the film and echoes Ralston's mood perfectly. After romping home at the 2009 ceremony, Boyle's 127 Hours team failed to pick up one Oscar which I feel is a shame as it was one of the more technically sound movies released that year. Unfortunately, the 2011 ceremony included the strongest line-up of films since the field was increased and 127 Hours was a film that fell victim to the fact that it was up against nine other contenders. That being said this is an incredibly intense nail-biter of a film that is enhanced by some fine technical components and a memorable central performance from Franco.

Three years on another British director and American star teamed up for more survival tips this time informing the audience how to cope if one is ever attacked by Somali Pirates. Paul Greengrass' Captain Phillips told the true story of Richard Phillips, whose perilous cargo ship journey around the Somali coast later became the subject of a memoir. Due to the fact that he's played by everybody's favourite nice guy Tom Hanks, Philips is presented as a down-to-Earth guy who is trying to carry out a job to the best of his ability. What I liked about Billy Ray's screenplay was the fact that Captain Phillips isn't a one-sided story and instead it focuses on the Somalian pirates as much as it does Phillips and his crew. I would go as far as to say that Grengrass and Ray make you care about Abduwali Muse, the self-proclaimed leader of the pirates who becomes Phillips' opposite a the film progresses. The first half of the film hypes up the tension as Muse's team boards Philips' container ship but is outwitted by his crew who capture the former and try to negotiate a trade. However, this trade is unsuccessful and the second half of the film sees the matter becoming even more gripping as the pirates abduct Phillips in the ship's lifeboat. As the situation for the pirates becomes more perilous, Ray makes us realise why these men take up piracy in the first place and what options they have in their native land. Although the Americans ultimately end up victorious, I couldn't help but feel a little sympathetic as Muse found himself arrested for piracy whilst his friends were all killed.

It's the blurring of the lines between good and evil that is one of Captain Phillips' main strengths and helped to make it one of the best films of 2013. Paul Greengrass is one of my favourite directors and he made Captain Phillips feel almost as claustrophobic as his 9/11 drama United 93. Cinematographer Barry Akroyd employs a similar style to the one he used on The Hurt Locker and as a result makes Captain Phillips feel almost like a documentary. Greengrass perfectly amps up the tension gradually with the pirates' first attack on the ship feeling particularly tame when compared to their later treatment of Phillips. Christopher Rouse's frantic editing of the piece is also outstanding and helped to make me feel slightly uneasy all through the film. Captain Phillips also features what is, in my opinion, Tom Hanks' Best Performance of the last ten or fifteen years. Hanks is so absorbing that he makes you sympathise with Phillips even before the pirates board his ship. His portrayal of the everyman in a perilous situation put me in mind of his turn in Saving Private Ryan in which he played an equally sympathetic character. I personally felt it was rather odd that Hanks didn't even receive a nomination for his role here and was seemingly snubbed in favour of Christian Bale's comedy hairpiece-led turn in American Hustle. In fact the only member of the cast who was nominated for their role in the film was Barkhad Abdi who delivered a breakthrough performance as Muse. Abdi was great at mastering certain facial expressions which portrayed his desperation as the situation slipped out of his control. It's through Abdi's performance that you at least have some sympathy for Muse's plight and why people like him are forced into piracy. Although Abdi won a BAFTA for his role, not one of Captain Phillips' six nominations resulted in a win. This is a shame as I feel that it's a great film full of tension, great characterisation and two winning performances. But at least I know now that, if I ever do find myself on a freighter ship on the African coast, I'll be able to survive it in the same way that Phillips did.

Next time we go from survival skills to dance lessons with a side of psychological torment

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 377-378: More Real Life Tales

As we saw in the last post, and indeed throughout this whole blog, Oscar loves a biopic. Whilst films such as Ray document the whole life of their subject most of these best picture nominees focus on a specific time in that person's life. That's certainly true of the next two films on the list both of which won their leading man the Best Actor Oscar at their respective ceremonies.

It's with a tinge of sadness that I settled down to watch the first part of this double bill, Capote; one of the few 21st century Best Picture nominees I'd not seen before. Obviously this is due to the fact that last year we lost the man who played the lead role of Truman Capote, the excellent Philip Seymour Hoffman. The film concentrates on Capote's life after he became a household name thanks to Breakfast at Tiffany's and follows him during the creation of his famous non-fiction work In Cold Blood. From the start of the film, director Bennett Miller and screenwriter Dan Futterman present the difference between Truman's life of alcohol-fuelled parties and the stark brutal world of the murder of four members of the Clutter family. Fascinated by the murders, Truman and friend Harper Lee journey to Kansas as he attempts to craft an article about the incident for The New Yorker. However, Futterman's real focus is on Truman's fascination with Perry Smith who, along with Dick Hickock, is found guilty of the crime. Whilst occasionally Truman's obsession with Perry is presented as somewhat of a romantic leaning, it appeared to me as if the film was suggesting that the author's fascination was with the criminal's conflicting character. Although charged with four murders, Perry appeared ever so sensitive, was a brilliant artist and appeared to be incredibly eloquent when compared to Dick. As the film progresses, so does Truman's book however more problems arise when the convicted duo are given a stay of execution. Truman's desperation for an ending of sorts conflicts with his feelings for Perry and in the end he surmises that there can be only one conclusion.

Having never seen Capote before I didn't really know what to expect and I was pleasantly surprised by what I found. Obviously part of my enjoyment stemmed from Philip Seymour Hoffman's Oscar-winning turn as the eponymous writer. Hoffman's skill is in not simply doing an impression of Capote but instead playing him as a fully-fledged character. It's fair to say that Hoffman became Capote to the extent that I forgot at times that I was watching the actor playing the part. Hoffman brilliantly conveyed Capote's feelings for Perry and how his writing of 'In Cold Blood' started to affect him emotionally. For her role as Nelle Harper Lee, Catherine Keener was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress prize, however I didn't feel that she made that big an impact. If I were to give another acting award for the film then it would go to Clifton Collins Jr. as the charismatic killer Perry Smith. Collins Jr. gave an enigmatic turn as the sensitive murderer whose reluctance to tell his full story was the driving point of the film. Futterman's screenplay was well-paced and presented the facts in an entertaining manner, ensuring that the audience was never bored. Meanwhile Miller proved himself to be a fine director; transposing Truman's booze-soaked party life with the cold, harsh reality of the Kansas murders. At just under two hours, Capote was a very easy film to watch and I found myself being wrapped up in the story. At the same time there was nothing particularly remarkable about it outside of Hoffman's fine central turn. So, while I can understand why the film appeared in the Best Picture category, I never particularly felt that it should've won the big prize.

The same can be said for the other film in this double bill; Gus Van Sant's Milk - a biopic of the first openly gay man to hold office in the U.S.; Harvey Milk. Just like Capote, Milk looks at a specific point in Harvey's life as he moves to San Francisco and later decides to run for office. The film is presented as a tape recording our hero makes as he believes he'll soon be assassinated and it starts on the eve of Harvey's fortieth birthday when he meets arguably the love of his life Scott Smith. Together Scott and Harvey open a camera shop in the heart of a burgeoning gay community in San Francisco known as 'The Castro'. Milk's frustration with the way the gay community is being persecuted leads him to run for city supervisor, however his first two campaigns are unsuccessful. Meanwhile the campaigning puts a strain on his relationship with Scott, who eventually leaves him, reappearing every now and again in the film to praise his former lover's success. After finally getting into office in 1976, Harvey constantly clashes with the boorish Dan White; another supervisor who takes offence at his colleague's way of life. Dan's jealousy appears to stem from the fact that he isn't nearly as charismatic as Harvey and therefore finds it hard getting his voice heard. The other story is Harvey's need to get the controversial Proposition 6, which states that all gay teachers be sacked, overturned in the state of California. This story provided it's fair share of uplifting moments as Milk went head-to-head in debates with the bigoted John Briggs, who felt that all homosexuals were perverted. Even if you didn't know the story going in, it was quite obvious that Harvey wasn't going to make it till the end of the film and is eventual assassination at the hands of Dan White was well-handled. The candlelight vigil at the end of the film provided a heart-warming ending to what was another enjoyable and thought-provoking watch.

Of the four Best Actor-winning performances I've watched recently, Sean Penn's is possibly the least-deserving of the prize. I personally feel he's the one who is visibly acting while the other three performers deliver effortless turns. Although Penn's performance isn't as clichéd as it could've been I didn't really feel that he was as at ease with Dustin Lance Black's dialogue as he should have been. Maybe I'm a little biased, as I wanted Mickey Rourke to win Best Actor for The Wrestler, but I believe that Penn didn't convey the full extent of Milk's charisma. Reading around on the film it appears that, when the idea of a film about Milk was first conceived, Robin Williams was attached to play the role and I ultimately think that he would've suited the role much better. Penn was lucky that he was surrounded by such a fine ensemble of actors who beautifully portrayed the friendship between the men and women who became a family on The Castro. I really thought James Franco gave a grounded performance as the put-upon Scott who'd finally had enough of play second fiddle to the great Harvey Milk. Meanwhile Emile Hirsch and Allison Pill were similarly great as Milk's supporters Cleve Jones and Anne Kronenberg. However, the performance of the film came from Josh Brolin as the rather old-fashioned Dan White, a man who couldn't understand just why Harvey was as popular as he was. Brolin received a Best Supporting Actor nod for his role in the film but I believe he should have won the awards but unfortunately that year saw him come up against Heath Ledger's Joker in The Dark Knight. Harris Savides' cinematography is another of Milk's positive elements as he gets in amongst the film's many protests and makes the audience understand just how intense the gay protests were during the 1970s. Gus Van Sant appears to have devoted a lot of time into getting the area of The Castro as authentic as possible and transformed the area into looking like it would in the 1970s. I personally feel that Milk works as a study of the gay movement of the 1970s and the strength in numbers that the community experienced during the time. However, I'm in the minority of people who weren't won over by Penn's performance and don't think he was as deserving of the prize as his predecessors.

Next time we leave real life behind as we explore one of the most successful film franchises of all time.