Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 467-468: Tarantino's Waltz

Back in the 1990s we documented the career of Quentin Tarantino when his second feature film Pulp Fiction was nominated for Best Picture. Since then he had an interesting career helming an adaptation of Elmore Leonard's Jackie Brown and his epic martial arts western Kill Bill. Tarantino suffered somewhat of a slump in the mid noughties with his latest offering, Death Proof going down very badly. However, he turned his fortunes around a few years later when he teamed up with a then unknown Austrian actor by the name of Christoph Waltz.

The film was Inglourious Basterds, in which Waltz makes an instant impression as the charismatically brutal Col. Hans Landa. Just like with Pulp Fiction, Tarantino's World War II movie is split into chapters that focus on different characters before bringing them altogether in a memorable finale. The film's first chapter focuses on Landa, dubbed the 'Jew Hunter' by the Nazi party, who attempts to track down a Jewish family who have so far evaded his detection. This opening scene is a testament to Waltz's power as an actor as he initially appears charming but later demonstrates Landa's brutality in all its glory. It's only after meeting the films antagonist that we meet the eponymous heroes of the piece; a Jew-scalping bunch of American soldiers let by Brad Pitt's over-the-top Aldo Raine. Raine's brand of patriotism and Nazi-scalping made him an off-putting character in my eyes and I had little sympathy for him when he found himself in a perilous situation later in the movie. In fact if Inglourious Basterds does have a sympathetic character then its cinema owner Shosanna, whose family were killed by Landa's platoon in the opening sequence. After her cinema is picked to host a Nazi premiere, Shosanna decides it's the perfect opportunity to get revenge for her family by burning her business to the ground. However, Shosanna didn't count on The Basterds also showing up with a plan of their own which involved the detonation of dynamite strapped to their inside legs. As a self-proclaimed cinema aficionado it does seem apt that Tarantino's film's big scene occurs in a movie-house however I did find the finale a little far-fetched even by the director's normal standards.

Inglourious Basterds is one of those films that has individual elements that work however its ultimately not the sum of its parts. Firstly, at almost two and a half hours, it's far too long and every scene feels a little overstretched. I can event pinpoint the moments where needless dialogue is being inserted into a scene that could've had a better rhythm to it had it not been written by Tarantino. The fact that Tarantino likes to break cinematic convention as much as possible also makes Inglorioius Basterds seem a little too full of itself. The use of modern music for example doesn't always work whilst the random wording that flashes up on the screen every so often is another trick that I found a little hard to stomach. It's quite easy for me to pinpoint which scenes that work and which don't primarily because of the chaptered structure of the film. Despite being the film's antagonist, Hans Landa's scenes are Inglourious Basterds' best as I found him to be a man that oozed charisma. The fact that he leaves the film after the first scene meant that we long to see him again which we do in small helpings elsewhere. Shosanna is another great character, a woman who utilises her knowledge of film to get her revenge on the men that had her family killed. On the flipside I found that any scenes involving the Basterds were overblown, needlessly violent and contained a performance from Brad Pitt that was bordering on a pantomime. The film also wastes great actors like Michael Fassbender and Diane Kruger by having them only appear in a handful of scenes despite both of their characters seeming interesting. I did however enjoy Melanie Laurent as the bitter but feisty Shosanna who thankfully got her fair share of screentime before her ultimate demise. But Inglourious Basterds did belong to Christoph Waltz, who won a Best Supporting Actor Oscar for portraying Landa. I think that Tarantino owes a debt of gratitude to Waltz who made the film seem a lot better than it actually was. Like it or not, Inglourious Basterds did propel Tarantino back into the mainstream and I feel that that is primarily due to Waltz's fantastic performance.


Three years later Tarantino and Waltz would reunite earning the latter another Best Supporting Actor Oscar and the former his second Best Screenwriting award. The film in question was Django Unchained and was once again a homage to one of Tarantino's favourite genres as he favoured a spaghetti western approach throughout the film. However, with the film being set in America's south, Tarantino has redubbed the film 'A Southern' and has also commented that it his look at the slavery movement. But you know when Tarantino's involved, the film is never going to be straightforward and indeed here he mixes a little social commentary alongside his usual bloody violence and superior soundtrack. The story sees Jamie Foxx's Django being freed from a chain gang by Waltz's bounty hunting Dr. King Schultz who hopes that the former slave will help him track down some wanted men. When Schultz discovers Django's aptitude for the profession of bounty hunting he takes him under his wing whilst also promising to help him locate his lost wife. The pair tracks down Django's wife to the Candyland plantation where the charming yet ruthless Calvin Candie believes that the men are looking for one of his prize fighters. From the point that Schultz and Django enter Candieland the film becomes a dangerous game as our duo face peril not only from Candie himself but also from sneaky servant Stephen. As is usually the way with modern Tarantino films, Django Unchained is about twenty minutes too long and there are some sequences that could easily have been edited down. These sequences including a comedy number including the Klu Klux Klan and a lot of the empty scenes before Django and Schultz arrive at Candieland.

Another issue I had with the final part of the film was the fact that Schultz and Candie had both been killed off in the movie's penultimate shoot-out. This was a shame as they were the two most charismatic characters in the film and without them it was left to the rather bland Django to carry the rest of the movie. Just as he was in Inglourious Basterds, Waltz is a joy to watch here with him playing a considerably more sympathetic role than he did in Tarantino's previous film. Indeed, Schultz is arguably the film's most well-rounded character as we see him go from loner bounty hunter to Django's mentor. Elsewhere it was great to see Leonardo Dicaprio in a role that saw him get to play against type as the film's main antagonist Calvin Candie. Dicaprio appeared to relish playing the role and he certainly gave an enigmatic turn to the extent that I felt he should have been put forward for the Oscar over Waltz. If there's a weak link in the film then it's Jamie Foxx, whose is seemingly outshone by his fellow performers in the lead role of Django. It's telling that when Dicaprio and Waltz aren't on screen the film dips in quality and that final twenty minutes was a chore to get through. It wasn't helped by the fact that Tarantino himself turns up as an Australian miner with his accent being one of the most questionable in cinematic history. In addition I felt that Tarantino let his old mate Samuel L Jackson get away with far too much over-acting as the sadistic Stephen. One thing I do have to applaud Tarantino for is his use of music in the film and particularly the original song written by western movie legend Ennio Morricone. The film is also visually superb with great time taken to get the look of each character right whilst the set of Candieland is similarly memorable. Whilst enjoyable, Django Unchained was far too long for my liking with Tarantino showing even less restraint than he did during Inglourious Basterds. Additionally there was less grit employed in the film with the message being lost beneath a pool of bloody corpses and an out-of-place explosion.

Having watched these two films back-to-back it does seem to me as if Tarantino really needs someone to tell him where he can slash significant portions of his films. But, whilst his films are doing well during the awards ceremonies I can't see this ever happening. I do feel that I'm in the minority when I say this but I don't think Tarantino has been at his best since the first instalment of Kill Bill. While Basterds and Django are both superior to Death Proof they're nowhere near the quality of the likes of Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs. I do feel that the main reason that Oscar honours Tarantino in the 2010s is just so they can highlight their recognition of edgier fare alongside the more prestigious period pieces and issue-based movies.

Next time we tone down the violence and look at a quirky indie comedy with two strong female characters taking centre stage.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 375-376: Duelling Pianos

Welcome back to the 21st Century guys and, at least for the time being, this is where I'll be staying as I get closer to completing my quest. However, as the next four films from the decade are all biopics of sorts, I'll be shooting around various time periods. We start with two films that focus on real life pianists albeit two men who have very little else in common.

First up we have The Pianist; a film based on the memoirs of Polish composer and pianist Wladyslaw Szpilman. The film is a blow-by-blow account of what happened to the Jewish Szpilman during the Second World War as he attempted to survive as Warsaw crumbled around him. The interesting thing about Szpilman is he is never presented as any type of hero but instead as somebody who is simply trying to survive the extraordinary circumstances he's found himself in. Although early on he does his best to try and save his family, once he's separated from them he's essentially concerned about himself. The other interesting thing about the character is that his survival often comes from the help of non-Jews including a friendly couple and a man who married the woman who Szpilman once loved. In the film's latter scenes, Szpilman's survival is aided by a German officer whose sole reason for helping him is to hear his music. Indeed, music is one of The Pianist's main attributes and we can see Szpilman's pain as he's forced to keep quite while in a room with a piano. Although it's a film set during wartime, I don't think The Pianist can really be described as a war film and instead it sees the devastation of Poland from Szpilman's eyes. Screenwriter Ronald Harwood cleverly punctuates scenes of actions with quieter moments that simply focus on Szpilman's deterioration. We follow him as he tries to get over his jaundice and his struggles to find food and water in the film's final scenes. The Pianist's main triumph is in presenting a sympathetic character who is necessarily a heroic man but is someone who's pain the audience can identify with.

It's no surprise that Adrien Brody won the Best Actor prize for his performance as Szpilman as he completely commands the screen throughout. Brody has the mannerisms of a silent film star which helps in the latter half of the film where there is very little dialogue. Brody helps the audience understand Szpilman's feelings as he slumps about the deserted streets of Warsaw clutching a jar of pickles in his hands. I felt Brody was absolutely captivating at playing both the charming musician in the film's early moments and the shell of a man in the film's latter scenes. Brody was aided by director Roman Polanski who made the town of Warsaw as big a character as Szpilman. I found some of The Pianist's images truly shocking as Szpilman was horrified by the dead bodies strewn across the streets and later surveyed the hollowed out buildings which were once occupied by happy families. In my opinion Pawel Edelman deserved an Oscar for his superb cinematography which at times made The Pianist feel like a documentary. Thankfully Polanski was awarded with a Best Director honour for helming a truly memorable piece of cinema which has as much to say about the holocaust as Schindler's List. If there's one criticism I have of The Pianist it's that I didn't feel as strong an emotional connection with Szpilman as I possibly could have done. Whilst I admired the film, I was never completely drawn in to what was happening on the screen and instead I felt more like a bystander. Maybe this is the reason that The Pianist didn't win the Best Picture award however I do feel it deserved it over the film that eventually scooped the award.

While The Pianist dealt with just one period of Szpilman's life, the other film in this post was a wide-reaching biopic of a famous pianist and vocalist. Ray, looked at the life and times of the legendary Ray Charles; from a small boy growing up in Florida to one of the most successful jazz artists of all time. Director Taylor Hackford and screenwriter James L White take a fairly linear approach to telling Ray's life; starting with his first performances in a country band. From there we see his first appearances on stage, touring with a band and meeting his future wife. Throughout the course of the story, the film flashes back to Ray's childhood to witness two very traumatic events in his life. The first is the death of his brother, who drowned in a laundry tub, and the second was the gradual loss of his eyesight. I believe that the film explained how Ray managed to get about with a stick or a dog and showed how exactly he seduced the ladies on a nightly basis. What I liked about the film was that it didn't shy away from the more negative side of Ray's personality, particularly his drug use. As the film progressed, and Ray's success grew, so did his reliance on heroin which as a result put him at odds with his friends and family. Additionally Ray's dalliances with various women are portrayed as he conducted various extra-marital affairs throughout his career. One in particular, with backing singer Margie, has disastrous consequences after she dies from an overdose only a couple of years after giving birth to his child. One problem I did have with the film was that it was pretty uneven as it spent too long on some moments and not enough on others. I found that Hackford and White took too long documenting the build-up of Ray's career and not enough time on other key moments in his life. I'd have like to have seen more about his protests against segregation and his attempts to kick his drug habit. As a result I found that the screenplay was largely inconsistent and that slightly affected my enjoyment of the film.

Thankfully Ray benefited from a tremendous Oscar-winning performance from Jamie Foxx, one that arguably made him a big name star. Foxx could've easily portrayed Charles as somewhat of a caricature but instead made him a fully-rounded character. He was particularly strong at portraying Ray's gradual dependence on drugs and the subtle changes in his character. Additionally, he was able to convey Ray's charisma and you could believe just why so many people fell under his spell. Foxx was ably supported throughout the film by a cast of character actors most notably Richard Shiff and Curtis Armstrong as a pair of Atlantic record chiefs and Regina King as the tragic Margie. I think that your enjoyment of Ray does depend on how much you can tolerate jazz music but I personally felt the music in the film was one of its most positive elements. Hackford and White use the majority of Ray's songs to tell a certain story about a period in his life and as a result give the film the feel of a musical. Paul Hirsch deftly edits together these set pieces to allow the audience to associate Charles' songs to either his success or certain moments in his personal life. It was no surprise to me that, alongside Foxx's honour, the film also won the sound mixing Oscar as I believed that the way the music was used was crucial to Ray's success. As his wife notes towards the end of the film, Ray loved music more than drugs, women and even his own family, a message that the film conveys perfectly. Whilst it doesn't really hold up against some of the more prestigious Oscar films, Ray is a fun biopic with lots of enjoyable musical sequence and is anchored by a fantastic central performance.

We continue our cavalcade of biopics with two more films that earned their stars Best Actor Oscars.