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.
Showing posts with label Jeff Daniels. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jeff Daniels. Show all posts
Saturday, 28 March 2015
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.
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.
Tuesday, 25 March 2014
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 279-281: Jack's Back!
Arguably one of the largest presences throughout the last decade was Jack Nicholson, who won the Best Actor prize for his role in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and was nominated numerous times elsewhere. Like many of the stars of the 1970s, Jack's success continued into the eighties but oddly he took a backseat in a lot of his roles. In two of the three Best Picture nominees he appeared in he was nominated for Best Supporting Actor twice before being back to playing the lead in the final film of the trio.
In a way I feel that Nicholson's role as a supporting performer allowed him to improve his repertoire and demonstrated the range that he had. A case in point is his turn in Warren Beatty's Reds in which Nicholson plays playwright Eugene O'Neill, an acquaintance of Beatty's journalist turned revolutionary John Reed. Reds was Beatty's epic retelling of the build-up and response to Reed's 'Ten Days That Shook the World' which chronicled his first-hand experiences of the Russian revolution. The first half of the film is dedicated to Reed's life in New York and his relationship with journalist Louise Bryant who is initially presented as a big fan of his. Reed and Bryant get married but their relationship is fraught to say the least as they split-up and reconcile several time throughout the film. At the same time, Bryant starts an affair with O'Neill which is born out of the fact that he doesn't see her as a particularly decent performer in one of his plays. O'Neill pops up throughout the film and is presented as somebody who observes life rather than somebody who actually does something about it. In fact he's almost the polar opposite to Reed whose political views become more radical after his time in Russia and he tries to make some changes to the Socialist Party in America. The final third of the film looks at political identity in Russia and sees Louise try to find John after he goes missing in Finland. The couple's final reunion is beautifully played although it did take a hell of a long time getting there.
It was clear with Reds that Beatty was influenced by the grand epics of past decades, most of which have been featured in this blog. At over three hours long, Reds achieved epic status but at the same time the film felt awfully modern. As with other epics, Reds had some excellent cinematography as well as some great early 20th century period detail and costumes. But what really made Reds unique was the use of 'witnesses', talking heads who appeared throughout the film to discuss their experiences with Reed and Bryant. I felt that these witnesses really made Reds feel like a documentary and their presence bolstered the film from average melodrama to important historical epic. I found Nicholson's performance in Reds to be rather understated and if anything he was the least passionate of all of the characters. To me it took a while to adjust to Jack Nicholson not playing a version of himself but I felt that he was effective in the handful of scenes he appeared in the film. Conversely, Beatty brought the passion both in front and behind the camera to create an idealistic character who was definitely very flawed. Beatty and Diane Keaton had some great chemistry and made us believe in John and Louise's fiery marriage. In fact, Keaton stole the show for me and I enjoyed her performance in Reds more so than her Oscar winning turn in Annie Hall. Oddly, of the four actors nominated for the film it's Maureen Stapleton as Reed's good friend Emma Goldman. There's nothing particularly wrong with Stapleton's performance I just don't feel she's on-screen long enough to warrant the win. Stapleton's only shining moment came towards the end of the film when she delivered a monologue about the changing face of Russian politics. Beatty was awarded with a Best Director prize for Reds, which truly felt like his passion project, whilst a third Oscar was given for the stunning cinematography employed throughout. Ultimately, Reds was a little baggy in places but no more so than other epics and I feel it really benefited from the real life witnesses interviewed throughout. Meanwhile Nicholson delivered an out-of-character performance which demonstrated the range of the actor.
This range continued into a film in which Nicholson won the award for Best Supporting Actor for playing an alcoholic former spaceman who romances his next door neighbour. The film was Terms of Endearment, which itself would go on to win the Best Picture Award that year, and the next door neighbour was Shirely Maclaine's Aurora whose life is chronicled throughout the movie. Over the course of a number of years, we follow the widowed Aurora and her daughter Emma as they fall out and make up numerous times. Aurora is sceptical about Emma's husband Flap, who she believes isn't good enough for her beloved daughter and eventually decides not to attend the woman. This decision puts a wedge between the pair and it takes a while for wounds to be healed and for everybody to move on. When Emma, Flap and their young son move away from Huston things start to unravel as Emma gets pregnant twice more. With Flap never around, Emma is forced to take on the responsibilities of mothering three children with her eldest son beginning to resent her. Throughout the film both Flap and Emma conduct affairs whilst the previously celibate Aurora starts a relationship with Nicholson's Garrett Breedlove, who previously only dated much younger women. The romance between Garrett and Aurora is an interesting one as he is always trying to provoke her whilst she's unsure if he's the right man for her. But a tragic diagnosis puts everything into perspective for the mother and daughter pair who are forced to reconcile for the last time.
As it covers a number of years in our protagonists' lives, I found Terms of Endearment to be incredibly episodic. With its focus on relationships, illness and family bonds I thought that James L Brooks' script suited a soap opera more than it did a Best Picture winner. Indeed, upon watching this film I found little to suggest that it should have been awarded the top prize at that year's Oscars. There were very few likeable characters in the main cast with Aurora being presented as somebody who was realistic to the point of hatred whilst Emma could be quite bratty at times. The only person I had any real sympathy for was Sam, a married bank manager with whom Emma conducts an affair. Michael Gore's Oscar-nominated score was incredibly overpowering and really did nothing for the overall feel of the film. I personally felt that Terms of Endearment's only saving grace were its performances and that's possibly why it went on to win two of the four acting awards at the Oscars. As Aurora, Shirley MacLaine won best actress and I think this was fair enough as she added a slight tenderness to a character who could've been even more detestable in the hands of a lesser actress. However I felt that Maclaine's co-star, and fellow nominee, Debra Winger was more deserving of the Oscar as she definitely turned in the better performance as the tragic Emma. John Lithgow, Jeff Daniels and Danny DeVito lent fine support even if DeVito really didn't have a lot to do as one of Aurora's suitors. But to me it was Nicholson who stole the show as Garrett, a man whose best years are behind him and who is living off one of his previous accomplishments. Nicholson's turn as the man who has to come to terms with the ageing process seemed incredibly real and it almost felt as Garrett's transition marked Nicholson's move to the next stage of his career. Despite him already attaining lead man status, his Supporting Actor Oscar here was more than deserved as he really gave Terms of Endearment the realism is sorely needed.
But, two years later, Nicholson was back where he belonged, in the lead role, as we saw him portray Charley Partanna in Prizzi's Honor. The film is an incredibly darkly comic saga focusing on the Prizzi crime dynasty for whom Charley works as one of their top hitmen. Charley almost married into the family before, conducting a relationship with the Don's grandaughter Maerose, but it ultimately didn't pan out. The film opens at a Prizzi family wedding where Charley spots a beautiful blond woman and wonders who she is. He later runs into this woman at the wedding reception but she quickly disappears before he can ask her name. She later contacts him and reveals herself to be Irene Walker however its only later that Charley discovers that Irene is another contractor for the Prizzi family. In addition, Irene is involved in a casino heist in which she is thought to have stolen a large amount of money from the Prizzis. The film then moves along at a pace as everybody seems to be double crossing one another in order to get money and power. But Irene and Charley's relationship seems to be the only real element of the whole film as they decide to get married. Although the big question is whether two hired killers can ever live together in wedded bliss especially considering all that has gone on up to this point.
Prizzi's Honor was an interesting film in that I never quite knew exactly where it was going. Richard Condon and Janet Roach's script gives us a cast full of characters who really can't be trusted due to the profession that they're all in. In fact the only reliable character is Charley himself who, despite being a contractor, is actually a fairly decent and down-to-Earth guy. You get the impression that, if Charley hadn't been born into this world, then he would just be doing a normal job. At times Prizzi's Honor feels like its spoofing films such as The Godfather especially with its opening wedding scenes which mirror the start of Coppola's classic gangster yarn. The relationship between Charley and Irene also has the feel of a screwball comedy pairing as both are trying to act like the powerful member of the couple. But at times I felt that this comic element made for an imbalance in tone and at times it was hard to decide how seriously Prizzi's Honor was actually taking itself. However John Huston's slick direction made for an incredibly stylish affair which was bolstered by a trio of fine performances. Of all of the performances I've seen of his so far, Prizzi's Honor was the one in which Nicholson played his most down-to-Earth character yet. Nicholson was incredibly restrained as the hitman with a heart who really struggled to know where his allegiance's lay. However Nicholson was eclipsed by his two-female co-stars most notably Kathleen Turner who lent her femme fatale style to the role of Irene. Turner and Nicholson's chemistry was fantastic and I was a little shocked to learn that she didn't receive any recognition from the Oscars. The same cannot be said for Huston's granddaughter Anjelica who won the Best Supporting Actress award for playing the scheming Maerose Prizzi. I though Huston was fantastic throughout the film and really appeared to be having tons of fun playing Maerose. Ultimately Prizzi's Honor was an imbalanced by enjoyable gangster comedy however it wasn't a film that I ever found particularly memorable or engrossing.
Next time we have another Oscar winning performance from an actor who we've seen many times already during this blog.
In a way I feel that Nicholson's role as a supporting performer allowed him to improve his repertoire and demonstrated the range that he had. A case in point is his turn in Warren Beatty's Reds in which Nicholson plays playwright Eugene O'Neill, an acquaintance of Beatty's journalist turned revolutionary John Reed. Reds was Beatty's epic retelling of the build-up and response to Reed's 'Ten Days That Shook the World' which chronicled his first-hand experiences of the Russian revolution. The first half of the film is dedicated to Reed's life in New York and his relationship with journalist Louise Bryant who is initially presented as a big fan of his. Reed and Bryant get married but their relationship is fraught to say the least as they split-up and reconcile several time throughout the film. At the same time, Bryant starts an affair with O'Neill which is born out of the fact that he doesn't see her as a particularly decent performer in one of his plays. O'Neill pops up throughout the film and is presented as somebody who observes life rather than somebody who actually does something about it. In fact he's almost the polar opposite to Reed whose political views become more radical after his time in Russia and he tries to make some changes to the Socialist Party in America. The final third of the film looks at political identity in Russia and sees Louise try to find John after he goes missing in Finland. The couple's final reunion is beautifully played although it did take a hell of a long time getting there.
It was clear with Reds that Beatty was influenced by the grand epics of past decades, most of which have been featured in this blog. At over three hours long, Reds achieved epic status but at the same time the film felt awfully modern. As with other epics, Reds had some excellent cinematography as well as some great early 20th century period detail and costumes. But what really made Reds unique was the use of 'witnesses', talking heads who appeared throughout the film to discuss their experiences with Reed and Bryant. I felt that these witnesses really made Reds feel like a documentary and their presence bolstered the film from average melodrama to important historical epic. I found Nicholson's performance in Reds to be rather understated and if anything he was the least passionate of all of the characters. To me it took a while to adjust to Jack Nicholson not playing a version of himself but I felt that he was effective in the handful of scenes he appeared in the film. Conversely, Beatty brought the passion both in front and behind the camera to create an idealistic character who was definitely very flawed. Beatty and Diane Keaton had some great chemistry and made us believe in John and Louise's fiery marriage. In fact, Keaton stole the show for me and I enjoyed her performance in Reds more so than her Oscar winning turn in Annie Hall. Oddly, of the four actors nominated for the film it's Maureen Stapleton as Reed's good friend Emma Goldman. There's nothing particularly wrong with Stapleton's performance I just don't feel she's on-screen long enough to warrant the win. Stapleton's only shining moment came towards the end of the film when she delivered a monologue about the changing face of Russian politics. Beatty was awarded with a Best Director prize for Reds, which truly felt like his passion project, whilst a third Oscar was given for the stunning cinematography employed throughout. Ultimately, Reds was a little baggy in places but no more so than other epics and I feel it really benefited from the real life witnesses interviewed throughout. Meanwhile Nicholson delivered an out-of-character performance which demonstrated the range of the actor.
This range continued into a film in which Nicholson won the award for Best Supporting Actor for playing an alcoholic former spaceman who romances his next door neighbour. The film was Terms of Endearment, which itself would go on to win the Best Picture Award that year, and the next door neighbour was Shirely Maclaine's Aurora whose life is chronicled throughout the movie. Over the course of a number of years, we follow the widowed Aurora and her daughter Emma as they fall out and make up numerous times. Aurora is sceptical about Emma's husband Flap, who she believes isn't good enough for her beloved daughter and eventually decides not to attend the woman. This decision puts a wedge between the pair and it takes a while for wounds to be healed and for everybody to move on. When Emma, Flap and their young son move away from Huston things start to unravel as Emma gets pregnant twice more. With Flap never around, Emma is forced to take on the responsibilities of mothering three children with her eldest son beginning to resent her. Throughout the film both Flap and Emma conduct affairs whilst the previously celibate Aurora starts a relationship with Nicholson's Garrett Breedlove, who previously only dated much younger women. The romance between Garrett and Aurora is an interesting one as he is always trying to provoke her whilst she's unsure if he's the right man for her. But a tragic diagnosis puts everything into perspective for the mother and daughter pair who are forced to reconcile for the last time.
As it covers a number of years in our protagonists' lives, I found Terms of Endearment to be incredibly episodic. With its focus on relationships, illness and family bonds I thought that James L Brooks' script suited a soap opera more than it did a Best Picture winner. Indeed, upon watching this film I found little to suggest that it should have been awarded the top prize at that year's Oscars. There were very few likeable characters in the main cast with Aurora being presented as somebody who was realistic to the point of hatred whilst Emma could be quite bratty at times. The only person I had any real sympathy for was Sam, a married bank manager with whom Emma conducts an affair. Michael Gore's Oscar-nominated score was incredibly overpowering and really did nothing for the overall feel of the film. I personally felt that Terms of Endearment's only saving grace were its performances and that's possibly why it went on to win two of the four acting awards at the Oscars. As Aurora, Shirley MacLaine won best actress and I think this was fair enough as she added a slight tenderness to a character who could've been even more detestable in the hands of a lesser actress. However I felt that Maclaine's co-star, and fellow nominee, Debra Winger was more deserving of the Oscar as she definitely turned in the better performance as the tragic Emma. John Lithgow, Jeff Daniels and Danny DeVito lent fine support even if DeVito really didn't have a lot to do as one of Aurora's suitors. But to me it was Nicholson who stole the show as Garrett, a man whose best years are behind him and who is living off one of his previous accomplishments. Nicholson's turn as the man who has to come to terms with the ageing process seemed incredibly real and it almost felt as Garrett's transition marked Nicholson's move to the next stage of his career. Despite him already attaining lead man status, his Supporting Actor Oscar here was more than deserved as he really gave Terms of Endearment the realism is sorely needed.
But, two years later, Nicholson was back where he belonged, in the lead role, as we saw him portray Charley Partanna in Prizzi's Honor. The film is an incredibly darkly comic saga focusing on the Prizzi crime dynasty for whom Charley works as one of their top hitmen. Charley almost married into the family before, conducting a relationship with the Don's grandaughter Maerose, but it ultimately didn't pan out. The film opens at a Prizzi family wedding where Charley spots a beautiful blond woman and wonders who she is. He later runs into this woman at the wedding reception but she quickly disappears before he can ask her name. She later contacts him and reveals herself to be Irene Walker however its only later that Charley discovers that Irene is another contractor for the Prizzi family. In addition, Irene is involved in a casino heist in which she is thought to have stolen a large amount of money from the Prizzis. The film then moves along at a pace as everybody seems to be double crossing one another in order to get money and power. But Irene and Charley's relationship seems to be the only real element of the whole film as they decide to get married. Although the big question is whether two hired killers can ever live together in wedded bliss especially considering all that has gone on up to this point.
Prizzi's Honor was an interesting film in that I never quite knew exactly where it was going. Richard Condon and Janet Roach's script gives us a cast full of characters who really can't be trusted due to the profession that they're all in. In fact the only reliable character is Charley himself who, despite being a contractor, is actually a fairly decent and down-to-Earth guy. You get the impression that, if Charley hadn't been born into this world, then he would just be doing a normal job. At times Prizzi's Honor feels like its spoofing films such as The Godfather especially with its opening wedding scenes which mirror the start of Coppola's classic gangster yarn. The relationship between Charley and Irene also has the feel of a screwball comedy pairing as both are trying to act like the powerful member of the couple. But at times I felt that this comic element made for an imbalance in tone and at times it was hard to decide how seriously Prizzi's Honor was actually taking itself. However John Huston's slick direction made for an incredibly stylish affair which was bolstered by a trio of fine performances. Of all of the performances I've seen of his so far, Prizzi's Honor was the one in which Nicholson played his most down-to-Earth character yet. Nicholson was incredibly restrained as the hitman with a heart who really struggled to know where his allegiance's lay. However Nicholson was eclipsed by his two-female co-stars most notably Kathleen Turner who lent her femme fatale style to the role of Irene. Turner and Nicholson's chemistry was fantastic and I was a little shocked to learn that she didn't receive any recognition from the Oscars. The same cannot be said for Huston's granddaughter Anjelica who won the Best Supporting Actress award for playing the scheming Maerose Prizzi. I though Huston was fantastic throughout the film and really appeared to be having tons of fun playing Maerose. Ultimately Prizzi's Honor was an imbalanced by enjoyable gangster comedy however it wasn't a film that I ever found particularly memorable or engrossing.
Next time we have another Oscar winning performance from an actor who we've seen many times already during this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)