Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 298: The Lynch Mob

The name of director David Lynch is certainly synonymous with surreal films that have bizarre plots and often don't make a lot of sense. As a result Lynch's films don't really feature heavily at any of the Oscar ceremonies and he's only ever had one film which made it on to the Best Picture nominee list. The film in question, and Lynch's second feature, is The Elephant Man which is based on two biographies chronicling the story of John Merrick. The deformed Merrick is initially seen in a Victorian Freak Show where he's rescued by Frederick Treves, a surgeon at the London Hospital. Treves believes that Merrick's treatment is the reason that he's treated like a freak and attempts to get him to talk. Treves' colleagues at the hospital are initially sceptical of his treatment of Merrick with many feeling that he's brought him in as a patient simply to further his own career. But, when Merrick is finally able to speak of his own volition, the hospital's governor decides to allow Treves to continue to treat 'The Elephant Man' at the London. Soon publicity for Merrick grows and respected actress Madge Kendal comes to visit him partly out of curiosity. The kindly but stern hospital matron Mrs Mothershead believes that Merrick is still being treated like a fairground attraction even if Treves thinks otherwise. Meanwhile the hospital's night porter begins to profit out of Merrick's presence at the institution as he takes money for people to come and stare at the Elephant Man. During one of these trips Merrick's former owner, brutish freak show proprietor Bytes, kidnaps him and smuggles him to Europe. In the end it's up to his fellow freaks to show that they are in fact the only people to show some sort of compassion. The film ends with one of Lynch's trademark surreal sequences as Merrick is coaxed from this world into the next by his loving mother.

There's no denying that The Elephant Man is a fantastic film. Freddie Francis' black and white photography really adds to the legitimacy of the story and the period setting. Lynch builds up perfectly to the first unveiling of John Merrick and therefore his deformity is all the more shocking. The make-up department deserves credit for their work on making John Hurt completely indistinguishable and it's a shame that the film was released a year before the make-up Oscar was reintroduced. Hurt himself puts in a fabulous performance as we see Merrick go from hopeless freak show act to well-respected member of society. Anthony Hopkins is equally strong as Treves and he essentially has to play the straight man against all of the wonderfully colourful supporting characters. Chief among these characters is Bytes, played with rigour by Freddie Jones, who is a perfect villain as is Michael Elphick's sinister night porter. Now appearing in her sixth decade on the list, Wendy Hiller puts in a memorable term as Matron Mothershead whilst Anne Bancroft is well-utilised as Madge Kendal. It was interesting for me to see a few familiar faces with smaller roles whether it be Pauline Quirke in a blink-or-you'll-miss-it turn or Dexter Fletcher a Bytes' young assistant. The script, co-written by Lynch, looks at human nature and in particular if Merrick or those that profit from him are in fact the real freaks. Despite all these positives, I couldn't really ever connect with The Elephant Man on a personal level and therefore I found myself emotionally detached from it for the most part. Whilst I found Hurt's performance as Merrick sympathetic I never truly care about his fate and instead simply appreciated the film as a whole. Ultimately I would say that The Elephant Man was definitely a film that I felt was well-made but not one that I was ever entertained by.

Next time we take our final look at a featured star from the 1970s who starred in two Best Picture nominees during the 1980s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 240: Banged Up Abroad

So far during this 1970s portion of the Oscar Challenge, a lot of films have felt that they dwell on quite bleak subjects. A case in point is 1979 nominee Midnight Express which was adapted from the book by Billy Hayes by a young Oliver Stone, who went on to win an Oscar for the film's screenplay. The story involves Hayes' arrest in Turkey for possession of two hasish blocks and his eventual incarceration for the crime. Along the way Billy is promised to stay in the prison for only a few years before his case is overturned and he is forced to stay in the prison for at least thirty years. Director Alan Parker presents the prison as a harsh and desolate place where even children are beaten on a daily basis. The Turkish guards essentially come off as sadistic and have no compassion for those who have been locked up. Billy is initially kept sane thanks to his friendship with a number of Western prisoners namely heroin addict Max and loudmouth American Jimmy. As time passes, the group attempt to escape but are gradually worn down by the brutal regime that is enforced within the prison. Eventually Billy loses his sanity and is only revived by a visit from his girlfriend who pleads with him to escape the confines of the institution before he loses himself completely. The final scenes of the film that play out apparently have little to do with what actually happened to Hayes himself, and that has definitely been a bone of contention ever since.

Despite this being an excellently directed Alan Parker film, to me Midnight Express has all the hallmarks of a Stone movie. The incredibly graphic scenes of violence and sexual activity coupled with a sense of despair would be go-to storytelling devices for Stone in his later films. Indeed, after reading the disparity between the film and Hayes' actual journey, it appears as if Stone had to liven up the ending to the story as what really happened was fairly dull. I have to say, at certain points, the film was pretty heavy-going especially in the latter scenes of the film. Thankfully there were several elements of the movie that worked quite well namely the set pieces, which provided the films major highlights. The opening scene in particular, from Billy's strapping the drugs to his chest to his eventual arrest, was well-orchestrated and vividly filmed. Despite being heavily fictionalised, the scenes in the prison's mental wing were similarly well-written and completely harrowing. The film was also boosted by an excellent and stark score courtesy of Oscar winner Giorgio Moroder which really complemented the awkward nature of the plot. I was personally surprised that Brad Davis didn't receive a nomination for Best Actor as he perfectly anchored the film as Billy Hayes. In fact the only acting nod the film garnered was in the Supporting Actor category as John Hurt was nominated for his turn as the drug addict Max. Hurt's scenes were indeed memorable, but I personally wanted to see more of him and especially his cat. Ultimately, I don't think you can really enjoy a film like Midnight Express but you can certainly admire it, as I did, for its bleak narrative and stark visuals.

Next time we leave the hate behind and concentrate on the love.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 209: More English History Lessons

As I've been trawling through the 1960s nominees I've been amazed at how many British films I've come across. Those of you who read my Peter O'Toole piece know that the actor starred in two films in which he played Henry II, those being Becket and The Lion in Winter. I'd like to think that those two films make up some sort of trilogy with my final 1960s film - A Man for All Seasons. The film, which won Best Picture at the 1967 ceremony, also concerns English monarchy and is full of idyllic outdoor locations. Like Becket, the film is about the relationship between a King and one of his nobleman, in this case Henry VIII and his Chancellor Sir Thomas More. The film is all based around the story of Henry attempting to get a divorce from Catherine of Aragon so he can marry his mistress Anne Boleyn. The incredibly pious More doesn't think that Henry should get the divorce and moreover refuses to implant him as head of the Church of England. It's clear that Henry really loves Thomas, however he can't understand his friend's decision not to let him do whatever he wants. In the end, Thomas realises that resistance is futile so he resigns as Chancellor and the marriage later goes through. However, Henry is keen to punish More for both refusing the marriage and not attending the wedding. Henry requests that the new Chancellor, Thomas Cromwell, try to find evidence that proves More is a traitor. However, More remains steadfast in his silence and is arrested for his supposed betrayal of the King. Anybody who knows their English history knows how the story ends, however I'm not going to spoil it for those who didn't listen during class.

From the opening few scenes of A Man for All Seasons, it's pretty easy to see that the film was based on a play. A lot of the scenes involve characters simply talking to each other in rooms while I times I felt I was simply watching a filmed version of the play. Having said that, the film attempts to make the most of its exterior locations most notably the journey More makes between his house and court using the river. The Oscar-winning costumes are all also stunning and really add to the realism of the film as you really believe you're in Tudor England. However, the film's best quality is definitely its ensemble cast, all of whom completely embody their respective characters. Paul Scofield won the Best Actor Oscar for his role as More and I found him completely engrossing throughout. Scofield is able to convey More's moral standing with ease but also makes him somewhat of a flawed hero. As his wife, the Oscar-nominated Wendy Hiller puts in another great turn as she pleads with her husband to forgo his morals and save himself. In addition, the film boasts several scene-stealing performances most notably Robert Shaw as the boisterous King Henry and Orson Welles as the shady Cardinal Wolsely. In one of his first on-screen roles, John Hurt makes a big impression as the slimy Rich who plays both sides of the court to get his own way. My main issue with A Man for All Seasons was that it remained fairly static throughout and I never really found myself immersed in the story in the way I probably ought to be. This is probably because I studied this period of history quite extensively and therefore found it quite hard to enjoy A Man for All Seasons as pure entertainment film.

Overall, A Man for All Seasons is an incredibly well-acted film that boasts gorgeous costumes and art direction. At the same time a lot of the scenes are quite static and I never felt I could truly relax while watching the film. But did the film deserve to win Best Picture? Join me next time as I look back at the 1960s ceremonies and reveal my decisions on whether the ten winners all deserved their awards.