Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 437-438: Jumping Through Hooper's

Tom Hooper is a director who went on an interesting journey on his way to the Oscar podium. Initially directing episodes of the likes of Byker Grove and Eastenders, Hooper found his niche in helming one-off TV movies about real people. These films included Longford and Elizabeth I as well as the cinematic release; The Damned United in which our old friend Michael Sheen played notorious football manager Brian Clough. It was a film based on a real story that earned Hooper national acclaim and saw him scoop the Best Director award at the 2011 ceremony.

That film in question was The King's Speech which had an interesting journey from initial conception to arriving on the screen. Screenwriter David Seidler learnt of the relationship between King George VI and Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue and wanted to tell the story partly because he himself had a stammer. After securing the diaries of Logue, his plans were halted when the Queen Mother asked Seidler not to write anything while she was still alive. After she passed away, Seidler continued writing and the finished article was his play The King's Speech. The film went on to become one of the most-watched films of that year and it attracted a generation to the cinema who hadn't been in years. Part of the reason for this is that The King's Speech is quite a universal tale about finding one's voice and standing up for yourself. At times The King's Speech resembles a sports film as it features many montages of Logue and King George training up for the latter's next important public function. But more than that it's about how a friendship can inspire somebody to be more than they ever thought they could be. I think the fact that the character in question is a British monarch is entirely by-the-by and instead the odd couple relationship works in the favour of The King's Speech. The film builds up to a sterling finale where Logue helps George prepare for the speech he is forced to deliver to announce Britain's entry into the Second World War. This scene is made all the more poignant by the inclusion of Beethoven's 7th symphony playing over the top of it which some people thought was actually part of Alexandre Desplat's original score.

Of course, like most of the films on this list, if you poke at The King's Speech too much holes will eventually start to appear. At times it did feel as if we were being rushed through the history of Britain between the wars, with the section on Edward and Mrs. Simpson being particularly poorly paced. However Seidler's main concern wasn't particularly with the history of the piece but rather with the characters themselves. This to me lifted The King's Speech over other similar period pieces that have been nominated for, and in this film's case, won the Best Picture award. The film is further enhanced by a trio of fine performers led by the spectacular Colin Firth in the role of King George. What's wonderful about Firth's performance is that he never overdoes George's speech impediment and he makes you really feel for the character every time he is stuck with nothing to say. I think that Firth makes the role more than just the disability as he ably portrays George's loving relationship with his wife and two daughters. As his wife, Helena Bonham Carter is just magnificent as she plays Elizabeth with the right mix of dignity and rebelliousness. Carter and Firth's chemistry is just perfect and they make for a believable royal couple throughout the film. Also worthy of a mention is Geoffrey Rush who is a joy to watch as the jobbing Australian actor who finds himself in a rather odd situation. Rush's larger-than-life turn is the perfect contrast to Firth's introverted performance and therefore the two make a rather great pair. The King's Speech went on to be the big winner at that year's Oscars with Hooper, Seidler and Firth all picking up awards along the way. Whilst by no means perfect, The King's Speech is a great character-driven piece that is more than just a costume drama. While it's never utterly remarkable, The King's Speech is an easy watch and one that has just enough positive features to justify its Best Picture win.

Two years later, Hooper returned with an adaptation of a much-loved musical that had been incredibly successful during its stage run. It's also one of only a few films to have its story adapted for two Best Picture winners as we previously saw a straight version of Les Miserables back in the 1930s. This time there is barely any dialogue as almost every word of Victor Hugo's original novel has been transformed into song by Claude-Michel Schönberg and Alain Boublil. According to my research, the total number of songs in Les Miserables is a staggering fifty-one even if some our reprises and others don't last very long. One thing Hooper did differently from any of the other musical films we've seen so far is to get his actors to sing live. This worked well for most of the performers, many of whom had previous musical experience either on stage or on screen. However, this isn't true of Russell Crowe whose musical performance as the film's main antagonist Javert had been criticised by most. While I agree with them, I think Javert is the one role where the singing doesn't have to be that strong and I thought that Crowe was an impressive enough presence for his musical weakness not to be that much of hindrance. I thought that Crowe also worked well against Hugh Jackman who portrayed the film's hero Jean Valjean brilliantly. Despite Jackman being known for portraying action heroes on screen, he has a background in musical theatre will is well-utilised during the first half of the film. This half of the film covers a lot of ground and sees Valjean go from convict to mayor and factory owner in a number of years. Valjean's redemption comes after he takes in Cosette, the daughter of one of his late factory workers Satine. Anne Hathaway won the Best Supporting Actress Award for her role as Satine mainly as she nailed one of the musical's most memorable numbers 'I Dreamed a Dream'.

However, I personally feel as if the second half of the film is stronger than the first thanks to the themes of the French Revolution. I feel Hooper is at his strongest when portraying the conflict between the poor residents of Paris and the nobility. His direction of the film's key number 'Can You Hear the People Sing' is brilliantly done and reflects how well the musical has translated onto the screen. I would say that ascetically, Les Miserables is beautifully realised with every set, costume and character designed within an inch of their lives. Meanwhile the unrequited love between the lovely Eponine and revolutionary leader Marius is wonderful to watch thanks in part to the performance from Samantha Barks. In my opinion Barks, who at the time was a relative unknown, deserved as much recognition for her role as Hathaway did for hers but unfortunately this wasn't the case. I personally thought that the one weak point of this second half was the budding romance between Marius and the adult Cosette which I felt was a sickly sweet affair. In my opinion Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne didn't have great chemistry and therefore I didn't care if their characters got together or not. Les Miserables also saw Hooper work with Helena Bonham Carter once again as she portrayed landlady Madame Thernardier and made a great double act with Sacha Baron Cohen as her husband. In fact the scenes with the unscrupulous Thernadiers were some of my favourites and provided such much needed comedy in between all the dramatic revolutionary uprising. While enjoyable in parts, Les Miserables was too long for my liking and not all of the songs worked their magic on me as they did other people. While the performances, most notably those from Jackman and Barks, were good there was nothing about Les Miserables that was particularly remarkable. Although I do appreciate that Hooper wanted to do something different after The King's Speech I didn't think that he left much a mark on Les Miserables with his only input seeming to be the decision to have the actors sing live. But realistically there was very little difference between the film and stage versions of Les Miserables and I think the film would've received the same feedback regardless of who was directing it.

Next time we turn our attention to an actress who changed people's perceptions of her during the first half of the 2010s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 59: Journeys to India and France

A bit of globe-trotting now as we journey to India and then to France. First off is the Lives of a Bengal Lancer which was nominated for Best Picture at the 1936 ceremony. It's hard to describe the film as it isn't really a war film although it does feature scenes of conflict. It is set during the days of the British Raj where Lt. McGregor is stationed and welcomes two new Lieutenants the cocksure Forsythe and Tom Stone the son of the unit's commander Donald. It is this relationship between father and son that is the backbone of the film, as Tom is captured following being tempted by a woman working for the villainous Mohammed Kahn. Despite being told by Donald not to go after his son, Forsythe and McGregor journey to the enemy camp where they are captured and all three are tortured. Tom eventually gives out sensitive information to Kahn but before he can use it Donald and his men burst in and in the ensuing battle Tom kills Kahn but McGregor dies. Tom and Forsythe are given medals of honour and McGregor is posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross. Although not exactly packed full of action, The Lives of a Bengal Lancer was still a very accomplished picture. This was mainly due to the screenplay, which was nominated for the Oscar, which gave opportunities for all the central characters chances to grow and develop and also develop some laddish banter, especially that between Forsythe and McGregor. The acting is also very good with Gary Cooper giving his best performance so far on this quest and Richard Cromwell was also very stoic as Donald the man who wanted to get to know his son but his life as a soldier and almost stunted his emotions. The film was nominated for eight Oscars in total but only one two Oscars for its assistant directors, which is a shame as I really enjoyed this one.

After looking at Charles Dickens adaptations the other day, we have another adaptation this time of Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, now much better known as a musical than from its source text. In this version it is Frederic Marsh who plays Frenchman Jean Valjean the man who is imprisoned and after escaping is treated almost like a beggar but is able to rehabilitated by a kindly priest. He then transforms himself into Monsieur Madelaine a factory owner and later mayor however he encounters Inspector Javert, played by Charles Laughton, the head of the police who he remembers from his time in prison. At the same time Madeline takes in the woman-of-questionable-morals Fantine and her daughter Cossette. Javert reveals that a man is being tried under the name of Valjean, as he is about to be imprisoned the real Valjean reveals himself. Just before Javert is able to bring him to justice he escapes along with Cossette. Valjean is then able to work as a gardener and make enough money to enrol Cossette into a fancy school. During this final part of the story there is an uprising in France as groups start to rebel against the harsh nature of the police. Cossette falls for the leader of the group, who themselves start to attract police attention. This means that Javert comes back into Valjean's life, although Javert is captured by Valjean he reconsiders and lets him go. Javert continues to pursue Valjean but in the end commits suicide by jumping in the river and Valjean and Cossette are reunited. Having only been faintly familiar with the story I think Richard Boleslawski did a good job of bringing it to life. The scenes at the end of the film involving Javert and Valjean are incredibly startling as our Valjean's life following him leaving prison. Like with a star is born, Frederic March is able to display a full range of emotions as Valjean while Charles Laughton steals the show as the villainous and despicable Javert. The film doesn't outstay its welcome and hits all the main plot points without lingering on any one character for too long. However it lost to another Laughton film, Mutiny on The Bounty.