We're back once again with the third post looking back at this year's Oscar nominees and this time we focus on the sort of film the Academy love most, a good old biopic.
We start with The Imitation Game, which focuses on Alan Turing; who was a key figure in cracking the German's Enigma Code and ultimately helped the allies win the war. The film focuses on three periods in Turing's life; his unhappy teenage years at Boarding School, his work on the Enigma Machine during the war and finally his decline in the early 1950s where he was ultimately arrested for conducting a homosexual relationship. Graham Moore's screenplay, based on Andrew Hodge's biography of Turing, paints the character as somebody who was hard to like at times. His obstinate attitude, lack of humour and contempt for those with inferior intelligence all led to him clashing with his co-workers and superiors. He had particular trouble with Commander Alastair Denniston who constantly tried to have his project shut down after an earlier clash with Turing. Thankfully Turing later found a friend in codebreaker Joan Clarke, whom he came to admire for her intelligence. She taught him to cherish his colleagues and he eventually proposed to her so he could stay on at Bletchley Park. I enjoyed how Moore began to intersect the three time periods as the film went along to make the audience understand just why Turing was as obsessed with his Enigma machine as he was. His naming the machine Christopher, after a particularly close school friend, made it somewhat of a personal project that he wanted to continue even after his arrest for indecency. William Goldenberg's editing of these three time periods was completely seamless and I believe he's certainly in contention of winning an Oscar for his work.
Other than Goldenberg's editing, I didn't find The Imitation Game to be particularly cinematic and at times it felt more like a BBC Sunday night drama than a multi-Oscar nominated picture. Although Morten Tyldum's direction was solid, there was no really striking visuals in The Theory of Everything. What the film did have going for it was a stunning central turn from Benedict Cumberbatch; who essentially played Turing as a more sympathetic version of Sherlock. Cumberbatch made you feel for Turing throughout the film, especially in the scenes in which his secret homosexuality was used against him. Cumberbatch's performance was particularly moving in the 1950s when Turing agreed to chemical castration rather than be separated from his beloved machine. Even though Cumberbatch won't win Best Actor, of the three performances in that category I've seen thus far, his is definitely the most moving. Nominated alongside Cumerbatch was Keira Knightley; whose Supporting Actress nomination was more than deserved thanks to her plucky portrayal of Joan. Knightley turned what could've been a one-note character into somebody to root for and made sure that her character could more than hold her own against the boys. The film also benefited from a glut of fine supporting turns from the likes of Charles Dance, Rory Kinnear, Matthew Goode and Mark Strong. Despite some fine performances and an involving story; The Imitation Game does have the same cinematic style as most of its fellow nominees. I believe that part of the reason it has garnered as many nominations as it has is due to the involvement of the God-like Harvey Weinstein who has made sure that as many Academy members see the film as possible. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I believe that more visually spectacular and unique films have been overlooked thanks to Weinstein's campaigning for The Imitation Game. At the same time I'm glad that Turing's story has been told on screen as it was one that I hadn't heard before and one that moved me deeply.
The real-life drama double bill continues with Selma; which tells the story of the Martin Luther King-led marches on the titular Alabama town in 1964. The purpose of the marches were to eliminate restrictions on black people's rights to register to vote. These struggles are perfectly represented in an earlier scene in which a black woman, attempts to register but is blind-sided with questions which would be impossible for anyone to answer. Obviously the marches themselves were met with opposition, not least from the Governor of Alabama George Wallace who tried to quash King's efforts. One of the main criticisms levelled at the film was the way the relationship between King and President Lyndon B Johnson was portrayed. Whilst in actuality Johnson was one of King's key supporters; the film portrayed him as someone who went out of his way to quash the planned marches. Although I didn't feel that Johnson was the film's key antagonist it was certainly suggested that he was a thorn in King's side and he later allowed J. Edgar Hoover to tap his phone in an effort to split him from his wife. Despite the historical inaccuracies I felt that Selma really started to get going after the first march which depicted the brutal beating of many of the protesters. I felt that the way that this march and its aftermath was filmed drew me into the film with the subsequent two marches having a different tone to them. I do believe that if I was an American then I'd know more about this story than I do so it was an interesting watch despite the fact that I'd sort of guessed the ending. But I did feel like Selma was geared towards an American audience who have a greater grasp of the feelings of both the Selma natives and King's group.
Oddly for such an American film, the three lead parts are all ably played by British actors. The brilliant David Oyelowo gave a captivating turn as King as he perfectly captured the charismatic nature of the man. Oyelowo was totally convincing throughout and I felt he perfectly portrayed the reasons why people were so willing to follow King into potentially violent situations. At the same time he was able to show a more vulnerable side to the character in particular his doubts about being a competent leader. As President Johnson, Tom Wilkinson gave a solid if somewhat unremarkable turn as a leader who didn't like being forced into a corner. Meanwhile Tim Roth's George Wallace was every part the slimy villain as he hid behind minor laws to stop black people from voting. In supporting roles, Oprah Winfrey and Wendell Pierce shine in a cast that also includes a rousing cameo from Martin Sheen. As I've already mentioned the cinematography added to the stirring mood of the marches and I also enjoyed Jason Moran's fantastic score. However, just like The Imitation Game, Selma at times felt like a historical TV feature drama rather than a cinematic release. At times Paul Webb's script featured too many scenes with men in rooms talking to each other and it was only during the silent marches that the film came alive. One of the main controversies surrounding the film is the fact that it hasn't been nominated in any categories outside of Best Picture and Best Song for John Legend's 'Glory'. With no black actors in any of the four categories this year I feel that at least Oyelowo deserved a place in the Best Actor category as his turn was certainly better than Bradley Cooper's in American Sniper. Apart from that though I think that Selma is somewhat of unremarkable historical film which people will quickly forget in years to come.
Next time I look at the final two Best Picture nominees from 2015.
Showing posts with label Mark Strong. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Strong. Show all posts
Monday, 25 May 2015
Friday, 24 April 2015
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 427-428: Kathryn's War
It's been over five years since I started my quest to track down and watch every film nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars. My challenge started just after the 2010 ceremony and since then we've had another five ceremonies. Although I contemplated finishing off where I started, I eventually decided to explore what the modern day Oscar field looks like. This is especially relevant as, from the 2010 ceremony onwards; Oscar changed the number of nominees from five to ten. Two years later the rules were changed again allowing the Academy to choose between five and ten films meaning that they weren't forced to select movies that maybe didn't feel like they deserved to be amongst the best of the year. So without further ado we start with two films from the director of the first Best Picture winner of this decade and somebody whose win for directing the film was a history-making moment.
The person in question was Kathryn Bigelow who became the first woman ever to win the Best Director Oscar. Oddly, in the seventy plus years of the Oscars only four women including Bigelow were nominated which tells you something about the sexism that surrounds the film industry in general. It's also interested that the film Bigelow won the Oscar for is a fairly macho affair and features very few female characters throughout. The Hurt Locker is based on journalist Mark Boal's experiences living and interviewing members of the army in 2004. Boal, who won an Oscar for the film's screenplay, interviewed over 1,000 officers before beginning his work on the film. The film's protagonist is Sergeant First Class William James, a talented but reckless bomb disposal expert who joins a three man bomb disposal team who are nearing the completion of their time in Iraq. The film follows the team throughout their last days in the country with James' colleague Sergeant Sanborn getting more frustrated with his superior's lack of compliance to regulations. The third member of the team, Specialist Owen Eldridge, is portrayed as somebody who is desperate to get home and is regularly visited by the Camp's doctor. After several incidents, which include Eldridge getting his leg shot off, the team finish their rotation however Boal's lasting message is that some soldiers can't leave war behind. Indeed the film starts with the message that 'war is a drug' and concludes with James returning to Iraq after finding that he can't cope with the mundane nature of his regular domestic life. This final scene is a little jarring to me as I never quite knew whether The Hurt Locker was an anti-war or pro-war film. The characters of Eldridge and Sanborn represent soldiers who want to get home and the latter in particular voices his need to get more out of life. At the same time the portrayal of the majority of the Iraqis as 'the enemy' makes this feel more like the recently recent American Sniper than something like Apocalypse Now.
Along with this odd balance of pro and anti-war sentiment, The Hurt Locker's other issue is that it doesn't really have a story to speak of. Instead the film is made up of a series of incidents that are strung together through the trio of characters who grow on you throughout the course of the film. James is a particularly memorable character who is initially portrayed as arrogant but later comes through for his team. His relationship with a young Iraqi boy known as 'Beckham' is also touching which explains his reaction when he thinks that the youngster has been used as a body bomb. Jeremy Renner's performance as James is very naturalistic and adds to the whole documentary-like feel of the film. This seems to have been Bigelow's intention as she cast three relative unknowns in the roles of James, Sanborn and Eldridge. What I liked most about The Hurt Locker was the fact that it at times it didn't feel like I was watching a fictional film at all. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd's use of 16mm cameras meant that the audience were able to look at multiple angles at once. Bigelow wanted us to get multiple perspectives during the film's many set pieces and I certainly feel this is one thing that the film achieved. Particularly memorable was one of the film's final scenes in which James is unable to detach a bomb from an innocent Iraqi man before it is detonated. The Hurt Locker really doesn't feel like any other Best Picture winner as its focus on realism over story is something knew. The only Best Picture winner it resembles is Platoon and even that had more of a focus on story than The Hurt Locker. To me this almost validates the Academy's decision to extend the Best Picture category especially if we're going to get films that play more towards realism than fiction. It's also great to see Bigelow, who did a fantastic job anchoring the film, being the first woman to pick up an award that has had only male recipients up to this point. Here's hoping that more female directors are honoured in the years to come and that Bigelow's victory isn't just a one-off.
Bigelow's next film, Zero Dark Thirty, was also in the Best Picture field although she herself wasn't nominated for director. Again the film focused on a modern day war setting, this time the War on Terror with the lead characters on the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. Although it possessed quite macho themes, Zero Dark Thirty's lead character was young CIA officer Maya. The film followed Maya from meek rookie to Osama obsessive as gradually the hunt for the terrorist mastermind engulfed her life. Originally the film was going to focus on the fruitless search for Osama straight after the World Trade Centre attacks however, following the capture and death of Bin Laden, Bigelow and Boal had to go back to square one. That to me is why the film feels incredibly fragmented with the first ninety minutes featuring Maya's attempts to get close to Osama's associates. It's a frustrating watch as every time Maya feels like she's getting somewhere she hits a brick wall or finds her plans wrapped up in red tape. The second part of the film sees Maya transported back to Washington after an attempt on her life in Pakistan as we watch her fight against the system again. The final third, which focuses exclusively on the army's hunt for and eventual murder of Bin Laden, feels almost tacked on to the end. Although this is where the film is at its tensest, this final half an hour is separate from the rest of the film save a few shots of Maya that appear to have been thrown in for continuity. The fragmented feel of Zero Dark Thirty is slightly off-putting at times and whilst all three sections are well-made they don't quite fit together. The scenes with Maya back in Washington are a particular drag and are only saved by James Gandolfini's appearance as the CIA's Director.
Despite my problems with the uneven structure of the film I think that Zero Dark Thirty is a step up on The Hurt Locker due to the fact that it has a proper story. As it's based on true events you know what we're building up to even though you're not quite sure what's going to happen on the way there. Boal and Bigelow punctuate the shocks well as there are several jump-out-of-you-seat moments such as when Maya and fellow CIA analyst Jessica experience a terror attack at a restaurant. In addition I felt I knew the character of Maya more so than I did any of the trio of bomb disposers in The Hurt Locker. Maya's progression from slightly nervous analyst to confident woman who isn't afraid to stand up to the CIA director is told well by Boal. The character is enhanced by Jessica Chastain's fantastic performance which earned her a Best Actress nomination. Chastain brilliantly conveys all of Maya's strengths and weaknesses which means that you start to feel for her as the film goes on. The fact that Chastain all but vanishes once the hunt for Bin Laden begins is one of the problems with the film for me. However I think she manages to save it right at the end with a tender moment as she boards a plane having finally succeeded in bringing down her nemesis. The supporting cast is almost universally fantastic with special mention going to Mark Strong, Jennifer Ehle and Joel Edgerton. Zero Dark Thirty's other big plus point is Greig Fraser's cinematography which employs a similar documentary-feel to Barry Ackroyd's camera work in The Hurt Locker. This is especially relevant in the final section of the film as you feel at times like you're part of the team who are being used to hunt down Osama. Zero Dark Thirty didn't have nearly as much success as The Hurt Locker did and only managed to win one award in the Sound Editing category. In fact this wasn't even a universal victory as the Zero Dark Thirty team found themselves tied with the sound effects team from the Bond film Skyfall. I do think it's a shame that Zero Dark Thirty wasn't as well-regarded by the Academy as The Hurt Locker as I believe it's a superior film. Despite my problems with the structure I think the characters, performances and story are stronger than Bigelow's Oscar-winning endeavour.
But one thing you can say without a doubt is that Bigelow broke through the barrier and will always be remembered for being the first female Best Director winner. Unfortunately, since her win no other women have been nominated despite several female-helmed projects featuring in the Best Picture category. I do feel this balance needs to be addressed soon and I'm hoping it won't be long before somebody joins Bigelow in the female Best Director winner's club.
Next time we explore the work of a male director who had three films in the Best Picture category in the space of only four years.
The person in question was Kathryn Bigelow who became the first woman ever to win the Best Director Oscar. Oddly, in the seventy plus years of the Oscars only four women including Bigelow were nominated which tells you something about the sexism that surrounds the film industry in general. It's also interested that the film Bigelow won the Oscar for is a fairly macho affair and features very few female characters throughout. The Hurt Locker is based on journalist Mark Boal's experiences living and interviewing members of the army in 2004. Boal, who won an Oscar for the film's screenplay, interviewed over 1,000 officers before beginning his work on the film. The film's protagonist is Sergeant First Class William James, a talented but reckless bomb disposal expert who joins a three man bomb disposal team who are nearing the completion of their time in Iraq. The film follows the team throughout their last days in the country with James' colleague Sergeant Sanborn getting more frustrated with his superior's lack of compliance to regulations. The third member of the team, Specialist Owen Eldridge, is portrayed as somebody who is desperate to get home and is regularly visited by the Camp's doctor. After several incidents, which include Eldridge getting his leg shot off, the team finish their rotation however Boal's lasting message is that some soldiers can't leave war behind. Indeed the film starts with the message that 'war is a drug' and concludes with James returning to Iraq after finding that he can't cope with the mundane nature of his regular domestic life. This final scene is a little jarring to me as I never quite knew whether The Hurt Locker was an anti-war or pro-war film. The characters of Eldridge and Sanborn represent soldiers who want to get home and the latter in particular voices his need to get more out of life. At the same time the portrayal of the majority of the Iraqis as 'the enemy' makes this feel more like the recently recent American Sniper than something like Apocalypse Now.
Along with this odd balance of pro and anti-war sentiment, The Hurt Locker's other issue is that it doesn't really have a story to speak of. Instead the film is made up of a series of incidents that are strung together through the trio of characters who grow on you throughout the course of the film. James is a particularly memorable character who is initially portrayed as arrogant but later comes through for his team. His relationship with a young Iraqi boy known as 'Beckham' is also touching which explains his reaction when he thinks that the youngster has been used as a body bomb. Jeremy Renner's performance as James is very naturalistic and adds to the whole documentary-like feel of the film. This seems to have been Bigelow's intention as she cast three relative unknowns in the roles of James, Sanborn and Eldridge. What I liked most about The Hurt Locker was the fact that it at times it didn't feel like I was watching a fictional film at all. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd's use of 16mm cameras meant that the audience were able to look at multiple angles at once. Bigelow wanted us to get multiple perspectives during the film's many set pieces and I certainly feel this is one thing that the film achieved. Particularly memorable was one of the film's final scenes in which James is unable to detach a bomb from an innocent Iraqi man before it is detonated. The Hurt Locker really doesn't feel like any other Best Picture winner as its focus on realism over story is something knew. The only Best Picture winner it resembles is Platoon and even that had more of a focus on story than The Hurt Locker. To me this almost validates the Academy's decision to extend the Best Picture category especially if we're going to get films that play more towards realism than fiction. It's also great to see Bigelow, who did a fantastic job anchoring the film, being the first woman to pick up an award that has had only male recipients up to this point. Here's hoping that more female directors are honoured in the years to come and that Bigelow's victory isn't just a one-off.
Bigelow's next film, Zero Dark Thirty, was also in the Best Picture field although she herself wasn't nominated for director. Again the film focused on a modern day war setting, this time the War on Terror with the lead characters on the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. Although it possessed quite macho themes, Zero Dark Thirty's lead character was young CIA officer Maya. The film followed Maya from meek rookie to Osama obsessive as gradually the hunt for the terrorist mastermind engulfed her life. Originally the film was going to focus on the fruitless search for Osama straight after the World Trade Centre attacks however, following the capture and death of Bin Laden, Bigelow and Boal had to go back to square one. That to me is why the film feels incredibly fragmented with the first ninety minutes featuring Maya's attempts to get close to Osama's associates. It's a frustrating watch as every time Maya feels like she's getting somewhere she hits a brick wall or finds her plans wrapped up in red tape. The second part of the film sees Maya transported back to Washington after an attempt on her life in Pakistan as we watch her fight against the system again. The final third, which focuses exclusively on the army's hunt for and eventual murder of Bin Laden, feels almost tacked on to the end. Although this is where the film is at its tensest, this final half an hour is separate from the rest of the film save a few shots of Maya that appear to have been thrown in for continuity. The fragmented feel of Zero Dark Thirty is slightly off-putting at times and whilst all three sections are well-made they don't quite fit together. The scenes with Maya back in Washington are a particular drag and are only saved by James Gandolfini's appearance as the CIA's Director.
Despite my problems with the uneven structure of the film I think that Zero Dark Thirty is a step up on The Hurt Locker due to the fact that it has a proper story. As it's based on true events you know what we're building up to even though you're not quite sure what's going to happen on the way there. Boal and Bigelow punctuate the shocks well as there are several jump-out-of-you-seat moments such as when Maya and fellow CIA analyst Jessica experience a terror attack at a restaurant. In addition I felt I knew the character of Maya more so than I did any of the trio of bomb disposers in The Hurt Locker. Maya's progression from slightly nervous analyst to confident woman who isn't afraid to stand up to the CIA director is told well by Boal. The character is enhanced by Jessica Chastain's fantastic performance which earned her a Best Actress nomination. Chastain brilliantly conveys all of Maya's strengths and weaknesses which means that you start to feel for her as the film goes on. The fact that Chastain all but vanishes once the hunt for Bin Laden begins is one of the problems with the film for me. However I think she manages to save it right at the end with a tender moment as she boards a plane having finally succeeded in bringing down her nemesis. The supporting cast is almost universally fantastic with special mention going to Mark Strong, Jennifer Ehle and Joel Edgerton. Zero Dark Thirty's other big plus point is Greig Fraser's cinematography which employs a similar documentary-feel to Barry Ackroyd's camera work in The Hurt Locker. This is especially relevant in the final section of the film as you feel at times like you're part of the team who are being used to hunt down Osama. Zero Dark Thirty didn't have nearly as much success as The Hurt Locker did and only managed to win one award in the Sound Editing category. In fact this wasn't even a universal victory as the Zero Dark Thirty team found themselves tied with the sound effects team from the Bond film Skyfall. I do think it's a shame that Zero Dark Thirty wasn't as well-regarded by the Academy as The Hurt Locker as I believe it's a superior film. Despite my problems with the structure I think the characters, performances and story are stronger than Bigelow's Oscar-winning endeavour.
But one thing you can say without a doubt is that Bigelow broke through the barrier and will always be remembered for being the first female Best Director winner. Unfortunately, since her win no other women have been nominated despite several female-helmed projects featuring in the Best Picture category. I do feel this balance needs to be addressed soon and I'm hoping it won't be long before somebody joins Bigelow in the female Best Director winner's club.
Next time we explore the work of a male director who had three films in the Best Picture category in the space of only four years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)