As I discussed in the last post, foreign language films are very unlikely to ever receive a nomination for Best Picture. However, one type of film that has even less chance of making its way into the Best Picture shortlist is the animated movie. Up until now only one fully animated film has made it into the Best Picture category, that being Beauty and the Beast. The Academy attempted to redress this balance by introducing a Best Animated Feature category in the early 21st century. However, by extending the Best Picture category to a potential ten nominees, animated films were finally given their dues by the Academy.
Interestingly both of the animated features nominated for the Best Picture prize came from one studio, that being the much-acclaimed Pixar. Pixar, who partnered with Disney, had delivered plenty of films that had won the Best Animated Feature prize including Ratatouille and the fantastic Wall-E. One year after Wall-E they released Up which won the Best Animated Feature prize as well as scooping a deserving Best Picture nod. I think Up is a film that is most famous for its first ten minutes in which we go through the life of Carl Fredricksen, a young wimpy kid who grows thanks to the love of his eventual wife Ellie. Director Pete Docter is responsible for plenty of tears with a five minute montage that includes Carl and Ellie's wedding, the discovery they can't have children, their planned trip to South America and her eventual death. These scenes are accompanied by Michael Giacchino's memorable score which itself went on to win an Oscar. After this emotional opening, the rest of Up looks at Carl's new adventure as he straps balloons to his house and flies away in order to avoid going into a retirement home. The problem is that Carl has taken young Adventure Scout Russell along for the ride and over the course of the film his young companion goes from unwanted nuisance to surrogate grandchild. Whilst the relationship between Carl and Ellie plays more to the adult audience, Docter makes sure there's something for the kids in the form of a colourful bird and dogs with talking collars. The more manic part of the film sees Carl attempt to protect the aforementioned bird by taking on his childhood hero; adventurer and subsequent madman Charles F. Muntz. After several madcap sequences, Up returns to its emotional core as the final scene brings home how much Russell and Carl now mean to each other.
It always amazes me just how much work goes into making a Pixar movie especially after learning that Docter started writing the script five years before Up was finally released. The lead character of Carl is an interesting one for an animation as he's not somebody who you'd particularly want to root for. But Docter makes him likeable by including that opening montage as well as adding aspects of famous film curmudgeons including Spencer Tracy and Walter Matthau. Carl is voiced brilliantly by Edward Asner who is able to bring out both his character's gruffness and kindness of spirit. Until researching this blog post, I hadn't realised that the character of Russell was an Asian American and that casting a youngster from this ethnic background garnered praise from the local community. After moaning about annoying child stars recently it was great to hear Jordan Nagai's endearing vocals as the wonderfully innocent Russell. Nagai didn't actually audition for the role but his energy was noted by Docter whilst he was waiting for a brother who was up for the role. Every single frame of the feature has been lovingly created, with some of Pixar's animators spending ages in South America to get the features of Paradise Falls completely right. Upon this viewing of Up, which must be my third or fourth, there were several problems I had with the narrative. As a more mature viewer I got a little bit bored in the sections that weren't for me and I didn't particularly care for Kevin the Bird as I found him to be a bit irritating. But with a fine beginning and end, two great voice actors and wonderful animation, Up is a modern classic that will be watched by current and future generations for centuries to come.
Despite producing many incredibly popular animated features, Pixar will always be most famous for the Toy Story films. This is primarily because Toy Story was the studio's first full feature when it was released in 1995. Four years later the sequel was released to even more acclaim but audiences were then made to wait another eleven years for the conclusion to the trilogy. Toy Story 3's main plot saw Woody, Buzz and the gang realise that seventeen-year-old Andy now didn't want to play with them particularly as he was just about to head off to college. The predicament about what to do with our childhood toys is one that all of us have gone through and seeing this through the eyes of the toys themselves is quite unique. Whilst Andy decides to take Woody to college, a choice that I still find odd to this day, the other toys are destined for the attic. However, due to some miscommunication, they end up believing they were destined for the garbage and therefore take matters into their own hands. With Woody splitting himself from the gang, they arrive at Sunnyside Daycare believing that they will find children who'll play with them properly. However, they quickly learn that Daycare is manipulated by the cute-looking but evil-minded Lotso who believes that every toy at the institution has been discarded by a child. I think that screenwriter Michael Arndt did a great job at turning the middle chunk of Toy Story 3 into a prison movie spoof. There were some great scenes in which the returning Woody learnt of the security at the centre and how he would best be able to sneak his friends out. The final scenes of the film though were the most touching, and to me rivalled anything in Up, as the toys believed they were to be incinerated and held hands to face the inevitable. This emotion lasted on to the scene in which Andy finally set a heartfelt goodbye to Woody and friends in a moment that evoked memories of the final moments of Winnie the Pooh.
I think enlisting Arndt to write the script for Toy Story 3 was a masterstroke and one that more that paid off. Arndt, who previously won an Oscar for penning Little Miss Sunshine, knew that the key to the film's charm was the relationship between the toys and therefore based the story around their closeness. The scene in the incinerator still makes me well up when I think about it and that scene where the toys link hands one-by-one is particularly poignant. I found the structure of the film allowed the old characters to shine while at the same time introducing new memorable supporting players. Obviously some of the most memorable scenes in Toy Story 3 belong to Ken, who is superbly voiced here by Michael Keaton, a character who goes from sleazy enforcer to groovy manager of the daycare thanks in part to his relationship with Barbie. Despite the film being about talking toys, Toy Story 3 is a film that feels incredibly close to real life and the fact that it touches on themes of moving on means that it resonates with every member of the audience. I think what makes the Pixar films so great is that they never insult their audience in the way other animated movies seem to. Both in Up and Toy Story 3 the stories are quite complex and contain something for every member of the family. In fact the two films I've watched for this particular post are better written than a lot of the other Oscar-nominated movies that I've talked about recently. The only minus point in Toy Story 3's favour is the fact that Pixar have now announced a fourth film which won't follow on from this classic. Instead it has been announced as a stand-alone sequel which leads me to believe that it's simply an attempt to cash in on the franchise's success. But disregarding that fact I think it's fair to say that Toy Story 3 caps off what is arguably the most consistent and well-rounded film trilogy of all time.
Next time we follow two British national treasures as they go on a trip around America.
Showing posts with label Ned Beatty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ned Beatty. Show all posts
Monday, 4 May 2015
Monday, 24 February 2014
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 255: The Great Outdoors
Thinking back over the majority of the last couple of films I've reviewed, most of them have complex plot structures. Obviously sprawling costume dramas such as Barry Lyndon and Nicholas and Alexandra have stories that stretch over numerous decades but even something like An Unmarried Woman has a lot going on story-wise. But for the next film on the list, Deliverance, a simple story is all that suffices and I feel the film is all the better for it. Deliverance follows four businessmen on a camping trip as one of their number, Lewis, is desperate to explore a valley before it and the surrounding town becomes one massive lake. Though Lewis and his friend Ed are experienced campers; their companions Drew and Bobby are not. Deliverance gives as an eerie feeling right away as the quartet arrive in the small town and encounter the locals, most of whom are portrayed as inbred yokels. Soon the four men are off on their canoes but on their first night camping, Lewis believes he hears a noise in the bushes. On the second day, Ed and Bobby get lost and end up coming ashore where they encounter two men. Anybody who's seen the film knows what graphic fate the two men inflict on the pair, especially Bobby, and this whole set piece ends with Louis killing one of the men with an arrow. From there the film presents a moral dilemma, namely should the men report the incident to the police or bury the body and forget what happened altogether. As the leader of the gang, Lewis eventually convinces the majority of the group to go along with his plan. But it's not smooth sailing back to dry land and our heroes face several more obstacles before they can return home.
Director John Boorman presents Deliverance in a fairly simplistic manner and it's all the better for it. A lot of the dialogue is fairly inconsequential and is used to demonstrate that these four men are quite ordinary. Indeed, even before we see their faces, we hear their voices as they plan the camping trip and let the audience know how they got to the small town. Boorman is also able to create the eerie tone of the film without going overboard and there are only one or two really big set pieces throughout the course of Deliverance. However, it's these set pieces that set in motion the moral quandary that's at the heart of Deliverance and I feel the film makes the audience question what they'd do in this situation. Cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond excels at thrusting us head first into the action and I feel he really captured the volatile nature of the outdoors. Indeed most of Deliverance happens outside and it's this exposure to the elements that changes the four men forever. I was really compelled by the majority of Deliverance, but I feel the pace really lagged once the men made it onto dry land. The final scenes, in which they attempted to cover up what had happened during their trip, dragged on too long for my liking. Of the four central actors, I found Ronny Cox and Ned Beatty the most engaging as novice explorers Drew and Bobby. Beatty in particular was outstanding during the violent scene whilst Cox made Drew the group's moral leader. After watching his performances in both Midnight Cowboy and Coming Home, it was interesting to see Jon Voight play a down-to-Earth everyman. I feel Voight really took to the role of Ed and I found he was at home here equally as much as he was playing a more outlandish character. Due to the fact that he was a major box office star at the time, I feel Burt Reynolds was the biggest name in Deliverance. But to me he made Lewis quite a caricature and he was the character I was least interested in overall. Another memorable element of Deliverance is the duelling banjos scene which is uplifting early on but later takes on a sinister undertone every time the tune is subsequently played in the film. Ultimately I found Deliverance a film with a simple story that was well-filmed and well-acted and one that poses a moral dilemma that we can all relate to.
Next Time I watch the final two films of the decade, a double bill starring a famous screen double act.
Tuesday, 7 January 2014
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 235-236: Altman's All-Stars
As regular readers of the Oscar Challenge blog will now, I often put together films from the same director that have been nominated in the same decade. This time it's the turn of Robert Altman whose movies M*A*S*H and Nashville were give nods in the 1970s. Both very different in tone, they are similar in the way that Altman employs his ensemble casts and the sprawling nature of the plot.
In the early 1970s, Altman had his first breakthrough with M*A*S*H, a film loosely based on Richard Hooker's original novel about medical personnel stationed at an army hospital during the Korean War. The main plot of the film sees three new surgeons arrive at camp and instantly stir things up. The first two of these troublemakers are 'Hawkeye' Pierce and 'Duke' Forest who regularly steal, drink and cause chaos. They instantly rub their new cam pmates up the wrong way especially Robert Duvall's religious Frank Burns who they're able to get rid of due to his inferior surgical abilities. Senior nurse Margaret Houlihan is similarly outraged by their sexist behaviour and their insistence on referring to her as 'Hotlips'. Joining their number soon after is 'Trapper' McIntyre another surgeon who is as insubordinate as Hawkeye and Duke. The film then becomes quite episodic in nature but does see Trapper and Hawkeye become medical heroes after saving the lives of a congressman's son. Despite seemingly uninterested in their work, our central duo are always concerned with doing the right thing, even if they have to resort to blackmail to do it. This theme about the working man sticking up for the people who can't defend themselves, spoke to the audiences of the 1970s who were experiencing political unrest at the time.
Altman quickly marked himself out as a maverick director by using very little of the original source novel for his book while in addition encouraging the actors to improvise in certain scenes. However, when the film was made in 1970, Altman hadn't earned the reputation yet to work in such a reckless way. This led to the film's leads Elliot Gould and Donald Sutherland to try and get Altman sacked on numerous occasions. Obviously, the film today is hailed as a classic and went to win the Palme d'Or at Cannes as well as the Oscar for Best Screenplay. Altman's gambles all paid off here as I thoroughly enjoyed M*A*S*H and thought it was one of the best Oscar-nominated comedies of all time. As Hawkeye and Trapper; Sutherland and Gould were fantastic and they shared great on-screen chemistry throughout. Altman's script was packed full of great lines but there was plenty of social commentary hidden behind the laughs. Despite having quite a sporadic structure, M*A*S*H was held together thanks to the strength of its characters and the solid narrative that Altman provided throughout. This film fully put Altman on the map and, after watching it, it's not hard to see exactly why.
Five years later, Altman returned to the Best Picture list with another film that has a sprawling narrative - Nashville. Set in the musical city of Tennessee; Nashville follows twenty-four characters during five days which lead up to a political rally for vice-presidential candidate Hal Philip Walker. The film basically focuses on the country music scene and the measures some will go to to enhance their careers. There's the legendary Haven Hamilton, who has political aspirations of his home and whose fame is fading fast. Barbara Jean is one of the most popular country singers around but suffers from exhaustion and spends most of the film in hospital. As the country music business is a fickle one, Barbara Jean's manager eventually replaces her at several events with the inferior but beautiful Connie White. We also meet Tom Frank, a womanising member of a country music trio who attempts to break out on his own throughout the course of the film. Then there's Sueleen Gay, another aspiring country singer who has no talent what to speak of and gets exploited in one of the film's most memorable scenes. The film's climax brings the majority of the characters together at the aforementioned rally and sees one of the characters attempt to shoot two of Nashville's biggest stars. Despite this tragedy occurring Winifred, another aspiring country singer, takes to the stage and finally gets her big break.
Having enjoyed the sprawling, episodic narrative throughout M*A*S*H, I was dismayed that I didn't enjoy the same structure so much with Nashville. I believe part of the reason for that is due to the fact that it's a drama rather than a comedy so can't get away with being as fragmented as Altman's previous film. One of the other issues the film had is that there's far too many characters and interconnected plots for the film to work. At over two and a half hours, I felt the film dragged too much despite the fact that almost half of it was musical performances by various members of the cast. That being said some of these musical performances were incredibly entertaining and really gave Nashville a sense of place. In fact one of its more positive features is how it immerses the viewer in the culture and style of Nashville; including the religious nature of all of its inhabitants seen in the scenes set at various church services. There were some brilliant performances amongst the ensemble most notably from Lily Tomlin, Ronee Blakely and Henry Gibson. Throughout this voyage I have questioned why a few of these films are held up as classics and I'm afraid I'll have to add Nashville to this ever-growing list. Don't get me wrong I did enjoy parts of it, but as a whole it was overlong and incredibly dull in places.
Next time we have yet another comedy, the last of the genre to win the Best Picture Award.
In the early 1970s, Altman had his first breakthrough with M*A*S*H, a film loosely based on Richard Hooker's original novel about medical personnel stationed at an army hospital during the Korean War. The main plot of the film sees three new surgeons arrive at camp and instantly stir things up. The first two of these troublemakers are 'Hawkeye' Pierce and 'Duke' Forest who regularly steal, drink and cause chaos. They instantly rub their new cam pmates up the wrong way especially Robert Duvall's religious Frank Burns who they're able to get rid of due to his inferior surgical abilities. Senior nurse Margaret Houlihan is similarly outraged by their sexist behaviour and their insistence on referring to her as 'Hotlips'. Joining their number soon after is 'Trapper' McIntyre another surgeon who is as insubordinate as Hawkeye and Duke. The film then becomes quite episodic in nature but does see Trapper and Hawkeye become medical heroes after saving the lives of a congressman's son. Despite seemingly uninterested in their work, our central duo are always concerned with doing the right thing, even if they have to resort to blackmail to do it. This theme about the working man sticking up for the people who can't defend themselves, spoke to the audiences of the 1970s who were experiencing political unrest at the time.
Altman quickly marked himself out as a maverick director by using very little of the original source novel for his book while in addition encouraging the actors to improvise in certain scenes. However, when the film was made in 1970, Altman hadn't earned the reputation yet to work in such a reckless way. This led to the film's leads Elliot Gould and Donald Sutherland to try and get Altman sacked on numerous occasions. Obviously, the film today is hailed as a classic and went to win the Palme d'Or at Cannes as well as the Oscar for Best Screenplay. Altman's gambles all paid off here as I thoroughly enjoyed M*A*S*H and thought it was one of the best Oscar-nominated comedies of all time. As Hawkeye and Trapper; Sutherland and Gould were fantastic and they shared great on-screen chemistry throughout. Altman's script was packed full of great lines but there was plenty of social commentary hidden behind the laughs. Despite having quite a sporadic structure, M*A*S*H was held together thanks to the strength of its characters and the solid narrative that Altman provided throughout. This film fully put Altman on the map and, after watching it, it's not hard to see exactly why.
Five years later, Altman returned to the Best Picture list with another film that has a sprawling narrative - Nashville. Set in the musical city of Tennessee; Nashville follows twenty-four characters during five days which lead up to a political rally for vice-presidential candidate Hal Philip Walker. The film basically focuses on the country music scene and the measures some will go to to enhance their careers. There's the legendary Haven Hamilton, who has political aspirations of his home and whose fame is fading fast. Barbara Jean is one of the most popular country singers around but suffers from exhaustion and spends most of the film in hospital. As the country music business is a fickle one, Barbara Jean's manager eventually replaces her at several events with the inferior but beautiful Connie White. We also meet Tom Frank, a womanising member of a country music trio who attempts to break out on his own throughout the course of the film. Then there's Sueleen Gay, another aspiring country singer who has no talent what to speak of and gets exploited in one of the film's most memorable scenes. The film's climax brings the majority of the characters together at the aforementioned rally and sees one of the characters attempt to shoot two of Nashville's biggest stars. Despite this tragedy occurring Winifred, another aspiring country singer, takes to the stage and finally gets her big break.
Having enjoyed the sprawling, episodic narrative throughout M*A*S*H, I was dismayed that I didn't enjoy the same structure so much with Nashville. I believe part of the reason for that is due to the fact that it's a drama rather than a comedy so can't get away with being as fragmented as Altman's previous film. One of the other issues the film had is that there's far too many characters and interconnected plots for the film to work. At over two and a half hours, I felt the film dragged too much despite the fact that almost half of it was musical performances by various members of the cast. That being said some of these musical performances were incredibly entertaining and really gave Nashville a sense of place. In fact one of its more positive features is how it immerses the viewer in the culture and style of Nashville; including the religious nature of all of its inhabitants seen in the scenes set at various church services. There were some brilliant performances amongst the ensemble most notably from Lily Tomlin, Ronee Blakely and Henry Gibson. Throughout this voyage I have questioned why a few of these films are held up as classics and I'm afraid I'll have to add Nashville to this ever-growing list. Don't get me wrong I did enjoy parts of it, but as a whole it was overlong and incredibly dull in places.
Next time we have yet another comedy, the last of the genre to win the Best Picture Award.
Friday, 20 September 2013
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 232-233: An I-Lumet-nating Double Bill
If you put a gun to my head and asked me what my favourite film of all time was then the answer would probably be 12 Angry Men. It's one of those films that I could just watch over and over again while it's also incredibly well-made. Shockingly, I've watched very few of director Sidney Lumet's other films and that's one mistake I've been able to correct with the help of this project. This post will look over the two Oscar-nominated films that he directed in the 1970s.
One of the things that makes 12 Angry Men so effective is that it's almost entirely set in the jury room and I felt the same way about Dog Day Afternoon. Though it's not restricted to one setting, Dog Day Afternoon is almost wholly set in and around a bank that is being robbed. The film begins with Sal and Sonny robbing a bank and attempting to commit the crime without being caught. Things soon go awry when they discover that there's hardly any money left in the bank and instead decides to steal a bunch of traveller's cheques. However, as Sonny tries to burn off the bank's register on the cheques, smoke starts to billow from the bank which in turn alerts locals that something's not right at the bank. Soon the pair are discovered and the police descend on the bank and, as they attempt to diffuse the situation, we learn more about our central pair. As Sonny is the man that the police are in constant contact with, he comes out of the bank on several occasions to talk to Detective Moretti, the policeman in charge of handling the hostage situation. Sonny soon becomes a local hero as he is attempting to stand up for the common man. Sonny later becomes a gay icon as we discover he married a man in a secret ceremony and has robbed the bank in order to pay for his wife Leon's sexual reassignment surgery. However, Leon is less than thrilled with this revelation and it seems as if he's been trying to escape Sonny for years. Meanwhile, the more menacing Sal is getting increasingly agitated as he doesn't really care for Sonny's flamboyance and his need to be a friend to all of their hostages. Soon, the stage is set for the final act in which Sonny and Sal attempt to escape, while the police endeavour to stop them.
I found Dog Day Afternoon to be a slow burning story that took its time to develop. It was only after Moretti and his team arrived that I really started to get involved in the film. Lumet and writer Frank Piersen create an intriguing anti-hero in Sonny, a character who we begin to learn more of once the hostage situation is in full swing. Throughout the film our perception of Sonny changes as we learn that, in an odd sort of way, he's trying to do the best for everyone. The character of Sal is more interesting, as we have to make our own minds up about him, and he really isn't as in your face as Sonny is. The pairing of Al Pacino and John Cazale is a great one and their loud and calm double act contrasts their roles in The Godfather films. I found Pacino to be more captivating here than he was in The Godfather films and I found that the character of Sonny really tested him. Meanwhile Chris Sarandon was brilliant in his handful of scenes as Leon, the pre-op transsexual who wanted nothing to do with his new husband. The claustrophobic nature of the over-heated bank added to the tense feel of the film as Sonny started to lose his head. As I'd never seen the film before, I have to admit that the final sequence had me on the edge of my seat. I felt that Dog Day Afternoon perfectly enforced my views that Lumet is an assured director who gets the best out of his actors and utilises his setting to full effect.
If I hadn't thought that already then I would've definitely to come that conclusion after watching Network. Of all of Lumet's films Network definitely did the best at the Oscars and Paddy Chayefsky's script is still widely regarded as one of the best of all time. Though I'd never seen Network before I was aware that it centred around Peter Finch's Howard Beale and the fact that he claimed he was going to commit suicide live on air. What I didn't realise was that the main story was a lot bigger than that and involved the UBS Network's head of programming Diana Christensen and her wish to put Beale back on the air after he becomes one of the biggest talking points in the country. Christensen is portrayed as a woman who puts her career before anything else and can't seem to sustain a relationship with anyone. Even her affair with the married former head of news Max Schumacher doesn't satisfy her and he eventually tries to act as the voice of reason in the film. Meanwhile Beale's power over the masses has no ends and he soon attempts to block a merger between UPS' owner CCA and Saudi Arabians. Obviously the CCA aren't happy about this and attempt to put end to Beale once and for all. But, as Network shows us throughout, people are guided by television and trust it more than they do the people in their own lives.
Coming into Network, I was expecting it to all revolve around Peter Finch as Howard Beale, but I was wrong. Even though Finch rightfully won the Best Actor Oscar, I would've said he was more of a supporting performer while William Holden was the real star of the show. Holden's Schumacher is the wise old sage of the film and he is the only person who doesn't always think about what's best for ratings. Chayefsky's satirical look at the world of television is incredibly witty and the dialogue is written with a sort of beat at the heart of it. Finch is utterly spellbinding as the crazy Beale while Faye Dunaway puts in an Oscar-winning performance as Diana. I found Dunaway to be great here also, playing the strong woman in a man's world she was almost the tragic heroine of the piece as she discovered that she couldn't be anything other than her job. Robert Duvall as the company' money man and Ned Beatty as CCA's chairman both put in great supporting turns with the latter really playing the film's version of the devil incarnate. In fact, the only cast member not to make much of an impression was Beatrice Straight, odd seeing as she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role in the film. Straight does hold the record for appearing on screen for the shortest time. Network continues Lumet's love of filming inside a certain location, with the UPS network buildings housing the majority of the film. Once again these buildings feel quite claustrophobic as they contain rooms full of people talking about meaningless statistics and programme concepts. Overall, I found Network to be a more wholly enjoyable film than Dog Day Afternoon even if it wasn't as intriguing or gripping. Network, and in particular its script, has influenced a whole generation of directors and screenwriters, many of whom have mocked the industry in which they made their name. Though Network is an incredibly influential film, it still holds up today in its own right and I do think people should seek it out if they haven't already seen it.
Next time we take things a bit easier with a lightweight comedy about the afterlife.
One of the things that makes 12 Angry Men so effective is that it's almost entirely set in the jury room and I felt the same way about Dog Day Afternoon. Though it's not restricted to one setting, Dog Day Afternoon is almost wholly set in and around a bank that is being robbed. The film begins with Sal and Sonny robbing a bank and attempting to commit the crime without being caught. Things soon go awry when they discover that there's hardly any money left in the bank and instead decides to steal a bunch of traveller's cheques. However, as Sonny tries to burn off the bank's register on the cheques, smoke starts to billow from the bank which in turn alerts locals that something's not right at the bank. Soon the pair are discovered and the police descend on the bank and, as they attempt to diffuse the situation, we learn more about our central pair. As Sonny is the man that the police are in constant contact with, he comes out of the bank on several occasions to talk to Detective Moretti, the policeman in charge of handling the hostage situation. Sonny soon becomes a local hero as he is attempting to stand up for the common man. Sonny later becomes a gay icon as we discover he married a man in a secret ceremony and has robbed the bank in order to pay for his wife Leon's sexual reassignment surgery. However, Leon is less than thrilled with this revelation and it seems as if he's been trying to escape Sonny for years. Meanwhile, the more menacing Sal is getting increasingly agitated as he doesn't really care for Sonny's flamboyance and his need to be a friend to all of their hostages. Soon, the stage is set for the final act in which Sonny and Sal attempt to escape, while the police endeavour to stop them.
I found Dog Day Afternoon to be a slow burning story that took its time to develop. It was only after Moretti and his team arrived that I really started to get involved in the film. Lumet and writer Frank Piersen create an intriguing anti-hero in Sonny, a character who we begin to learn more of once the hostage situation is in full swing. Throughout the film our perception of Sonny changes as we learn that, in an odd sort of way, he's trying to do the best for everyone. The character of Sal is more interesting, as we have to make our own minds up about him, and he really isn't as in your face as Sonny is. The pairing of Al Pacino and John Cazale is a great one and their loud and calm double act contrasts their roles in The Godfather films. I found Pacino to be more captivating here than he was in The Godfather films and I found that the character of Sonny really tested him. Meanwhile Chris Sarandon was brilliant in his handful of scenes as Leon, the pre-op transsexual who wanted nothing to do with his new husband. The claustrophobic nature of the over-heated bank added to the tense feel of the film as Sonny started to lose his head. As I'd never seen the film before, I have to admit that the final sequence had me on the edge of my seat. I felt that Dog Day Afternoon perfectly enforced my views that Lumet is an assured director who gets the best out of his actors and utilises his setting to full effect.
If I hadn't thought that already then I would've definitely to come that conclusion after watching Network. Of all of Lumet's films Network definitely did the best at the Oscars and Paddy Chayefsky's script is still widely regarded as one of the best of all time. Though I'd never seen Network before I was aware that it centred around Peter Finch's Howard Beale and the fact that he claimed he was going to commit suicide live on air. What I didn't realise was that the main story was a lot bigger than that and involved the UBS Network's head of programming Diana Christensen and her wish to put Beale back on the air after he becomes one of the biggest talking points in the country. Christensen is portrayed as a woman who puts her career before anything else and can't seem to sustain a relationship with anyone. Even her affair with the married former head of news Max Schumacher doesn't satisfy her and he eventually tries to act as the voice of reason in the film. Meanwhile Beale's power over the masses has no ends and he soon attempts to block a merger between UPS' owner CCA and Saudi Arabians. Obviously the CCA aren't happy about this and attempt to put end to Beale once and for all. But, as Network shows us throughout, people are guided by television and trust it more than they do the people in their own lives.
Coming into Network, I was expecting it to all revolve around Peter Finch as Howard Beale, but I was wrong. Even though Finch rightfully won the Best Actor Oscar, I would've said he was more of a supporting performer while William Holden was the real star of the show. Holden's Schumacher is the wise old sage of the film and he is the only person who doesn't always think about what's best for ratings. Chayefsky's satirical look at the world of television is incredibly witty and the dialogue is written with a sort of beat at the heart of it. Finch is utterly spellbinding as the crazy Beale while Faye Dunaway puts in an Oscar-winning performance as Diana. I found Dunaway to be great here also, playing the strong woman in a man's world she was almost the tragic heroine of the piece as she discovered that she couldn't be anything other than her job. Robert Duvall as the company' money man and Ned Beatty as CCA's chairman both put in great supporting turns with the latter really playing the film's version of the devil incarnate. In fact, the only cast member not to make much of an impression was Beatrice Straight, odd seeing as she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role in the film. Straight does hold the record for appearing on screen for the shortest time. Network continues Lumet's love of filming inside a certain location, with the UPS network buildings housing the majority of the film. Once again these buildings feel quite claustrophobic as they contain rooms full of people talking about meaningless statistics and programme concepts. Overall, I found Network to be a more wholly enjoyable film than Dog Day Afternoon even if it wasn't as intriguing or gripping. Network, and in particular its script, has influenced a whole generation of directors and screenwriters, many of whom have mocked the industry in which they made their name. Though Network is an incredibly influential film, it still holds up today in its own right and I do think people should seek it out if they haven't already seen it.
Next time we take things a bit easier with a lightweight comedy about the afterlife.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)