Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 301-302: Sheens at War

Most of the war films I've encountered throughout the course of this blog have been flag-waving salutes to the boys and girls fighting the good fight. Although occasionally bleak in tone, these films have nonetheless praised those in command of the missions and have led us to believe that everything is being done for the greater good. However, starting in the late 1970s, some films started to tell a different tale altogether with movies such as The Deer Hunter and Coming Home showing what was really going on in Vietnam. Two more films were nominated during the 1980s ceremony and were linked by the fact that the earlier one starred a famous actor and the latter featured his now notorious son.

Nominated at the first Oscar ceremony of the decade, Apocalypse Now was the perfect example of a war movie which really saw how badly some missions were handled. Francis Ford Coppola's movie starred Martin Sheen as Captain Ben Willard, a special operations veteran who is tasked with a secret mission whilst serving in Vietnam. The already jaded Willard is instructed to track down Colonel Kurtz, a formerly respected officer who went rogue and later retreated to neutral Cambodia. Willard later joins a navy command with a ragtag group of men including a former surfer, a wannabe chef and the captain of the vessel who is constantly feeling undermined by Willard's presence. Along the way the crew encounters several colourful characters including the memorable Colonel Killgore, who loves the smell of Napalm in the morning. After plenty of time has surpassed, and with some of the crew members winding up dead along the way, Willard and the remaining men arrive at Kurtz's base. Here they find that Kurtz has already brainwashed the majority of the natives, as well as a free-loving war photographer and a former commanding officer who is now seen to be in an almost comatose state. Coppola does well building up to Kurtz's first reveal and his presence in the film is certainly a representation of how war can change a man. It's certainly very clear of how the film is going to end but Coppola and his actors make sure the final scenes really stay with you. It's unfortunate then that he didn't employ the same amount of discipline throughout the film as I did feel a large proportion of it was surplus to requirements.

These feelings were magnified due to the fact that the only version of Apocalypse Now available to me was the Redux cut. This version of the film included almost an hours' worth of extra footage which Coppola somehow deemed important enough to insert into this new cut of the film. I have to hold my hands up and say that this was my first experience of watching Apocalypse Now and therefore I wasn't aware of which scenes were exclusive to the Redux version. However, after watching, I read up on the subject and discovered that all the scenes I thought were unnecessary were the ones that Coppola was desperate to resurrect. Without the scenes, Apocalypse Now was definitely a stronger film with an involving narrative that is punctuated with some colourful characters. There are certain moments that  everybody associates with the film from Willard's opening hallucination to 'The Ride of the Valkyries ' scene and finally the first appearance of Kurtz. These scenes are made memorable due to a fantastic technical team including cinematographer Vittorio Storaro and the editing team who did an excellent job of cutting together the aforementioned hallucination as well as the descent of Kilgore's helicopters. Storaro's camera really captured the horrors of the Vietnam war as well as letting us see how different men reacted to it. In terms of its ascetic value and its musical choices, Apocalypse Now can't be faulted one iota.

That being said I did find the narrative aspect of the film to be a real struggle, primarily Willard's lead voice-over. Coppola overuses this storytelling device to the extent that it just feels like an actor reciting lines rather than a jaded officer reciting what happened during his latest mission. This feeling made the narrative feel incredibly lazy at times and I did feel somebody as adept as Coppola could've found a different way to tell the story. Marlon Brando was incredibly well-utilised as Kurtz, appearing in only a couple of the film's final scenes his enigmatic presence was perfect for that of the disillusioned officer. Robert Duvall brought a real sense of entertainment to the role of Killgore while Dennis Hopper perfectly embodied the hippie movement as the war photographer. But it was Martin Sheen who was tasked with leading the film and I felt he did an admirable job of playing the somewhat reliable Captain whose experiences during his latest mission scar him for life. Sheen benefits from looking like the All-American hero and his opening scenes in Saigon allow us to sympathise with before he heads off in search of Kurtz. Sheen is especially fantastic in the later scenes as we see him being tempted by Kurt'z words and whether what he did was actually the right thing. Ultimately Acopalypse Now has elements of being the perfect film however I did feel it's narrative structure let it down. That being said visually it looked fantastic and it's cast were generally spectacular especially Sheen who was a more than reliable anchor for the film's story.

Seven years later, Martin's son Charlie Sheen followed his father to Vietnam for Oliver Stone's film Platoon, which would go on to win the Best Picture prize at that year's ceremony. Charlie's character in the film is Chris Taylor, a young man who has decided to join the army and fight in Vietnam rather than continue his studies at college. From the very beginning of the film, Stone establishes the fact that Taylor's war will be a tough one as he struggles to carry his kit into camp and is taunted by the men who've been there a while. Chris does find somewhat of a mentor in Sgt. Elias who initially is the only man who is willing to help him when he first arrives in Vietnam. Meanwhile, similar to the way Willard does in Apocalypse Now, Chris has a similarly expositional voiceover but at least this time the narrative is told through letters to his grandmother. As his time in Vietnam continues Chris becomes one of the gang however he never wins round the somewhat ruthless Staff Sergeant Barnes. Barnes and Elias are constantly clashing with the former hating the fact that the latter has more power than him. Meanwhile Elias chastises Barnes for shooting an innocent Vietnamese woman which leads to an incredibly aggressive fight between the pair. Chris soon realises that every man has his own personal war and his experiences are haunted by those who have shaped his time in Vietnam. By the end of the film both Elias and Barnes have been killed, but neither by the men who they initially considered to be the enemy. The final scene, in which Chris surveys the dead bodies strewn across the Vietnamese landscape, perfectly demonstrates the message that the film is trying to give.

Platoon feels like an extremely personal account of Vietnam and is indeed based on Stone's own experience of serving in the war. Stone wrote the screenplay for the film and tried to get it made in Hollywood while writing the scripts for other films, including the Oscar-winning Midnight Express. Eventually he took the decision to direct Platoon himself which I feel was the right move as he would now be able to realise his vision exactly the way he wanted to. The film's cinematography, which was nominated but didn't win an Oscar, is incredibly documentary-like in tone and at times it's if some of it has been lifted out of the history books I used to read at school. Luckily, unlike some of the films I've watched recently, the narrative is as involving as the visual aspects of the picture. This is down to the character of Chris Taylor, a sympathetic everyman who the audience can easily identify with. Taylor's war hasn't been the one he expected and he soon has to adapt new coping mechanisms whilst at the same time maintaining his moral code. Whilst not as compelling as his father's performance in Apocalypse Now, Charlie Sheen at least makes us care about Chris. Sheen brings a type of innocence to the role and becomes almost the straight man to the gang of crazy characters that are part of Chris' platoon. Willem Dafoe definitely makes Elias the heart of the film and he's the character that I personally cared the most about, which made his death even the more shocking. Meanwhile Tom Berenger is perfect as the grizzled veteran who does whatever it takes to make people talk and doesn't really think the rules apply to him. Dafoe and Berenger's duelling performances are the standout aspect of Platoon for me and both men were honoured with Supporting Actor Nominations. Elsewhere familiar faces such as Johnny Depp and Forest Whitaker appear in supporting roles and all add a little bit to the make-up of the platoon.

The film ultimately went on to win four Oscars, with Stone being honoured for his direction but not for his strong and harrowing script. I personally think that Platoon is the best Best Picture winner of the 1980s I've watched thus far and with just one more winner to go that's a compliment indeed. Overall I feel that Platoon is a film that combines the visual splendour of some films with the narrative depth of others. It cares about its characters which in turn makes me want to care about them and I do feel that it's a better film than Apocalypse Now. That being said both of these Vietnam war films featuring the Sheens are excellent movies and somehow worked as the perfect double bill.

Next time we head to one of America's most famous gambling destinations for a romantic crime drama.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 282: Duvall Does Country

Robert Duvall is an actor that we’ve encountered a number of times during the course of the blog. First cropping up as Boo Radley in To Kill a Mockingbird we’ve since seen him in supporting roles in The Godfather films, The Conversation and Network. However he’s never really featured in a leading capacity but in Tender Mercies he plays the washed-up alcoholic ex-country singer Mac Sledge. Tender Mercies was a project that Duvall was involved with from an early stage and the role of Mac was allegedly written for him by screenwriter Horton Foote. Duvall would later go on to win his only Best Actor Oscar for his role in the film and in my opinion this was completely deserved. You can tell Tender Mercies is written by a playwright as the majority of it happens in one fixed location and there are only a few overly dramatic events. It begins with Mac waking up in a motel and, unable to pay the bill, agreeing to work for the owner at the neighbouring gas station. Mac and the widowed owner Rosa Lee soon become attracted to each other and later marry with Mac becoming step-father to her adorable son Sonny. Happy with the quiet life he's found and off the booze, Mac is soon dragged back into the music industry when a journalist arrives asking some questions about his ex-wife Dixie Scott. Dixie has maintained her star power and the pair shares a daughter, Sue Anne who Mac is forbidden from seeing. Soon the article attracts a band of young country singers to come to the motel seeking advice and wondering if Mac will listen to them play at a local bar. Meanwhile, Rosa Lee gets jealous when Mac visits Dixie to enquire over seeing Sue Anne and later gives her a song he's written. Though there's one major incident that tests Mac's new found sobriety and his marriage to Rosa Lee, ultimately this is a rambling film about the dangers of the music industry and the sudden tragedies that life can bring.

Although Horton Foote claims that he didn't write the part of Sledge directly for Duvall, his friendship with the actor definitely had an overall effect on his creation of the character. Duvall's performance is really what anchors the film and he makes Mac Sledge someone you want to see succeed in his new quiet life away from the industry. Duvall makes the most of his time in the sun and really captivates the audience in every scene he's in with his most powerful moments being those including barely any dialogue. He makes Mac a strong-but-silent type whose major weaknesses are song-writing and the love he still has for the daughter he lost due to drinking. Tess Harper is brilliantly natural as Rosa Lee and indeed was cast for that reason having initially auditioned for a minor role in the film. All of the songs written for the film are expertly crafted and really sound like proper country numbers, in particular those performed by Dixie Scott. Tender Mercies also makes the use of its desolate set, a small gas station in West Texas which was chosen due to its lack of surrounding architecture. This is definitely a place that you could believe a reclusive musician would want to settle down in and it makes the outside world seem all the more glitzy whenever we venture outside of the motel. Tender Mercies really doesn't have much of a plot to speak of but I think that's okay as it's definitely more of a character study about how people can change given the right circumstances. Ultimately this was a film that I found easy to watch and one that contained a career-best turn from Robert Duvall who certainly deserved his time in the spotlight.

Next time we focus on a British director who found two of his films nominated for Best Picture during the 1980s. 

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.

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.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 217-218: A Double Bill I Couldn't Refuse

Oscar has an uneasy relationship with the film sequel. Though there have been nominations for other entries into a franchise only two films that follow on from a feature have won the Best Picture award. The first of these is Return of the King, the third film in the Lord of the Rings saga, which arguably isn't a sequel because of the fact it comes later in the franchise. In fact the only proper sequel to win the prize is The Godfather Part II, a sequel that some feel is better than the original. In this post I will test that theory by looking at both films which launched many careers while at the same time becoming some people's favourite films of all time.

The first Godfather film introduces us to the Corleone family by way of a family wedding where sister Connie is getting married to Carlo Rizzi. The celebration is also traditionally where Connie's father Vito, known as the godfather, can answer any requests that are asked of him. Vito's youngest son Michael returns from the war to see his family first time and introduces Kay to the clan. Here we meet hot-headed older brother Sonny, dim-witted middle brother Fredo and adopted son and family advisor Tom Hagen. The Godfather is arguably about Michael's evolution from mild-mannered ex-soldier to eventual head of the crime family. Indeed, after Vito is shot and almost attacked in hospital, Michael feels he needs to avenge his father in some way so hits back at the family that attempted to assassinate him. When the hit goes down, Michael is shipped to Sicily while Fredo is despatched to Las Vegas. While in Sicily, Michael falls in love and marries a local girl, eventually finding a shred of happiness before the family catches up with him and his wife is killed by way of a car bomb. Returning to America, a harder Michael becomes Vito's right hand man and is eventually made the family's Don following Sonny's murder. Michael marries Kay and the two have a son together but the marriage is doomed right from the get-go due to Michael's change in attitude. Indeed the first film sees several hits arranged by Michael while he himself attends the Christening of Connie's youngest child.

The second Godfather film also opens with a religious ceremony as Michael's son Anthony has his first communion while the celebrations see a much-changed Connie who has now abandoned her children in favour of a party-girl lifestyle. At the same time Michael is unsure who to trust as he plays both Jewish businessman Hyman Roth and family friend Frank Pentangeli. Both make assassination attempts on Michael's life and he later discovers that Fredo had an involvement in one of them. Michael is later arrested as part of ongoing look into the world of organised crime. Though at first Michael gives a statement damming the trial, he later worries after Pentangeli reappears to give evidence. Luckily, Michael and Tom find a way to bring Pentangeli's brother over to America meaning that Frank changes his statement. As the film reaches its final third Michael gradually finds himself alone as Kay leaves him and Fredo is killed on his orders. The film's end sees Michael sitting alone, having won the battle against Roth and Pentangeli, but lost those that he used to care about. Running parallel to Michael's story in The Godfather Part II is that of Vito's eventual rise to power from poor Sicilian immigrant to respected mob boss. Initially talked into partaking in petty crimes, Vito finds power after he kills off a respected crime lord. During his ascension, Vito is given the power to avenge his father's death and ultimately finds himself as the most feared and respected member of his community.

The parallel stories in The Godfather Part II are both equally engaging and really make the sequel a more impressive film from a storytelling point of view. Indeed, I found it rather brave that the majority of the scenes involving Vito's story are entirely spoken in Italian and I wonder if today's audience would cope with an American film that contained as many subtitled film. Personally I found the first Godfather film to have a better pace to it and a more simple story namely Michael's journey from someone who wasn't his father to someone who took his father's place. This gradual change in the character underlined how good a storyteller director Francis Ford Coppola is and I totally understood the motives of all of the characters. I personally can't say I was as engaged in Michael's story in the second film as it descended into more of a generic crime film. However, I found the set pieces more impressive and the film's final third was laced with plenty of tragedy namely Fredo's death which was beautifully played as was the scene in which Kay revealed that she'd had an abortion.

Both of the films benefit from having an incredibly strong ensemble cast and, as I previously mentioned, a lot of the cast became household names after starring in the films. The films won acting awards for Marlon Brando and Robert De Niro playing the older and younger incarnations of Vito Corleone. I was surprised that Al Pacino didn't also receive a Best Actor nomination for the first film and his place as supporting actor made him rightfully upset. Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall formed a great trio in the first film as the calm Michael, hot-heated Sonny and intelligent Tom. The second film benefited from the scenes featuring De Niro but also boasted scene stealing performances from Diane Keaton and John Cazale who both shone as Kay and Fredo. Apart from the performances, The Godfather is best known for Nina Rota's score which was disqualified from the Oscar category as it featured music previously recorded. Oddly the same score went onto win the Oscar for the sequel despite being eerily similar. The first two Godfather films are also heralded as brilliant today due to the intricate art direction and costume design the latter of which gave each character its separate identity.

Overall it's hard to say if The Godfather Part 2 bests The Godfather in terms of quality. The sequel definitely has the great prequel element however the modern day story is a bit more lacklustre. The first film is better paced but doesn't have as intriguing a plot as the evolution of Vito Corleone. Overall I would say both films were more than deserving of the Best Picture award but, if pushed, I would say that the original just outweighs the sequel but feel free to correct me.

A little bit of a change of pace in the next post as we turn our attention to a quirky romantic comedy.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 210-211: A Pair of Gene's

So here we are in the 1970s, a decade that really pushed the bar in terms of film-making and used the art form to tell some incredibly interesting stories. We begin with a double bill featuring an actor who really came into his own at the beginning of the decade - Gene Hackman.

Though Hackman had been around for a while he only really came to prominence in his late thirties after his appearance in Bonnie and Clyde, which earned him his first Oscar nomination. Four years later he was propelled to stardom thanks to his central role as Jimmy 'Popeye' Doyle in The French Connection. The French Connection picked up Best Picture at the 1972 ceremony and also gave its lead actor his first Academy Award. The film, which was the first R-Rated movie to win the Best Picture Award, takes place in the streets of New York and follows Doyle and his partner Buddy 'Cloudy' Russo as they attempt a drug bust. I found the story of the film fairly unique in that we followed the French drug smugglers at the same time as the New York cops. The film's main antagonist is Alain Charnier, who plans to smuggle millions of dollars' worth of heroin into the country by using the car of a TV personality. As we learn throughout the film, Doyle and Russo aren't exactly the most trustworthy of individuals but they are incredibly good at their jobs so most of their colleagues are forced to trust them. As Doyle and Russo identify Charnier and his men, the chase is on to track down the drugs and arrest those involved in the plot. But not everything goes to plan and when Doyle's plot backfires, he and Russo are taken off the case. However, that doesn't dissuade Doyle and he's soon in hot pursuit of the man whose been sent to assassinate him, hoping that this will result in him finding the drugs.

After watching The French Connection, I feel like I've entered the 1970s with a bang. The film is fast-paced without losing sight of its plot and incredibly stylised throughout. Director William Friedkin looked to French cinema to create a lot of the style in the French Connection and that is definitely evident. At the same time, The French Connection has a profound sense of location and I was completely transported into New York right from the earliest scenes. For me the style extends to the character's costumes most notably the hat and coat worn by Doyle. The most iconic scene in the whole film is the legendary car chase in which Doyle, in a car, is racing a commuter train which is above him. Owen Roizman's cinematography takes you right into Doyle's car while Friedkin makes sure that we don't miss a thing. I was completely sucked in by this chase and think it's one that's been imitate many times but has never been bettered. Hackman is absolutely tremendous in the lead role as Doyle combining the stereotypical 'bad cop' with someone who has a genuine passion for the job. Hackman understands every intricate detail of his character down to the little wave that Doyle gives to Charnier in one of the final scenes. Meanwhile, Hackman is well-supported by the reliable Roy Scheider as the more level-headed Russo. While earlier crime always saw the criminals brought to justice, we learn at the end of The French Connection that a lot of the crooks in the film either served small sentences or never went to jail again. Overall, The French Connection is definitely one of the best Best Picture winners I've seen so far.

Three year later, Hackman starred in another Best Picture nominee, even though he missed out on a Best Actor nomination this time around. Arguably, The Conversation was a better overall film than The French Connection while I definitely preferred Hackman as Harry Caul. Caul is one of America's most renowned surveillance experts and has often been praised for being able to pick up any speech necessary. Caul lives a fairly solitary existence, living alone with only his jazz saxophone for company, though he does have a regular relationship with a woman who knows nothing about him. But Caul's work has sometimes caused him emotional strain and, as we learn later in the film, one of his most recent jobs resulted in a triple murder. Caul is very wary when he is tasked with recording a couple as they walk through Union Square in San Francisco especially when he hears the phrase 'he'd kill us if he got the chance.' Caul is soon tasked with giving his tapes to  a man known simply as The Director, but when one of The Director's underlings takes the tapes a nervous Harry takes them back. As he becomes obsessed by the tapes, Harry realises he has to act on what he's heard and uses the information he has to act as a vigilante hero. But, the film's message ultimately seems to be that, even if you can hear everything, it doesn't necessarily mean that you listen to everything that's being said.

The Conversation is the first time that I've come across a Francis Ford Coppola film while writing this project and you can see why, at his peak, the director was hailed as one of the greats. The Conversation is a tense thriller which builds up the audience's expectations before completely changing the game in the last ten minutes. For me, I think that The Conversation features some of the greatest uses of sound in cinema history. The way we see the conversation being broken down by Harry throughout the film is simply superb and you never tire of hearing the same speech over and over again. Hackman's performance as Harry is also one of the film's greatest strengths as he portrays the surveillance expert as someone whose always been on the borders of society. Though Harry is seemingly attractive to the opposite sex, his intricate nature and paranoia make it impossible for him to form meaningful relationships. For the most part, Hackman plays Harry as someone who only speaks when he really needs to and I feel he communicates more by his actions than by his words. Hackman is supported by John Cazale as Harry's colleague Stan who is a bit wilder than his friend and often uses his job to ogle women. The film also features a great little performance from Harrison Ford as The Director's aide Martin Stett, which provided evidence of how great the actor would go on to be. My only frustration is that The Conversation didn't do better at that year's Oscars, but I don't think Coppola was too bothered seeing as it was another of his films that scooped the majority of the major prizes.

Next time I'll look at the three big screen musicals that were nominated for Best Picture during the 1970s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 194: Another Day in Court

In the 1950s we had two courtroom films that were nominated for Best Picture in the same year. The 1960s has also had its fair share of courtroom films, so join me as I spend another day with two more legal movies.

The first movie is almost solely set around the trial of a man convicted of shooting another man in cold blood. The film in question - Anatomy of a Murder has often been hailed by law professors as the greatest pure trial movie in history and after watching it it's easy to see why. James Stewart stars as Paul Biegler a former DA who now runs a failing law firm alongside a loyal secretary who sticks by Paul despite his lack of cases. Biegler is contacted by Laura Manion who wants him to defend her husband Paul who has been charged with the murder of innkeeper Barney Quill. It transpires that Biegler went to Quill's inn after discovering that Quill had raped Laura but once getting there shot him in cold blood. As Biegler realises the case will be a tough one to win, he decides to go with a defence of temporary insanity. This involved explaining to Paul exactly what he wants him to say on the stand and hopes this will be enough to get him off. Meanwhile Paul also tells Laura to dress more demurely in court as her seductive outfits may give the wrong impression to the jury. Paul's other issue is that the prosecution have drafted in a hot new attorney in the form of Claude Dancer who initially rungs rings around the world-weary Paul. It is only when Paul does some digging that he discovers the relationship between Quill and his barmaid Mary. Paul implores Mary to come forward as a witness as he feels that his case would depend on her testimony. But with Dancer getting the best of Paul, is Mary going to be enough to win the case?

I would agree that Anatomy of a Murder is a great trial movie and one that bases most of its action in and around the gathering of evidence. Despite being over two and half hours long, Anatomy of a Murder flew by thanks in part to Wendell Mayes' script which is incredibly well-paced, and giving a lot of time to each individual part of the story. Even though the vast majority of it is set in the courtroom, Otto Preminger still manages to make his film seem utterly stylish. The film is also given a contemporary air thanks to the Duke Ellington soundtrack which makes Anatomy of a Murder seem a lot less stuffy than other trial movies of the time. This is also true of the film's content, as it was one of the first to deal with both rape and sex in graphic terms as they both play heavily into the trial itself. Of course the cast are all terrific, with James Stewart earning a Best Actor nomination for his role as the once great DA who has now fallen on hard times. New kid on the bock George C Scott was also awarded a nomination for playing the young and hungry Dancer with some of the film's highlights being their courtroom sparring. Elsewhere, Lee Remick's sexuality makes you question whether or not Quill did force himself on her, while Eve Arden is on brilliantly comic form as Biegler's secretary Maida. Overall, Anatomy of a Murder is a fantastic film, full of intrigue, great performances, an amazing soundtrack and a well-paced script. It's also probably the best film I've ever seen that's largely set in a courtroom.

The other film covered in this post isn't largely set in a courtroom, but is still all based around trial. The film in question is Robert Mulligan's adaptation of Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird. For those who have never read the book, the film is all seen through the eyes of 'Scout' Finch a young girl with a big imagination. Along with her broth Jem, she lives in the fictional town of Maycomb, Alabama where their father Atticus is a pioneering lawyer. Atticus believes that everybody should be given a fair trial regardless of their race, sex or beliefs and this ethos often gets him into trouble. The middle section of the story sees Atticus defend Tom Robinson, a black man accused of raping a local girl with a violent father. A lot of the irrational townspeople take against Atticus defending Tom and want to kill Tom before he even gets to court. The pivotal scenes in the film do take place in the court as Scout and Jem sneak into the courtroom to see their father in action. These scenes allow us to witness how innocent Tom actually is however the racist jury don't see it that way and find Tom guilty. From there the tension in the film rises as the people of Maycomb take against Atticus for pleading Tom's innocence and for wanting him to take part in a retrial. Atticus' actions also put Scout and Jem in danger however they are eventually saved by an unlikely guardian angel.

As someone who hasn't read the book, I went into To Kill a Mockingbird with no prior knowledge of the story. What I found this to be was an innocent observer's view of an unjust society and another of cinema's most iconic courtroom scenes. I thought watching this and Anatomy of a Murder as a double was interesting as that film's protagonist may well be guilty, while Tom Robinson is blatantly innocent. Russell Harlan's cinematography is keen to make us feel like we're watching the entire story through Scout's eyes and makes sure the camera is at her level. Robert Mulligan also makes the whole town of Maycomb seem like a sweltering, confined environment where prejudice is rife and where everybody knows each other's business. I was personally entranced by the performances from the two young actors, Mary Badham and Philip Alford, who played Scout and Jem respectively. Badham was brilliant as the narrator of the piece and was rewarded with a Supporting Actress Nomination for her part in the film. Meanwhile, I found Brock Peters to be absolutely enticing as the tragic Tom Robinson as he really made you feel sorry for his character. However this film will be most remembered for Gregory Peck's Oscar-winning turn as the mighty Atticus Finch. Peck is captivating throughout the film's run and is able to make Finch into one of cinema's biggest heroes of all-time. Peck's Finch is admirable without being preachy and he is able to anchor the film perfectly. While To Kill a Mockingbird may not be as stylish or compelling as Anatomy of a Murder, it is full of heart and real character and that's why I fell in love with the film.