Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 299-300: De Niro Fights for Victory

One of the recurring themes of the Best Picture nominees of the 1980s has been the reappearance of plenty of featured stars from the 1970s. We've seen Dustin Hoffman, Gene Hackman, Jack Nicholson and more continue their careers by playing a variety of diverse roles. Somebody else who appeared in a few of the film we reviewed in the 1970s was one Robert De Niro, who himself won a Supporting Actor Oscar for The Godfather Part II. De Niro would see this success spread through into the 1980s where he'd become triumphant in the Best Actor category by teaming up with a regular collaborator.

The collaborator in question was director Martin Scorsese, who previously worked with De Niro on Best Picture Nominee Taxi Driver, and the film itself was Raging Bull. Based on the life of boxer Jake LaMotta, Raging Bull had long been a pet project of De Niro's since he'd read LaMotta's autobiography and become fascinated with the man. De Niro eventually convinced Scorsese to direct the film even though he was initially sceptical of the project as he didn't have the first idea about boxing. However I feel that Raging Bull isn't a boxing film but rather a film about a man that just happens to be a boxer. LaMotta is a man plagued by insecurities whether it be about his weight, if he's better than his opponents or if his wife is cheating on him. The aforementioned wife, and LaMotta's second, is Vicky a neighbourhood girl that Jake first meets when she's fifteen. Over a period of time Jake marries Vicky and also attempts to get a shot at the middleweight title thanks to his brother Joey's connections with the Mafia. Jake's goals don't come too easy as he's forced to take a dive but he does it in such a way that he is suspended altogether. Meanwhile, his personal life suffers ups and downs when he constantly believes that Vicky is cheating on him and even accuses Joey of sleeping with his wife. Although Jake eventually wins the title, and defends it in a physically gruelling match-up, his personal woes eventual impact on his in-ring career and he loses the belt eventually giving up boxing altogether. I personally found the latter part of the film incredibly sad as Jake piles on weight, opens a nightclub and eventually loses everything he holds dear. Though there is hint of redemption for LaMotta at the end of the film, I did feel it was a rather dour conclusion.

Raging Bull is an incredibly powerful film that takes its audience on an extremely emotional journey while at the same time getting us involved in every single fight. As well as being a passion project for De Niro, Scorsese was incredibly exacting in both the editing and sound mixing processes partly as he believed that this would be his first major feature. To me the editing and sound were two elements of Raging Bull that really stood out due to the way that certain sequences were put together and the sounds we hear when Jake is in the boxing ring. Thelma Schoomaker won her first of three Best Editing Oscars, all of which were for her work with Scorsese, and I feel that she more than deserved the prize. It's clear that every fight sequence is choreographed move for move which means that we really connect with Jake when he's doing what he loves. Michael Chapman's black-and-white cinematography is brilliantly imagined and adds to the artistic feel of the whole film. Additionally, I loved the home movies sequence that moved the action along which appeared to be more realistic due to the fact it was the only part of the film shot in colour. One of the things that most associate with Raging Bull is the fact that De Niro put on 60 pounds to play Jake in his later days. His commitment to the role alone earned him the Best Actor award and I believe that his performance throughout the piece was truly spectacular. De Niro portrays LaMotta as a talented boxer but one who has his vices which eventually overwhelm his life. However he's able to make what could be considered an unlikeable character into an incredibly sympathetic protagonist. The then unknown Joe Pesci was perfectly cast as Joey LaMotta and his chemistry with DeNiro (who suggested him for the role) is undeniably brilliant. Similarly new to acting was Cathy Moriarty who, as Vicky, was just astounding as he was able to play every stage of her characters development from wide-eyed teenager to jaded wife and mother. I personally can't believe that Raging Bull received mixed reviews when it was first released as to me it's an almost perfect film. I'm equally stunned that Raging Bull didn't win Best Picture and soon enough you'll be able to see my verdict on whether the right film triumphed over Scorsese's boxing masterpiece.

A film which I wouldn't describe as a masterpiece is the other 1980s Oscar nominated picture that De Niro starred in The Mission. Set in the 1750s, De Niro plays Rodrigo Mendoza a slave owner operating in South America who is one of the most powerful me in the region. Mendoza soon discovers that his half-brother Felipe is having an affair with his fiancée and kills the former in a duel. Although he is cleared of any wrongdoing, Mendoza later suffers a crisis of faith and nobody get help him out of his depression. Meanwhile, Jesuit priest Father Gabriel is attempting to build a mission for the Guaraní community who live in the jungle although he has previously come up against opposition from Mendoza. However it is Gabriel who becomes Mendoza's saviour when he challenges the former slaver to come up with his own penance. Mendoza eventually learns the errors of his ways and asks Father Gabriel if he can take vows and become a Jesuit himself, which he later agrees to. However, all is not well as the safety that the Jesuit missions had come under threat when the ownership of their land was transferred from the Spanish to the Portuguese. With the missions proving a threat to the Portuguese's potential enslavement of the natives, the papacy sends Cardinal Altamirano to discover if any of these institutions should remain open. Despite Altamirano's shock at the financial success of the missions, he ultimately has no choice but to shut them down. But Mendoza doesn't think the brotherhood should go down without a fight as he takes up his sword once again, but this time for the right cause.

The one thing I really knew about The Mission going in was that the score was fantastic. Indeed Ennio Morricone's soundtrack for The Mission was incredibly powerful throughout and really stayed with me after the end credits had rolled. But when a film is best known for its soundtrack you know you're in trouble and I have to say I found The Mission more than a little bit dull. I feel my primary issue with Roland Joffé's film was that it was incredibly earnest and was more concerned it providing an accurate historical story than it was in creating entertainment. Whereas I really enjoyed Joffé's previous work The Killing Fields, which dealt with similar themes of cultural identity and conflict, I never found myself truly immersed in The Mission. It didn't help that stars Robert De Niro and Jeremy Irons appeared to be in two different films with the former channelling Don Quixote and the latter seeming like he's in some sort of BBC costume drama. I have to say that, while it's admirable that he wanted to extend his repertoire, I don't think The Mission was the sort of film that De Niro should be involved with especially due to his incredibly hammy turn. Irons fared better in the sincere role of Father Gabriel while it was also good to see Liam Neeson running around shooting foreigners, even if The Mission wasn't really on the same level as Taken. The best performance in the entire film came from Ray McAnally as Altamirano, the narrator of the piece and the only level-headed character that the picture had to offer. There's no denying the film looked fantastic, with Chris Menges' cinematography being awarded with The Mission's only Oscar, but at times this felt more like a History Channel documentary than a film made for our entertainment. Ultimately I have to say I was disappointed by The Mission, a film I had high hopes for, but at least Morricone's score didn't let me down.

Next time we have a father and son who, despite appearing in different films, are fighting in the same war.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 271: Our Men in Cambodia

)
More often than not these Best Picture nominees are based on historical events and that's true of my next film, The Killing Fields. Exploring the struggle of the Cambodians during the Khmer Rouge massacre it sees the atrocity through the eyes of American journalist Sydney Schanberg and his interpreter Dith Pran. Over the course of two years Sydney and Pran become good friends but both realise that events in Cambodia are just getting worse. While Sydney arranges safe passage out of Cambodia for the Pran family, Dith decides not to go with them and instead continues to help his friend out with his stories. Eventually the embassies extradite all of the foreigners out of Cambodia and, after failing to get out of the country with a false passport, Pran is forced to go it alone. The second half of the film primarily deals with Pran's struggles and his decision to play dumb in fear of alerting the soldiers to his true identity. Meanwhile, back in America, Sydney does all he can to locate Pran and tries to bring hope to his family that he's still alive somewhere. But, after winning a Pulitzer, he is chastised by fellow journalist Al Rockoff who himself was in Cambodia with Pran. As American forces start to invade Cambodia, Pran still finds his life in danger and attempts to avoid peril until he finally gets to safety. Though I enjoyed a lot of The Killing Fields, primarily because it side-stepped any sort of Hollywood sentimentality, the final scene in which the two men embrace while 'Imagine' plays over the top is a little cheesy.

It's fair to say that The Killing Fields was tough going at times but I suppose that was point. Director Roland Joffé employs almost a documentary-like style to The Killing Fields as he instructs cinematographer Chris Menges to capture every inch of the atrocity. Menges lets us see the horrific nature of events through the eyes of Sydney and Pran as dead bodies are left on the side of the road and eventually occupy large valleys. In particular I found this to be Pran's story and, in his first ever film role, Dr. Haing S Ngor brought the perfect amount of realism to the role. It was Ngor's naturalistic performance that really lifted the film and added to the believable nature of the story. In fact the second half of the film basically relies on his facial expressions to tell the story of The Killing Fields as the latter Cambodian scenes have few lines of dialogue. Ngor would go on to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor but to me his performance was as much a lead role as Sam Waterston's with the pair having about equal time on screen. Not that there was anything wrong with Waterston's portrayal of Sydney as I found him to be sincere and earnest throughout. Although it took me a while to get into it, The Killing Fields really grabbed me with its Oscar-winning cinematography and editing. Even though the film didn't take the top prize at that year's Oscars, it did win Best Film at that year's BAFTAS and it definitely strikes me as a deserving nominee. Ultimately this was a film to appreciate rather than enjoy but it's a thoroughly interesting watch and Ngor's performance is just sublime.

Next time we have three films from a director who would become synonymous with the big-budget blockbuster.