Every year there seems to be one star who comes out of nowhere to be a household name and in 2011 that person was Jessica Chastain. We've already met Chastain via her Oscar-nominated performance in Zero Dark Thirty but a couple of years' earlier it seemed like she was everywhere. In fact she was so ubiquitous that she featured in two of the nine films that were nominated for Best Picture at the following year's ceremony.
First up we have her appearance as Mrs O'Brien in Terrence Malick's oblique The Tree of Life. Chastain's turn as the caring mother to a trio of sons in the 1950s, one of whom soon passes away towards the start of the film, was one of only a handful of the movie’s positive elements. The film is sort of seen through the perspective of a modern day Jack O'Brien who is reflecting on his harsh upbringing at the hands of his tyrannical father. Rather than presenting any sort of coherent narrative, Malick instead presents the film as a series of scenes in Jack's life. The majority of the movie depicts his childhood as quite a bleak time due to the fact that his father would often fly into a rage at a moment's notice. From criticising his sons' behaviour at the dinner table to teaching them how to fight, it's fair to say that Mr O'Brien will never win father of the year. However, Malick depicts Chastain's character in a more sympathetic light as she's more able to forgive her son when he does something a little mischievous. Whilst a coming-of-age film is nothing new, Malick's film comments on all existence featuring as it does a twenty minute sequence which shows us the beginning of time. The fact that dinosaurs appear in a film that is primarily set in the 1950s is one of those pretentious aspects of The Tree of Life that I don't like. That sentiment is echoed in my feelings about the end of the film where Jack is what I assume is the afterlife and is confronted by his mother and father as well as other people who have touched his life. Whilst I always applaud film-makers who think outside the box I do think that Malick is somebody who didn't actually ever see the box. Indeed, this feels more like an art instillation than a coherent movie which I'm assuming is why the critics loved it so much.
The Tree of Life is one of those films that critics love because it makes them seem intelligent but I feel that if they looked at it objectively then there's very little of worth here. Chastain's aforementioned performance as the matriarchal figure showcases why she became such a breakout star in that year. Her facial expressions convey her character's inner torment and she is able to balance the fear Mrs O'Brien feels towards her husband with the love she has for her children. Chastain is more impressive than either of her A-list co-stars, Brad Pitt and Sean Penn who play Mr O'Brien and the adult Jack respectively. Pitt just wasn't convincing as a harsh father figure whilst Penn hardly appears and when he does he just looks wistfully into the sky. I believe my main issue with The Tree of Life was that I felt detached from it throughout its two hour plus running time. Even though there were some parts of the narrative that hung together, Malick did little to make us care about his characters. I do remember going to see the film at the cinema and at the time there were roadworks happening outside which spoilt the quieter moments of the movie. However, I did prefer to listen the rather irritating noises that watch some of the more outlandish scenes that Malick decided to include in his film. I was actually quite surprised that The Tree of Life garnered nominations in the Best Picture and Director categories as it doesn't seem like your typical Oscar film. It does appear to me that this is the Academy's way of trying to look like they enjoy arthouse cinema however this was the same year that Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was up for the prize. In fact the only deserving nomination that The Tree of Life received was in the cinematography category which was one of the only elements of the film that deserved celebrating. Ultimately The Tree of Life is a pretentious piece of arthouse cinema that critics go potty over but normal people like me hate with a passion.
Whilst Chastain tried her best to salvage her poorly written character in The Tree of Life, she had more success bringing a bit of humour to Tate Taylor's The Help. In fact Chastain was one of three female performers who were nominated for their role in a film that primarily concentrated on strong women. The plot of the film is based on Kathryn Stockett's book of the same name and involves Emma Stone's Skeeter; an aspiring writer in 1960s Mississippi. Although Skeeter is friendly with the snobbier members of the Jacksonville community, she is portrayed as a forward thinking young lady. Skeeter has the idea to write a book from the point of view of the African American women who help raise white children and clean the houses of families who give them very little respect. Skeeter targets Aibileen Clark, a well-meaning maid who is the first person to come forward to tell her story for the book. Aibileen is soon joined by Minnie Jackson, an outspoken maid who is fired by her Queen Bee boss Hildy after using the guest bathroom rather than the outside convenience that had been constructed for her. After Hildy spreads lies about Minnie being a thief, she is only able to get work with Chastain's Celia Foote who has been shunned by the other women of the community. Celia and Minnie's relationship is one of the most entertaining parts of the film as the former doesn't really know how to treat the latter. However the pair soon become friends as they bond over being shunned by their communities and help each other realise what is important in their life. Meanwhile, Hildy has Minnie's replacement arrested after she steals a ring to pay for her sons to go to college. This prompts a multitude of maids to come forward and tell their stories to Skeeter who eventually publishes the book of the title. After the book is published it seems to me as if Taylor didn't quite know how to finish his film with the last fifteen minutes or so feeling a little unnecessary. However I felt that for a two hour film, The Help was an incredibly easy watch.
Despite being a terribly emotionally manipulative film I have to hold my hands up and say The Help did work its magic on me. I found myself welling up several times during the film and I feel that that's a testament to the strong female ensemble cast rather than Taylor's direction or adapted screenplay. I'm not surprised that the cast were rewarded with the top prize at that year's Screen Actors Guild Awards or that Octavia Spencer won the Supporting Actress Oscar for her role as Minnie. I felt that Spencer's strength lay in the fact that she was able to balance the more comedic aspects of her role with the fact that this was a woman who wasn't able to speak her mind. Whilst being strong in certain aspects of her life she was also abused by both the women she worked for and her husband. Joining her in the Best Supporting Actress category was Chastain, whose Celia Foote was a fantastic creation; a white-trash socialite who was just incredibly likeable. As Aibileen, Viola Davis was nominated for Best Actress and I feel she should have triumphed over Meryl Streep's dodgy Margaret Thatcher impression. Davis' narration was the strong foundation the film was based around and I felt the actress perfectly anchored the film. Also worthy of credit is Emma Stone who arguably gave her breakout performance as the pioneering Skeeter. Stone perfectly conveyed her character's willingness to think towards the future whilst at the same trying to maintain friendships she had since youth. I liked how The Help had faith in actresses such as Davis, Stone, Spencer and Chastain who weren't exactly marquee names. Indeed only Davis was really a recognisable presence partly due to her scene-stealing performance in Doubt however not even she was a marquee name. The bigger names in the cast, such as Sissy Spacek and Alison Janney were confined to roles in which they bolstered the leading ladies. Although it's quite a predictable piece of cinema, The Help is one of those films that you can't help but like and to me that's a testament to all of the actresses who made their characters feel three-dimensional.
Next time we look at an actor whose career path took a change for the better during the early part of the 2010s.
Showing posts with label Sean Penn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sean Penn. Show all posts
Wednesday, 20 May 2015
Saturday, 28 March 2015
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 410-411: A Couple of Clint's
Back on Day 309, I mentioned how Clint Eastwood had gone unrecognised by Oscar until winning the Best Picture prize in 1993 for Unforgiven. Oscar's love affair with Eastwood carried into the next decade with three of his films being nominated for Best Picture during the ten year stretch. This post will look at two of those three movies with the third to be covered at a later date.
We kick off with a film that Clint directed but never appeared however fact fans may want to know that Mystic River was the first movie that Eastwood scored himself. Eastwood's score is just one of the many positive elements of Mystic River; a film that I enjoyed immensely on this second viewing. This Boston-set crime thriller revolves around three childhood friends; Jimmy, Sean and Dave all of whom are effected by an event from their past. The event itself is played out in the film's first three minutes in which Dave is abducted by two men that three boys believe to be cops. Flash forward twenty-eight years later and Dave's abduction and subsequent abuse have caused him to become quite a slow-witted man. Although it's clear he loves his son and wife, he's prone to moments of absence and comes home one night covered in blood. That night happens to be the same one on which Jimmy's nineteen-year-old daughter goes missing and is eventually found murdered. Jimmy, who is now one of the town's most respected citizens, uses underhanded tactics to try and discover who the perpetrator was. This annoys Sean who just happens to be the investigating officer on the case and who isn't willing to believe his partner when he suggests Dave might be the killer. Screenwriter Brian Helgeland's adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel perfectly ups the tension as the audience have to wait till the end of the film to learn who the murderer actually is. Therefore Eastwood and Helgeland create a sense of unease which I believe help to make us sympathise with the characters who aren't quite sure who to trust. This also means that Mystic River's final twenty minutes are incredibly emotional as revelation after revelation pours out and by the end I was personally left with my heart broken.
As I previously mentioned this is my second time watching Mystic River but, just like a lot of films in this decade, it's not one that I particularly remember. I'm not quite sure why that is as everything about Mystic River is perfectly delivered from Eastwood's aforementioned score to Tom Stern's cinematography which allows the small town to become a character itself. Helegland does a good job of getting through the history between the three characters quite quickly to the extent that we understand why they are how they are. The more sympathetic character is definitely Dave, who has remained almost in a childlike state since his trauma at a young age. Tim Robbins is absolutely great as Dave, capturing the essence of the character beautifully and delivering a particularly stunning turn towards the end of the film. Sean Penn meanwhile gives Jimmy a terrifying demeanour but couples this with a softer side which is on view in the scene where his character learns of the death of his daughter. This scene is particularly iconic thanks to Stern's framing of the piece and the image of Penn being held back by numerous cops. Both Penn and Robbins won Oscars for their roles in the film but I feel a little sorry for Kevin Bacon who had the job of playing the less flashy role of Sean. I felt that Bacon deserved to at least be recognised for playing an intelligent police officer who occasionally let his heart get in the way of doing his job. Also nominated at the ceremony was Marcia Gay Harden who delivered a memorable supporting performance as Dave's frightened wife. I also personally liked Laura Linney as Jimmy's wife who becomes almost like a Lady Macbeth figure in the film's final ten minutes. Absorbing from beginning to end; Mystic River works as a thriller, a character study and a mystery all at the same time.
One year later Eastwood found himself in the same position as he did twelve years earlier as he picked up Best Director and Best Picture for his boxing movie Million Dollar Baby. Here Clint was back in front of the camera as grizzled boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, a man who was living with many regrets. Frankie was presented as the kind of man who put in all the work on a fighter only to be left behind when the boxer wanted to go for the title. His only true friends were the local pastor and Eddie 'Scrap-Iron' Dupris; a former fighter who now lives and works at Frankie's gym. In an Unforgiven reunion, Eddie is played by Morgan Freeman who seems to have been hired purely to give a Shawshank Redemption-like voiceover to the film. However, if you're going to get somebody to provide a thoughtful voiceover to a film then Freeman's your man and I felt he gave Million Dollar Baby that special quality. The bulk of the film is devoted to Frankie's training of Hilary Swank's Maggie Fitzgerald; an older female boxer that he was reluctant to take on as he doesn't coach girls. However, as the film goes on the pair develop an interesting working relationship which allows Maggie to thrive in the ring. I found that Paul Haggis' script made Million Dollar Baby feel classier than your average sporting film and Maggie's fights were split up with plenty of emotional scenes between Frankie and Maggie. One brilliant set piece sees Maggie return home to surprise her mother with a new house only to find her lovely gesture spat back in her face. The element of Million Dollar Baby that I remember the most is the film's final act in which Maggie finds herself paralysed after an accident in a title match. Here I felt that Haggis over-egged the pudding a little bit as Million Dollar Baby became a different film altogether especially after Maggie asks Frankie to help her end her own life. Although I knew the ending was coming, I still found it shocking to watch and I think this sensitive storyline helped Million Dollar Baby to win Best Picture.
Alongside Eastwood's awards for Directing and Best Picture both Swank and Freeman picked up awards for their performances. Swank gave a good portrayal of an every woman who was fighting to achieve her goal however for the most part I found it to be rather unremarkable. I think that the reason she was given the award was due to the final act as Maggie finds herself unable to fight the inevitable. Freeman's wise narration was coupled with a number of fine scenes in which he finally got to have the one fight that had been eluding him all these years. Whilst Freeman did a good job in this film I feel he's been better elsewhere especially in The Shawshank Redemption and Seven. If anybody should have won an Oscar for acting in the film I believe it should have been Eastwood himself as he perfectly conveyed the evolution in the character of Frankie. Clint played to his strengths for the most part but he still conveyed Frankie's growing fatherly feelings towards Maggie. As he had done in Mystic River, Clint also provided a suitable score for Million Dollar Baby which again enhanced the overall mood of the film. I personally felt that Million Dollar Baby took a while to get going and it was only when Frankie took Maggie under his wing that the pace of the film picked up. A subplot involving the simple fighter Danger didn't do anything for me and instead proved that Paul Haggis sometimes adds too many elements to his story as he did the year later with his script for Crash. Although a solid drama, I think it's Million Dollar Baby's mawkish third act that lets it down, although I'm sure this is why the academy ultimately gave it the Best Picture award. Ultimately there's a lot to like about Million Dollar Baby, especially the performances and Eastwood's assured direction, but it just doesn't have that extra special something that a Best Picture winner truly needs.
Next time I take a magical trip down death row.
We kick off with a film that Clint directed but never appeared however fact fans may want to know that Mystic River was the first movie that Eastwood scored himself. Eastwood's score is just one of the many positive elements of Mystic River; a film that I enjoyed immensely on this second viewing. This Boston-set crime thriller revolves around three childhood friends; Jimmy, Sean and Dave all of whom are effected by an event from their past. The event itself is played out in the film's first three minutes in which Dave is abducted by two men that three boys believe to be cops. Flash forward twenty-eight years later and Dave's abduction and subsequent abuse have caused him to become quite a slow-witted man. Although it's clear he loves his son and wife, he's prone to moments of absence and comes home one night covered in blood. That night happens to be the same one on which Jimmy's nineteen-year-old daughter goes missing and is eventually found murdered. Jimmy, who is now one of the town's most respected citizens, uses underhanded tactics to try and discover who the perpetrator was. This annoys Sean who just happens to be the investigating officer on the case and who isn't willing to believe his partner when he suggests Dave might be the killer. Screenwriter Brian Helgeland's adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel perfectly ups the tension as the audience have to wait till the end of the film to learn who the murderer actually is. Therefore Eastwood and Helgeland create a sense of unease which I believe help to make us sympathise with the characters who aren't quite sure who to trust. This also means that Mystic River's final twenty minutes are incredibly emotional as revelation after revelation pours out and by the end I was personally left with my heart broken.
As I previously mentioned this is my second time watching Mystic River but, just like a lot of films in this decade, it's not one that I particularly remember. I'm not quite sure why that is as everything about Mystic River is perfectly delivered from Eastwood's aforementioned score to Tom Stern's cinematography which allows the small town to become a character itself. Helegland does a good job of getting through the history between the three characters quite quickly to the extent that we understand why they are how they are. The more sympathetic character is definitely Dave, who has remained almost in a childlike state since his trauma at a young age. Tim Robbins is absolutely great as Dave, capturing the essence of the character beautifully and delivering a particularly stunning turn towards the end of the film. Sean Penn meanwhile gives Jimmy a terrifying demeanour but couples this with a softer side which is on view in the scene where his character learns of the death of his daughter. This scene is particularly iconic thanks to Stern's framing of the piece and the image of Penn being held back by numerous cops. Both Penn and Robbins won Oscars for their roles in the film but I feel a little sorry for Kevin Bacon who had the job of playing the less flashy role of Sean. I felt that Bacon deserved to at least be recognised for playing an intelligent police officer who occasionally let his heart get in the way of doing his job. Also nominated at the ceremony was Marcia Gay Harden who delivered a memorable supporting performance as Dave's frightened wife. I also personally liked Laura Linney as Jimmy's wife who becomes almost like a Lady Macbeth figure in the film's final ten minutes. Absorbing from beginning to end; Mystic River works as a thriller, a character study and a mystery all at the same time.
One year later Eastwood found himself in the same position as he did twelve years earlier as he picked up Best Director and Best Picture for his boxing movie Million Dollar Baby. Here Clint was back in front of the camera as grizzled boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, a man who was living with many regrets. Frankie was presented as the kind of man who put in all the work on a fighter only to be left behind when the boxer wanted to go for the title. His only true friends were the local pastor and Eddie 'Scrap-Iron' Dupris; a former fighter who now lives and works at Frankie's gym. In an Unforgiven reunion, Eddie is played by Morgan Freeman who seems to have been hired purely to give a Shawshank Redemption-like voiceover to the film. However, if you're going to get somebody to provide a thoughtful voiceover to a film then Freeman's your man and I felt he gave Million Dollar Baby that special quality. The bulk of the film is devoted to Frankie's training of Hilary Swank's Maggie Fitzgerald; an older female boxer that he was reluctant to take on as he doesn't coach girls. However, as the film goes on the pair develop an interesting working relationship which allows Maggie to thrive in the ring. I found that Paul Haggis' script made Million Dollar Baby feel classier than your average sporting film and Maggie's fights were split up with plenty of emotional scenes between Frankie and Maggie. One brilliant set piece sees Maggie return home to surprise her mother with a new house only to find her lovely gesture spat back in her face. The element of Million Dollar Baby that I remember the most is the film's final act in which Maggie finds herself paralysed after an accident in a title match. Here I felt that Haggis over-egged the pudding a little bit as Million Dollar Baby became a different film altogether especially after Maggie asks Frankie to help her end her own life. Although I knew the ending was coming, I still found it shocking to watch and I think this sensitive storyline helped Million Dollar Baby to win Best Picture.
Alongside Eastwood's awards for Directing and Best Picture both Swank and Freeman picked up awards for their performances. Swank gave a good portrayal of an every woman who was fighting to achieve her goal however for the most part I found it to be rather unremarkable. I think that the reason she was given the award was due to the final act as Maggie finds herself unable to fight the inevitable. Freeman's wise narration was coupled with a number of fine scenes in which he finally got to have the one fight that had been eluding him all these years. Whilst Freeman did a good job in this film I feel he's been better elsewhere especially in The Shawshank Redemption and Seven. If anybody should have won an Oscar for acting in the film I believe it should have been Eastwood himself as he perfectly conveyed the evolution in the character of Frankie. Clint played to his strengths for the most part but he still conveyed Frankie's growing fatherly feelings towards Maggie. As he had done in Mystic River, Clint also provided a suitable score for Million Dollar Baby which again enhanced the overall mood of the film. I personally felt that Million Dollar Baby took a while to get going and it was only when Frankie took Maggie under his wing that the pace of the film picked up. A subplot involving the simple fighter Danger didn't do anything for me and instead proved that Paul Haggis sometimes adds too many elements to his story as he did the year later with his script for Crash. Although a solid drama, I think it's Million Dollar Baby's mawkish third act that lets it down, although I'm sure this is why the academy ultimately gave it the Best Picture award. Ultimately there's a lot to like about Million Dollar Baby, especially the performances and Eastwood's assured direction, but it just doesn't have that extra special something that a Best Picture winner truly needs.
Next time I take a magical trip down death row.
Saturday, 7 February 2015
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 377-378: More Real Life Tales
As we saw in the last post, and indeed throughout this whole blog, Oscar loves a biopic. Whilst films such as Ray document the whole life of their subject most of these best picture nominees focus on a specific time in that person's life. That's certainly true of the next two films on the list both of which won their leading man the Best Actor Oscar at their respective ceremonies.
It's with a tinge of sadness that I settled down to watch the first part of this double bill, Capote; one of the few 21st century Best Picture nominees I'd not seen before. Obviously this is due to the fact that last year we lost the man who played the lead role of Truman Capote, the excellent Philip Seymour Hoffman. The film concentrates on Capote's life after he became a household name thanks to Breakfast at Tiffany's and follows him during the creation of his famous non-fiction work In Cold Blood. From the start of the film, director Bennett Miller and screenwriter Dan Futterman present the difference between Truman's life of alcohol-fuelled parties and the stark brutal world of the murder of four members of the Clutter family. Fascinated by the murders, Truman and friend Harper Lee journey to Kansas as he attempts to craft an article about the incident for The New Yorker. However, Futterman's real focus is on Truman's fascination with Perry Smith who, along with Dick Hickock, is found guilty of the crime. Whilst occasionally Truman's obsession with Perry is presented as somewhat of a romantic leaning, it appeared to me as if the film was suggesting that the author's fascination was with the criminal's conflicting character. Although charged with four murders, Perry appeared ever so sensitive, was a brilliant artist and appeared to be incredibly eloquent when compared to Dick. As the film progresses, so does Truman's book however more problems arise when the convicted duo are given a stay of execution. Truman's desperation for an ending of sorts conflicts with his feelings for Perry and in the end he surmises that there can be only one conclusion.
Having never seen Capote before I didn't really know what to expect and I was pleasantly surprised by what I found. Obviously part of my enjoyment stemmed from Philip Seymour Hoffman's Oscar-winning turn as the eponymous writer. Hoffman's skill is in not simply doing an impression of Capote but instead playing him as a fully-fledged character. It's fair to say that Hoffman became Capote to the extent that I forgot at times that I was watching the actor playing the part. Hoffman brilliantly conveyed Capote's feelings for Perry and how his writing of 'In Cold Blood' started to affect him emotionally. For her role as Nelle Harper Lee, Catherine Keener was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress prize, however I didn't feel that she made that big an impact. If I were to give another acting award for the film then it would go to Clifton Collins Jr. as the charismatic killer Perry Smith. Collins Jr. gave an enigmatic turn as the sensitive murderer whose reluctance to tell his full story was the driving point of the film. Futterman's screenplay was well-paced and presented the facts in an entertaining manner, ensuring that the audience was never bored. Meanwhile Miller proved himself to be a fine director; transposing Truman's booze-soaked party life with the cold, harsh reality of the Kansas murders. At just under two hours, Capote was a very easy film to watch and I found myself being wrapped up in the story. At the same time there was nothing particularly remarkable about it outside of Hoffman's fine central turn. So, while I can understand why the film appeared in the Best Picture category, I never particularly felt that it should've won the big prize.
The same can be said for the other film in this double bill; Gus Van Sant's Milk - a biopic of the first openly gay man to hold office in the U.S.; Harvey Milk. Just like Capote, Milk looks at a specific point in Harvey's life as he moves to San Francisco and later decides to run for office. The film is presented as a tape recording our hero makes as he believes he'll soon be assassinated and it starts on the eve of Harvey's fortieth birthday when he meets arguably the love of his life Scott Smith. Together Scott and Harvey open a camera shop in the heart of a burgeoning gay community in San Francisco known as 'The Castro'. Milk's frustration with the way the gay community is being persecuted leads him to run for city supervisor, however his first two campaigns are unsuccessful. Meanwhile the campaigning puts a strain on his relationship with Scott, who eventually leaves him, reappearing every now and again in the film to praise his former lover's success. After finally getting into office in 1976, Harvey constantly clashes with the boorish Dan White; another supervisor who takes offence at his colleague's way of life. Dan's jealousy appears to stem from the fact that he isn't nearly as charismatic as Harvey and therefore finds it hard getting his voice heard. The other story is Harvey's need to get the controversial Proposition 6, which states that all gay teachers be sacked, overturned in the state of California. This story provided it's fair share of uplifting moments as Milk went head-to-head in debates with the bigoted John Briggs, who felt that all homosexuals were perverted. Even if you didn't know the story going in, it was quite obvious that Harvey wasn't going to make it till the end of the film and is eventual assassination at the hands of Dan White was well-handled. The candlelight vigil at the end of the film provided a heart-warming ending to what was another enjoyable and thought-provoking watch.
Of the four Best Actor-winning performances I've watched recently, Sean Penn's is possibly the least-deserving of the prize. I personally feel he's the one who is visibly acting while the other three performers deliver effortless turns. Although Penn's performance isn't as clichéd as it could've been I didn't really feel that he was as at ease with Dustin Lance Black's dialogue as he should have been. Maybe I'm a little biased, as I wanted Mickey Rourke to win Best Actor for The Wrestler, but I believe that Penn didn't convey the full extent of Milk's charisma. Reading around on the film it appears that, when the idea of a film about Milk was first conceived, Robin Williams was attached to play the role and I ultimately think that he would've suited the role much better. Penn was lucky that he was surrounded by such a fine ensemble of actors who beautifully portrayed the friendship between the men and women who became a family on The Castro. I really thought James Franco gave a grounded performance as the put-upon Scott who'd finally had enough of play second fiddle to the great Harvey Milk. Meanwhile Emile Hirsch and Allison Pill were similarly great as Milk's supporters Cleve Jones and Anne Kronenberg. However, the performance of the film came from Josh Brolin as the rather old-fashioned Dan White, a man who couldn't understand just why Harvey was as popular as he was. Brolin received a Best Supporting Actor nod for his role in the film but I believe he should have won the awards but unfortunately that year saw him come up against Heath Ledger's Joker in The Dark Knight. Harris Savides' cinematography is another of Milk's positive elements as he gets in amongst the film's many protests and makes the audience understand just how intense the gay protests were during the 1970s. Gus Van Sant appears to have devoted a lot of time into getting the area of The Castro as authentic as possible and transformed the area into looking like it would in the 1970s. I personally feel that Milk works as a study of the gay movement of the 1970s and the strength in numbers that the community experienced during the time. However, I'm in the minority of people who weren't won over by Penn's performance and don't think he was as deserving of the prize as his predecessors.
Next time we leave real life behind as we explore one of the most successful film franchises of all time.
It's with a tinge of sadness that I settled down to watch the first part of this double bill, Capote; one of the few 21st century Best Picture nominees I'd not seen before. Obviously this is due to the fact that last year we lost the man who played the lead role of Truman Capote, the excellent Philip Seymour Hoffman. The film concentrates on Capote's life after he became a household name thanks to Breakfast at Tiffany's and follows him during the creation of his famous non-fiction work In Cold Blood. From the start of the film, director Bennett Miller and screenwriter Dan Futterman present the difference between Truman's life of alcohol-fuelled parties and the stark brutal world of the murder of four members of the Clutter family. Fascinated by the murders, Truman and friend Harper Lee journey to Kansas as he attempts to craft an article about the incident for The New Yorker. However, Futterman's real focus is on Truman's fascination with Perry Smith who, along with Dick Hickock, is found guilty of the crime. Whilst occasionally Truman's obsession with Perry is presented as somewhat of a romantic leaning, it appeared to me as if the film was suggesting that the author's fascination was with the criminal's conflicting character. Although charged with four murders, Perry appeared ever so sensitive, was a brilliant artist and appeared to be incredibly eloquent when compared to Dick. As the film progresses, so does Truman's book however more problems arise when the convicted duo are given a stay of execution. Truman's desperation for an ending of sorts conflicts with his feelings for Perry and in the end he surmises that there can be only one conclusion.
Having never seen Capote before I didn't really know what to expect and I was pleasantly surprised by what I found. Obviously part of my enjoyment stemmed from Philip Seymour Hoffman's Oscar-winning turn as the eponymous writer. Hoffman's skill is in not simply doing an impression of Capote but instead playing him as a fully-fledged character. It's fair to say that Hoffman became Capote to the extent that I forgot at times that I was watching the actor playing the part. Hoffman brilliantly conveyed Capote's feelings for Perry and how his writing of 'In Cold Blood' started to affect him emotionally. For her role as Nelle Harper Lee, Catherine Keener was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress prize, however I didn't feel that she made that big an impact. If I were to give another acting award for the film then it would go to Clifton Collins Jr. as the charismatic killer Perry Smith. Collins Jr. gave an enigmatic turn as the sensitive murderer whose reluctance to tell his full story was the driving point of the film. Futterman's screenplay was well-paced and presented the facts in an entertaining manner, ensuring that the audience was never bored. Meanwhile Miller proved himself to be a fine director; transposing Truman's booze-soaked party life with the cold, harsh reality of the Kansas murders. At just under two hours, Capote was a very easy film to watch and I found myself being wrapped up in the story. At the same time there was nothing particularly remarkable about it outside of Hoffman's fine central turn. So, while I can understand why the film appeared in the Best Picture category, I never particularly felt that it should've won the big prize.
The same can be said for the other film in this double bill; Gus Van Sant's Milk - a biopic of the first openly gay man to hold office in the U.S.; Harvey Milk. Just like Capote, Milk looks at a specific point in Harvey's life as he moves to San Francisco and later decides to run for office. The film is presented as a tape recording our hero makes as he believes he'll soon be assassinated and it starts on the eve of Harvey's fortieth birthday when he meets arguably the love of his life Scott Smith. Together Scott and Harvey open a camera shop in the heart of a burgeoning gay community in San Francisco known as 'The Castro'. Milk's frustration with the way the gay community is being persecuted leads him to run for city supervisor, however his first two campaigns are unsuccessful. Meanwhile the campaigning puts a strain on his relationship with Scott, who eventually leaves him, reappearing every now and again in the film to praise his former lover's success. After finally getting into office in 1976, Harvey constantly clashes with the boorish Dan White; another supervisor who takes offence at his colleague's way of life. Dan's jealousy appears to stem from the fact that he isn't nearly as charismatic as Harvey and therefore finds it hard getting his voice heard. The other story is Harvey's need to get the controversial Proposition 6, which states that all gay teachers be sacked, overturned in the state of California. This story provided it's fair share of uplifting moments as Milk went head-to-head in debates with the bigoted John Briggs, who felt that all homosexuals were perverted. Even if you didn't know the story going in, it was quite obvious that Harvey wasn't going to make it till the end of the film and is eventual assassination at the hands of Dan White was well-handled. The candlelight vigil at the end of the film provided a heart-warming ending to what was another enjoyable and thought-provoking watch.
Of the four Best Actor-winning performances I've watched recently, Sean Penn's is possibly the least-deserving of the prize. I personally feel he's the one who is visibly acting while the other three performers deliver effortless turns. Although Penn's performance isn't as clichéd as it could've been I didn't really feel that he was as at ease with Dustin Lance Black's dialogue as he should have been. Maybe I'm a little biased, as I wanted Mickey Rourke to win Best Actor for The Wrestler, but I believe that Penn didn't convey the full extent of Milk's charisma. Reading around on the film it appears that, when the idea of a film about Milk was first conceived, Robin Williams was attached to play the role and I ultimately think that he would've suited the role much better. Penn was lucky that he was surrounded by such a fine ensemble of actors who beautifully portrayed the friendship between the men and women who became a family on The Castro. I really thought James Franco gave a grounded performance as the put-upon Scott who'd finally had enough of play second fiddle to the great Harvey Milk. Meanwhile Emile Hirsch and Allison Pill were similarly great as Milk's supporters Cleve Jones and Anne Kronenberg. However, the performance of the film came from Josh Brolin as the rather old-fashioned Dan White, a man who couldn't understand just why Harvey was as popular as he was. Brolin received a Best Supporting Actor nod for his role in the film but I believe he should have won the awards but unfortunately that year saw him come up against Heath Ledger's Joker in The Dark Knight. Harris Savides' cinematography is another of Milk's positive elements as he gets in amongst the film's many protests and makes the audience understand just how intense the gay protests were during the 1970s. Gus Van Sant appears to have devoted a lot of time into getting the area of The Castro as authentic as possible and transformed the area into looking like it would in the 1970s. I personally feel that Milk works as a study of the gay movement of the 1970s and the strength in numbers that the community experienced during the time. However, I'm in the minority of people who weren't won over by Penn's performance and don't think he was as deserving of the prize as his predecessors.
Next time we leave real life behind as we explore one of the most successful film franchises of all time.
Sunday, 15 June 2014
Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 321: Terry's All-Stars
I do feel that when a director has achieved particular acclaim he can get away with most things. Terrence Malick is one such director who was well on his way to being a legend after helming Badlands and Days of Heaven in the 1970s. Malick took a twenty year hiatus following Days of Heaven so when it was announced that he'd be returning to the screen plenty of actors wanted a role in his new film. Luckily he was able to accommodate a fair few big names into The Thin Red Line, a film focusing on the Battle of Mount Austin fought in the Pacific between the Americans and the Japanese. Malick's first cut of the film was supposedly five hours long and obviously had to be cut down substantially to half of that original length. Even then I feel that the copy of The Thin Red Line I watched was overlong and confusing in some regards. One of my main issues was that of the duelling narration between Jim Caviezel's Private Witt and Nick Nolte's Lt. Col. Tall. Witt's story is that of a man who is dissatisfied with army life while Tall is trying to prove himself to his superiors who feel that a man of his advancing years shouldn't still be at war. Because of this Tall makes some risky decisions and it's one of his final choices that has an impact on the team. Events become even more complicated when Malick introduces another story later in the film as Ben Chaplin's Private Bell discovers his wife wants a divorce. The fact that both Caviezel and Chaplin are given voiceovers was rather confusing as at times I couldn't really tell the pair apart. It was only after he nobly died to save his comrades was when I realised that Witt was meant to be the hero of the piece. That alone should tell you that Malick's script was confusing and that some of what was cut from the film may have been important.
Spare a thought then for poor Adrien Brody, who prior to the release of The Thin Red Line had told people that he was the main focus of the film. After watching the film Brody's appearance amounted to nothing more than a five minute cameo towards the conclusion. Brody was understandably upset by the decision and he feels that Malick should have at least have informed of the changes that had been made prior to the film's screening. But at least Brody made into the film which is more than can be said for the likes of Martin Sheen, Micky Rourke, Gary Oldman and Billy Bob Thronton who all had their scenes cut entirely. As there are so many big names floating around it's incredibly hard to single out one or two actors to praise their performances in the film. Nick Nolte probably gives the best turn as the weary Tall and both Sean Penn and John Cusack made good impressions during their extended cameos. Like with most Malick films, the strongest aspect of The Thin Red Line is in its visuals. John Toll's cinematography is outstanding, especially when we follow the soldiers inside the long grass where they hide during their attacks. Toll's point-of-view shots really make you feel part of the action and in a way add to our understanding of what war might have been like for these men. But to me there was almost too much of a focus on arty camerawork and not enough done on character development. I personally wasn't a fan of certain characters reminiscing about their families back home and thought these scenes represented Malick's undisciplined approach to film-making. Hans Zimmer's score really helped the film achieve the emotional tone it was looking for especially when it accompanied The Thin Red Line's battle scenes. But that being said, ultimately I found The Thin Red Line to be a beautifully shot war film that really never compelled me to care about specific character. Rather than changing my views about Malick as a film-maker its simply reinforced them and I've still not be able to see what others do in this supposedly great director.
Next time we look at three films from a respected British actor who appeared in two Best Picture winners during the 1990s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)