Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 407-408: George, by George

We first met George Clooney back in the 1990s when he was one of many actors who had a bit part in The Thin Red Line. At the time Clooney was beginning to breakthrough into movies after coming to prominence as Dr. Doug Ross in E.R. Finishing his tenure with the show at the end of 1999; Clooney ascended to movie star status during the early 21st century. In 2002 he directed his first film, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and three years later would helm his second feature which netted him a Best Director nod.

That film was Good Night and Good Luck; which earned six nominations in all including two for Clooney in both the directing and screenwriting categories. Clooney also starred in the film as Fred Friendly the co-producer of notorious broadcaster Edward R. Morrow. The story focuses on Morrow's various attacks on Senator Joseph McCarthy and in particular his criticism of the scaremongering tactics that were being employed by his administration. The war begins when Morrow criticises McCarthy's prosecution of a young officer without having any proof of his wrongdoings. Their battle intensifies when McCarthy outright accuses Morrow of having communist leanings to which the host of 'See it Now' totally denies. Clooney and co-writer Grant Heslov's script looks at the effects of this war of words on both the CBS network and Murrow's colleagues on the 'See it Now' show. These include Joseph and Shirley; a married couple who have to keep their relationship a secret from their colleagues due to CBS guidelines. Also featured heavily is CBS journalist Don Hellenbeck, who is criticised in the press for being a 'pinko' and who ultimately commits suicide. In my opinion it's the relationship between the staff members that makes Good Night and Good Luck so successful especially when you come to realise they're like a little family. I especially liked the loyalty displayed by CBS Boss William Palley, the father figure of the group, who defended Murrow's actions to the advertisers who were worried about his barbed attacks. I also liked the way in which the film's narrative was book-ended by Murrow's speech to the Radio and Television News Directors Association in which he condemns the way in which TV is dumbing down.

It's clear that in both his writing and direction of Good Night and Good Luck that Clooney has a particular affinity with the 1950s. I wasn't surprised to learn that Clooney's father was a TV news journalist as there seems to be a certain respect of the profession running throughout the film. Indeed Murrow's words about the descent of TV in general looked to be Clooney's critique of the reality-heavy output of 21st century television. The script was just one of the things that made Good Night and Good Luck a solid piece of factual drama that obviously struck a chord with the academy due to its political message. The fact that the film was shot in black and white made it stand out from the colourful films that were nominated alongside it. The decision behind the colour scheme was to do with the fact that Clooney wanted to use black and white archive footage of McCarthy. Interestingly some audience members thought that McCarthy was being played by an actor and actually criticised the authenticity of the performance. However, the acting from top to bottom in Good Night and Good Luck is outstanding and it's hard to pick a weak link from the bunch. I particularly liked the tender turns given by Patricia Clarkson and Robert Downey Jr. as the married couple who had to hide their relationship at work. Ray Wise as the tragic Hellenbeck and Frank Langella as the strong-willed Palley were also on top form. But the stand out turn has to be the one given by David Strathairn as Murrow himself a fact the academy recognised by awarding the star with a Best Actor nomination. Strathairn portrays Murrow as a reserved individual whose passion kicks in as soon as he is able to talk about things that matter. I really liked the fact that the ensemble shared a great chemistry which made the character's family dynamic all the more believable. Whilst Good Night and Good Luck didn't win any of the six awards it was nominated for, Clooney did pick up his only acting Oscar to date for his role in Syriana.

Whilst Clooney did indeed pick up an acting award for Syriana it was in the supporting category and the actor would have to wait another two years to be recognised in the lead actor field. That recognition came for his performance as the eponymous anti-hero in Michael Clayton. Although Clooney had delivered fine performances up to that point he brought an extra tinge of vulnerability to the titular legal fixer. Director Tony Gilroy's script for Michael Clayton was brilliantly structured as he briefly tore away the layers of each character to reveal their true nature. In brief the film sees Clayton called to action by the head of the law firm for which he works when one of their senior litigators has a breakdown during a high profile deposition. Although the troubled Arthur Eden had been dealing with bipolar disorder, Clayton believes that his latest outburst is bigger than simply his illness. Gilroy later reveals that Arthur's paranoid suspicions are valid as he is being followed by goons hired by U-North; the agricultural company that the legal firm were defending. Halfway through the film Arthur is murdered however everyone bar Michael believes that he took his own life. From that point on, the film becomes a conspiracy thriller as Clayton tries to follow in Arthur's footsteps whilst evading suspicion from the U-North group. The unscrupulous U-North is represented by Karen Holder, a brusque general counsel who herself is suffering from mental difficulties. Events come to a head during the film's most iconic scene in which Michael's life is essentially saved by a group of horses. Although the film's ending is a little too neat, I did enjoy the fact that Michael decided to opt on the side of self-preservation while at the same time revealing the truth about the villainous U-North.

Usually I don't like dramas which start halfway through before flashing back to the beginning of the tale. However, in the case of Michael Clayton I think this worked as Gilroy makes the audience anticipate the events that we witnessed during the opening ten minutes. Gilroy's script is perfectly paced as he takes his time to let us get to know the characters before plunging us into the world of conspiracy. The character of Clayton himself isn't every inch the smooth-talking charmer that Clooney had been known for portraying up to this point. Indeed he has his demons which include a serious gambling habit and a recent bankruptcy caused by a bad investment in a bar. Clooney is great at portraying the infallible nature of the character as well as he is when conveying the cool, calm and collected part of Clayton's personality. Giving a similarly brilliant turn was Tom Wilkinson as the troubled Arthur Eden, who may be more sensible then everyone gives him credit for. Wilkinson seemed to be having an absolute hoot playing Arthur, especially when he went off the rails and stripped naked at the deposition. Wilkinson's ability to make us care for Arthur before his eventual demise meant that we then were rooting for Clayton to expose the truth behind his murder. Oddly, although both Clooney and Wilkinson were nominated for Oscars, the only winner on the night was Tilda Swinton. This decision struck me as a little odd as Swinton didn't make any big impression on me mainly as her character Karen Holder isn't on screen for a great deal of time. It almost felt if the Academy were honouring the film as a whole by letting Swinton win one of the seven categories in which Michael Clayton was nominated. Even though I've watched Michael Clayton before it didn't make as big an impression on me as it did this time round. I found it to be an intensely gripping thriller that revealed its hand gradually and was all the better for doing so. However I'm not shocked that it didn't win Best Picture and in a way I'm surprised that it was even nominated in the first place.

Next time we look at a film that occurs over three different timelines that are linked by one specific piece of literary work.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 370-371: A Bit of Brad

It's fair to say that when he first appeared on the scene Brad Pitt was considered somewhat of a heartthrob. In an interview he once conducted, he claimed that it was hard for him to get serious roles due to the way he looked. But, as his career progressed, he appeared in a number of diverse films that demonstrated his considerable acting talent. By the end of the noughties; the Academy started to recognise Brad's efforts as two of the films he starred in were nominated for Best Picture. However, I would contend that neither film saw Brad at his best and in fact I found him rather unlikeable in the first part of this double bill. 

Brad and his on-screen wife Cate Blanchett were certainly the most recognisable faces in Babel, which consisted of a cast of largely unknown foreign actors. Pitt and Blanchett star as Richard and Susan Jones, an American couple trying to save their marriage by going on holiday in Morocco. I personally found both characters to be utterly unlikeable and, as their story was one of four interconnecting tales, they didn't really have long enough on screen to change my mind. Richard and Susan's lives are changed forever when the latter is shot by a stray bullet while the pair are travelling back to the hotel on their tour bus. This incident also changes the lives of Yusef and Ahmed; two young brothers whose jealousy of one another causes the former to shoot the bullet that injures Susan. Meanwhile, back in America, Richard and Susan's twin children Debbie and Mike are being cared for by their Mexican nanny Amelia who hopes for a day off to attend her son's wedding. When Richard is unable to arrange alternative childcare arrangements for his kids, Amelia decides to take the children across the border with the help of her reckless nephew Santiago. The film's bleak nature eventually engulfs this story as Amelia has trouble crossing back from Mexico to the US and puts Mike and Debbie in danger as a result. The fourth story was my personal favourite although its connection to the original shooting was definitely the most tenuous. It focused on deaf Japanese teenager Chieko; whose father originally owned the rifle used in the incident as she desperately sought acceptance from her peers. I found Chieko to be the most identifiable character amongst the global cast and the scenes in which she tried to come on to a young police officer were incredibly touching. 

Part of the reason for this is the tender performance given by Rinko Kikuchi, who was one of two of Babel's stars to be nominated for acting awards. Although sign language was used throughout the film, Kikuchi's strengths came in the form of her facial expressions which told the story of both her sexual frustration and her grief concerning her mother's suicide. I did feel that Kikuchi's turn was more deserving of the Best Supporting Actress prize than the eventual winner Jennifer Hudson; whose in-your-face performance in Dreamgirls was a million miles away from the Japanese actress' sensitive portrayal of a deaf character. Nominated alongside Kikuchi was Adrian Barraza who, as Amelia, gave a great portrayal of a woman who'd been a mother to plenty of American children even though she received very little praise from the families who employed her. Also worthy of praise are Boubker Ait El Caid and Said Tarchani who brilliantly portrayed the two Moroccan children whose actions became a catalyst for the rest of the film. Director Alejandro González Iñárritu's vision for the film is beautifully realised thanks to Rodrigo Prieto's excellent cinematography and Gustavo Santaolalla's Oscar-winning score. Visually I can't fault Babel with several scenes sticking in the mind long after the final credits rolled. One scene in particular, in which Chieko attends a disco, is especially memorable as the sound dips as we see things from both are point-of-view and hers. My major problem with Babel was its increasingly bleak story as Guillermo Arriaga's screenplay didn't give anybody a happy ending with the possible exception of Chieko. A lot of the characters are also poorly-drawn with Richard and Susan coming off as particularly miserable which is a shame as Pitt and Blanchett's talents are seemingly wasted as a result. However, I did enjoy Babel more than I thought I would and it's definitely deserving of its place among the five Best Picture contenders. 

Pitt and Blanchett would reunite two years later as they played the two leads in David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Fincher's previous collaborations with Pitt; Seven and Fight Club, arguably contained two of the actor's best performances. Their successful partnership continued as Fincher led Pitt to his first Best Actor Award although I felt this was mainly to do with the character rather than the star's performance. Based on a short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald; the film tells the life story of the titular protagonist who physically ages backwards as he grows up. After being abandoned by his father, Benjamin is cared for by kindly nursing home employee Queenie who he looks upon as a mother. Meanwhile, during his childhood, Benjamin first meets Daisy who is the granddaughter of one of the home's residents. The film first introduces us to Daisy in the present day as she's on her deathbed and her daughter is reading from a will written by Benjamin which luckily contains his entire life story. Although it contains tales of journeys on ferries and Benjamin's later connection with his birth father; the main concern of the film is his romance with Daisy. As he grows physically younger, the two finally begin a relationship which appears to be going swimmingly. However when she gets pregnant, with the daughter who is reading Benjamin's story, he realises that Daisy will have to find another man to act as a father. Despite feeling that Benjamin's story should have ended when, as a teenager, he discovers that Daisy has met another man and married it continues to see him finally die as a child. This final section of the film is just one of many parts that I feel could have been cut to slim down Benjamin Button's two and half hour running time. 

Although it was nominated for thirteen Oscars, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button won just three and two of them were certainly well deserved. The visual effects and make-up in the film really make Benjamin's ageing process appear realistic and without them I feel that it wouldn't have been as well regarded as it is. Although the film's Art Direction wasn't as prominent, it was still unique enough to earn an Academy Award. In fact, visually, Benjamin Button can't be faulted all that much as it mixes in sepia tones with a more modern flare to create an aesthetically pleasing piece. However, as I alluded to, Eric Roth's adaptation of Fitzgerald's story is long-winded and contains plenty of sections that I would've cut entirely. As the film's key focus is on the relationship between Benjamin and Daisy, I would've concentrated on these scenes and cut everything that happened on that bleeding tugboat. Maybe it's a controversial statement, but I don't believe that Pitt really deserved that Best Actor nod as I feel he's slightly overshadowed by the make-up he wears throughout the film. I believe that I've seen Pitt act a lot better than he did in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and certainly his performance wasn't one of the more remarkable elements of the film. In fact I believe that Cate Blanchett's turn as injured dancer Daisy had more depth to it and I found her performance to be more captivating on the whole. Whilst I admire Fincher as a director, I feel The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is one of his weaker films and seems to be his attempt to curry favour with the Academy. The film certainly has all the elements of an Oscar-film; from the early 20th century settings to the extended running time, however I felt that it came off as a poor man's Forrest Gump. Thankfully Pitt would go on to bigger and better things in the next decade, eventually earning an Oscar as a producer rather than as an actor. 

Next Time we return to the 1940s for three more Oscar nominated movies.