Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 478-479: 2015 Oscar Nominees Part Three

We're back once again with the third post looking back at this year's Oscar nominees and this time we focus on the sort of film the Academy love most, a good old biopic.

We start with The Imitation Game, which focuses on Alan Turing; who was a key figure in cracking the German's Enigma Code and ultimately helped the allies win the war. The film focuses on three periods in Turing's life; his unhappy teenage years at Boarding School, his work on the Enigma Machine during the war and finally his decline in the early 1950s where he was ultimately arrested for conducting a homosexual relationship. Graham Moore's screenplay, based on Andrew Hodge's biography of Turing, paints the character as somebody who was hard to like at times. His obstinate attitude, lack of humour and contempt for those with inferior intelligence all led to him clashing with his co-workers and superiors. He had particular trouble with Commander Alastair Denniston who constantly tried to have his project shut down after an earlier clash with Turing. Thankfully Turing later found a friend in codebreaker Joan Clarke, whom he came to admire for her intelligence. She taught him to cherish his colleagues and he eventually proposed to her so he could stay on at Bletchley Park. I enjoyed how Moore began to intersect the three time periods as the film went along to make the audience understand just why Turing was as obsessed with his Enigma machine as he was. His naming the machine Christopher, after a particularly close school friend, made it somewhat of a personal project that he wanted to continue even after his arrest for indecency. William Goldenberg's editing of these three time periods was completely seamless and I believe he's certainly in contention of winning an Oscar for his work.

Other than Goldenberg's editing, I didn't find The Imitation Game to be particularly cinematic and at times it felt more like a BBC Sunday night drama than a multi-Oscar nominated picture. Although Morten Tyldum's direction was solid, there was no really striking visuals in The Theory of Everything. What the film did have going for it was a stunning central turn from Benedict Cumberbatch; who essentially played Turing as a more sympathetic version of Sherlock. Cumberbatch made you feel for Turing throughout the film, especially in the scenes in which his secret homosexuality was used against him. Cumberbatch's performance was particularly moving in the 1950s when Turing agreed to chemical castration rather than be separated from his beloved machine. Even though Cumberbatch won't win Best Actor, of the three performances in that category I've seen thus far, his is definitely the most moving. Nominated alongside Cumerbatch was Keira Knightley; whose Supporting Actress nomination was more than deserved thanks to her plucky portrayal of Joan. Knightley turned what could've been a one-note character into somebody to root for and made sure that her character could more than hold her own against the boys. The film also benefited from a glut of fine supporting turns from the likes of Charles Dance, Rory Kinnear, Matthew Goode and Mark Strong. Despite some fine performances and an involving story; The Imitation Game does have the same cinematic style as most of its fellow nominees. I believe that part of the reason it has garnered as many nominations as it has is due to the involvement of the God-like Harvey Weinstein who has made sure that as many Academy members see the film as possible. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I believe that more visually spectacular and unique films have been overlooked thanks to Weinstein's campaigning for The Imitation Game. At the same time I'm glad that Turing's story has been told on screen as it was one that I hadn't heard before and one that moved me deeply.

The real-life drama double bill continues with Selma; which tells the story of the Martin Luther King-led marches on the titular Alabama town in 1964. The purpose of the marches were to eliminate restrictions on black people's rights to register to vote. These struggles are perfectly represented in an earlier scene in which a black woman, attempts to register but is blind-sided with questions which would be impossible for anyone to answer. Obviously the marches themselves were met with opposition, not least from the Governor of Alabama George Wallace who tried to quash King's efforts. One of the main criticisms levelled at the film was the way the relationship between King and President Lyndon B Johnson was portrayed. Whilst in actuality Johnson was one of King's key supporters; the film portrayed him as someone who went out of his way to quash the planned marches. Although I didn't feel that Johnson was the film's key antagonist it was certainly suggested that he was a thorn in King's side and he later allowed J. Edgar Hoover to tap his phone in an effort to split him from his wife. Despite the historical inaccuracies I felt that Selma really started to get going after the first march which depicted the brutal beating of many of the protesters. I felt that the way that this march and its aftermath was filmed drew me into the film with the subsequent two marches having a different tone to them. I do believe that if I was an American then I'd know more about this story than I do so it was an interesting watch despite the fact that I'd sort of guessed the ending. But I did feel like Selma was geared towards an American audience who have a greater grasp of the feelings of both the Selma natives and King's group.

Oddly for such an American film, the three lead parts are all ably played by British actors. The brilliant David Oyelowo gave a captivating turn as King as he perfectly captured the charismatic nature of the man. Oyelowo was totally convincing throughout and I felt he perfectly portrayed the reasons why people were so willing to follow King into potentially violent situations. At the same time he was able to show a more vulnerable side to the character in particular his doubts about being a competent leader. As President Johnson, Tom Wilkinson gave a solid if somewhat unremarkable turn as a leader who didn't like being forced into a corner. Meanwhile Tim Roth's George Wallace was every part the slimy villain as he hid behind minor laws to stop black people from voting. In supporting roles, Oprah Winfrey and Wendell Pierce shine in a cast that also includes a rousing cameo from Martin Sheen. As I've already mentioned the cinematography added to the stirring mood of the marches and I also enjoyed Jason Moran's fantastic score. However, just like The Imitation Game, Selma at times felt like a historical TV feature drama rather than a cinematic release. At times Paul Webb's script featured too many scenes with men in rooms talking to each other and it was only during the silent marches that the film came alive. One of the main controversies surrounding the film is the fact that it hasn't been nominated in any categories outside of Best Picture and Best Song for John Legend's 'Glory'. With no black actors in any of the four categories this year I feel that at least Oyelowo deserved a place in the Best Actor category as his turn was certainly better than Bradley Cooper's in American Sniper. Apart from that though I think that Selma is somewhat of unremarkable historical film which people will quickly forget in years to come.

Next time I look at the final two Best Picture nominees from 2015.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 341: Non-Linear Tales from L.A.

So far the 1990s have primarily given us Best Picture nominees that are set in the past and have fairly rigid story structures. But the decade also produced some fresh voices in the world of film-making who were trying to change the face of the industry. Quentin Tarantino was one such voice whose style of direction combined stylised sequences, comic dialogue and superior soundtracks. Additionally Tarantino became known for his screenplays which were witty and often didn't obey the rules regarding linear storytelling. After a successful debut in Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino hit the big time with the Best Picture nominated Pulp Fiction. The film depicts a number of events which all relate in some way to Ving Rhames' L.A. mob boss Marsellus Wallace and a mysterious briefcase that belongs to him. The retrieval of the briefcase is a job undertaken by hitmen Jules and Vincent who both go on a voyage of discovery throughout the film. Vincent is later tasked with taken Marsellus' pretty wife Mia out on a date where they participate in the now iconic twist-dancing contest. Finally we learn the story of boxer Butch, his dad's gold watch and how he gets on Marsellus' bad side after refusing to throw a fight. Throw in The Wolf, a hold-up at a diner and an overdose and you've got the basic structure of Pulp Fiction. However, Tarantino tipped the structure of the film on its head by having the middle part of the film open and close it whilst the final scenes happened about forty-five minutes before the final credits rolled. This non-linear style really made the film stand-out as did the post-modern references which would become a regular occurrence in Tarantino's later movies. 

I remember being lent a VHS of Pulp Fiction when I was about fifteen and was blown away by the audacity of the movie. I watched it several times during my teens but this was the first time I'd revisited it in a while and I don't think its lost any of its impact. Whilst I'm not a Tarantino fanboy I still feel that his first three films were all great works that gave the film world something new. From the opening conversation between Pumpkin and Honey Bunny to the conclusion of the robbery Pulp Fiction was a compelling watch with one glaring exception. My major problem with Pulp Fiction is the story involving Butch isn't as exciting as the rest of the movie and significantly slows down the pace of the picture. I feel this is partly because Butch is a somewhat withdrawn character and partly due to the explicit nature of the scenes involving Marsellus, Zed and The Gimp. Part of the reason that Butch was given so much screentime was due to the fact that Bruce Willis was the film's biggest name and so had to be given the spotlight in what was a best a mediocre plot strand. Pulp Fiction definitely revived the career of Willis and it did the same for Travolta who needed a resurgence following his appearance in the Look Who's Talking franchise. Travolta's cool, calm and collected persona was perfectly executed as the charming yet violent hitman Vincent. Travolta proved to be an expert screen presence and was given a Best Actor nomination as a reward. Meanwhile Samuel L Jackson stole the show as the Bible-quoting Jules and made quite an impact at the Oscars when he seemed visibly annoyed that he'd lost the Best Supporting Actor prize. Uma Thurman was also nominated for her role as the flirty yet troubled Mia and she was yet another cast member who benefited from appearing in the movie. Capable support was provided by Harvey Keitel whose appearance as The Wolf stands out as one of my favourite parts of the entire film. 

Pulp Fiction is an incredibly stylish film with all of the sets and props being incredibly distinctive. All of the key characters have memorable costumes that helps mark them out and in the long term has meant that we never forget them. Another key aspect of Pulp Fiction is the fact that the film didn't have a score but rather a collection of classic songs which helped propel the action. Nobody can hear Dick Dale's Misirlou without thinking of Pulp Fiction whilst Urge Overkill's cover of 'Girl You'll be a Woman Soon' made into the charts as a result of featuring in the film. As far as Oscar success goes the film saw Tarantino win his first Best Screenplay award which in my opinion was well-deserved. It's not surprising that the film got another six nominations when you consider that it was the first movie to be entirely produced by Harvey Weinstein's Miramax company. As we've seen, Weinstein became incredibly influential throughout the decade when it came to the Oscars but in the case of Pulp Fiction is acclaim was more than deserved. But looking back I think the success of his first three films went to Tarantino's head and he lost the discipline he'd employed in his earlier works. Even his last two movies, which have been critically acclaimed, suffered from some sloppy storytelling and a number of over-indulgent scenes. Thankfully Pulp Fiction reminds of a time before Tarantino's ego got the better of him and I would say that it still stands up today as a masterpiece thanks to its funny and violent nature as well as its extremely accomplished ensemble cast. 

Next time we look at two big movie stars who decided to direct and star in two films that later went on to become Best Picture nominees.