Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 427-428: Kathryn's War

It's been over five years since I started my quest to track down and watch every film nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars. My challenge started just after the 2010 ceremony and since then we've had another five ceremonies. Although I contemplated finishing off where I started, I eventually decided to explore what the modern day Oscar field looks like. This is especially relevant as, from the 2010 ceremony onwards; Oscar changed the number of nominees from five to ten. Two years later the rules were changed again allowing the Academy to choose between five and ten films meaning that they weren't forced to select movies that maybe didn't feel like they deserved to be amongst the best of the year. So without further ado we start with two films from the director of the first Best Picture winner of this decade and somebody whose win for directing the film was a history-making moment.

The person in question was Kathryn Bigelow who became the first woman ever to win the Best Director Oscar. Oddly, in the seventy plus years of the Oscars only four women including Bigelow were nominated which tells you something about the sexism that surrounds the film industry in general. It's also interested that the film Bigelow won the Oscar for is a fairly macho affair and features very few female characters throughout. The Hurt Locker is based on journalist Mark Boal's experiences living and interviewing members of the army in 2004. Boal, who won an Oscar for the film's screenplay, interviewed over 1,000 officers before beginning his work on the film. The film's protagonist is Sergeant First Class William James, a talented but reckless bomb disposal expert who joins a three man bomb disposal team who are nearing the completion of their time in Iraq. The film follows the team throughout their last days in the country with James' colleague Sergeant Sanborn getting more frustrated with his superior's lack of compliance to regulations. The third member of the team, Specialist Owen Eldridge, is portrayed as somebody who is desperate to get home and is regularly visited by the Camp's doctor. After several incidents, which include Eldridge getting his leg shot off, the team finish their rotation however Boal's lasting message is that some soldiers can't leave war behind. Indeed the film starts with the message that 'war is a drug' and concludes with James returning to Iraq after finding that he can't cope with the mundane nature of his regular domestic life. This final scene is a little jarring to me as I never quite knew whether The Hurt Locker was an anti-war or pro-war film. The characters of Eldridge and Sanborn represent soldiers who want to get home and the latter in particular voices his need to get more out of life. At the same time the portrayal of the majority of the Iraqis as 'the enemy' makes this feel more like the recently recent American Sniper than something like Apocalypse Now.

Along with this odd balance of pro and anti-war sentiment, The Hurt Locker's other issue is that it doesn't really have a story to speak of. Instead the film is made up of a series of incidents that are strung together through the trio of characters who grow on you throughout the course of the film. James is a particularly memorable character who is initially portrayed as arrogant but later comes through for his team. His relationship with a young Iraqi boy known as 'Beckham' is also touching which explains his reaction when he thinks that the youngster has been used as a body bomb. Jeremy Renner's performance as James is very naturalistic and adds to the whole documentary-like feel of the film. This seems to have been Bigelow's intention as she cast three relative unknowns in the roles of James, Sanborn and Eldridge. What I liked most about The Hurt Locker was the fact that it at times it didn't feel like I was watching a fictional film at all. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd's use of 16mm cameras meant that the audience were able to look at multiple angles at once. Bigelow wanted us to get multiple perspectives during the film's many set pieces and I certainly feel this is one thing that the film achieved. Particularly memorable was one of the film's final scenes in which James is unable to detach a bomb from an innocent Iraqi man before it is detonated. The Hurt Locker really doesn't feel like any other Best Picture winner as its focus on realism over story is something knew. The only Best Picture winner it resembles is Platoon and even that had more of a focus on story than The Hurt Locker. To me this almost validates the Academy's decision to extend the Best Picture category especially if we're going to get films that play more towards realism than fiction. It's also great to see Bigelow, who did a fantastic job anchoring the film, being the first woman to pick up an award that has had only male recipients up to this point. Here's hoping that more female directors are honoured in the years to come and that Bigelow's victory isn't just a one-off.

Bigelow's next film, Zero Dark Thirty, was also in the Best Picture field although she herself wasn't nominated for director. Again the film focused on a modern day war setting, this time the War on Terror with the lead characters on the hunt for Osama Bin Laden. Although it possessed quite macho themes, Zero Dark Thirty's lead character was young CIA officer Maya. The film followed Maya from meek rookie to Osama obsessive as gradually the hunt for the terrorist mastermind engulfed her life. Originally the film was going to focus on the fruitless search for Osama straight after the World Trade Centre attacks however, following the capture and death of Bin Laden, Bigelow and Boal had to go back to square one. That to me is why the film feels incredibly fragmented with the first ninety minutes featuring Maya's attempts to get close to Osama's associates. It's a frustrating watch as every time Maya feels like she's getting somewhere she hits a brick wall or finds her plans wrapped up in red tape. The second part of the film sees Maya transported back to Washington after an attempt on her life in Pakistan as we watch her fight against the system again. The final third, which focuses exclusively on the army's hunt for and eventual murder of Bin Laden, feels almost tacked on to the end. Although this is where the film is at its tensest, this final half an hour is separate from the rest of the film save a few shots of Maya that appear to have been thrown in for continuity. The fragmented feel of Zero Dark Thirty is slightly off-putting at times and whilst all three sections are well-made they don't quite fit together. The scenes with Maya back in Washington are a particular drag and are only saved by James Gandolfini's appearance as the CIA's Director.

Despite my problems with the uneven structure of the film I think that Zero Dark Thirty is a step up on The Hurt Locker due to the fact that it has a proper story. As it's based on true events you know what we're building up to even though you're not quite sure what's going to happen on the way there. Boal and Bigelow punctuate the shocks well as there are several jump-out-of-you-seat moments such as when Maya and fellow CIA analyst Jessica experience a terror attack at a restaurant. In addition I felt I knew the character of Maya more so than I did any of the trio of bomb disposers in The Hurt Locker. Maya's progression from slightly nervous analyst to confident woman who isn't afraid to stand up to the CIA director is told well by Boal. The character is enhanced by Jessica Chastain's fantastic performance which earned her a Best Actress nomination. Chastain brilliantly conveys all of Maya's strengths and weaknesses which means that you start to feel for her as the film goes on. The fact that Chastain all but vanishes once the hunt for Bin Laden begins is one of the problems with the film for me. However I think she manages to save it right at the end with a tender moment as she boards a plane having finally succeeded in bringing down her nemesis. The supporting cast is almost universally fantastic with special mention going to Mark Strong, Jennifer Ehle and Joel Edgerton. Zero Dark Thirty's other big plus point is Greig Fraser's cinematography which employs a similar documentary-feel to Barry Ackroyd's camera work in The Hurt Locker. This is especially relevant in the final section of the film as you feel at times like you're part of the team who are being used to hunt down Osama. Zero Dark Thirty didn't have nearly as much success as The Hurt Locker did and only managed to win one award in the Sound Editing category. In fact this wasn't even a universal victory as the Zero Dark Thirty team found themselves tied with the sound effects team from the Bond film Skyfall. I do think it's a shame that Zero Dark Thirty wasn't as well-regarded by the Academy as The Hurt Locker as I believe it's a superior film. Despite my problems with the structure I think the characters, performances and story are stronger than Bigelow's Oscar-winning endeavour.

But one thing you can say without a doubt is that Bigelow broke through the barrier and will always be remembered for being the first female Best Director winner. Unfortunately, since her win no other women have been nominated despite several female-helmed projects featuring in the Best Picture category. I do feel this balance needs to be addressed soon and I'm hoping it won't be long before somebody joins Bigelow in the female Best Director winner's club.

Next time we explore the work of a male director who had three films in the Best Picture category in the space of only four years.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 425-426: Days of Future Past World Tour

As we've seen throughout the course of this journey very few foreign films are actually nominated for the main Best Picture prize. In fact to this day only nine films not made in the English language have been in contention for Best Picture and none of these have been successful. That's partly why foreign films have their own category at the Oscars which often features better films than those in the Best Picture race. In this post I return to the late 1960s and early 1970s to look at two films from the small group of nine to have found themselves among the five Best Picture nominees.

The first of the two films in this post feels extremely relevant and if I didn't know it already I would've been surprised that it was forty-five years old. Costa-Gavras' Z is an incredibly intense film about the assassination of a communist speaker by the hands of the far right government. Cinematographer Raul Coultard employs an incredibly realistic tone to his camera work meaning that at times you feel like you're watching a documentary. The bulk of the film focuses on Jean-Louis Trintigant's investigating magistrate who attempts to get to the bottom of conflicting statements given by both the assailants and the witnesses. Along the way he discovers false statements, witness intimidation and persecution of anyone who tries to argue with the right-wing establishment. Having previously watched Costa-Gavras' only other Best Picture nominated film Missing I know that his style is very much that of a fly-on-the-wall film-maker. Additionally both films were about political injustice and as a result I found myself getting more and more invested in Z as it went on. Particularly powerful was the final scene in which it was revealed that the majority of the generals who were charged with conspiracy ultimately went free whilst most of the witnesses were killed. Z won that year's Best Foreign Language Film Oscar with Françoise Bonnot also being rewarded for his excellent editing of the movie. Another notable element of Z was the fantastic score by Mikis Theodorakis which was at times incredibly jarring but added to the overall feel of the film. Z is an example of a movie that I feel deserved to win Best Picture and I think if it had been released in the English language then it would have done just that. Ultimately I think Z is an outstanding piece of cinema and was more than deserving of winning the Best Picture prize as well as the title of Best Foreign Language film.

The other film in this post, Jan Troell's The Emigrants, also featured in both categories but oddly in different years. This occurred due to the fact that, at the 1972 ceremony, it had only been screened in its native Sweden rather for the larger Academy audience. After attaining a proper screening the following year it was nominated for Best Picture as well as a further three Oscars. The film looks at a group of people, all from the same small province in Sweden, who decide to emigrate to America. This group includes proud farmer Karl-Oscar, his idealistic brother Robert, his wife Kristina, their children and an oddball preacher. My main issue with The Emigrants was the fact that the group didn't get on the boat to America until 90 minutes into this three hour epic. I feel that Troell could've easily have skimmed 45 minutes of the running time had everything happened a little quicker. That being said the second half of the film more than made up for the first with Troell drawing the audience in to the claustrophobic settings of the boat journey from Sweden to the USA. It was in this second half that I became engrossed in the characters' fates partly due to the fact that the performances were fantastic. Liv Ullman, who was nominated for Best Actress, was brilliant as the young mother who was worried that she'd never set foot in America meanwhile Max Van Sydow gave a powerful turn as her strong-willed husband.  The film built up to a great ending which also set up for a sequel, The New Land, which was nominated for Best Foreign Language Feature the same year that The Emigrants featured in the Best Picture category. It's fair to say that The Emigrants is definitely a film of two halves and I definitely struggled to make it through the first part of the feature. Despite the pay-off being rewarding I think the subject of foreign travellers coming to the USA has been dealt with better elsewhere most notably by 1960s nominee America, America. Ultimately The Emigrants was a realistic film with some fine performances but one that suffered from some bad pacing and an inflated running time.

And with that we're back to the present day as I sprint to the finish line next with the final fifty or so Best Picture nominees.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 423-424: Days of Future Past Part Seven

After several posts focusing on the early days of Oscar this catch-up segment goes into the late 1950s and 1960s to look at a few nominees that had previously evaded me.

William Wyler has been a regular face on this blog and is the only director to helm three Best Picture winners in Mrs. Miniver, The Best Years of Our Lives and Ben-Hur. Although Wyler has directed many iconic pictures he's also been involved with some less memorable offerings. Friendly Persuasion definitely fits into that latter category as its the quintessential example of middle-of-the-road film-making. The film focuses on the Birdwells; a Quaker family living in Southern Indiana during the American Civil War. Over the course of the two and a bit hours, the family are constantly chastised for their reluctance to fight for their land. This story is an interesting one and the scenes in which the eldest Birdwell child Josh considers his fate are some of the film's most memorable. The problem with Friendly Persuasion is that the first hour is fairly devoid of plot and at times is quite episodic. There are some interesting set pieces including one at a state fair and some of the final scenes in which Josh fights for the home guard. The main issue I had with the characters in general though was the fact that none of them seemed to be happy Quakers with the possible exception of matriarch Eliza. It appeared that they'd rather fight, play music and dance than sit in a prayer hall for hours on end and to be honest I don't blame them. Whilst Wyler does make use of the fine locations afforded to him, I feel he left it too late to really pull the trigger on the film's grittier moments. I did find that Gary Cooper and Dorothy McGuire gave fine depictions of parents Jess and Eliza however the younger actors portraying their children were a little wooden. It was also odd seeing Anthony Perkins playing the sympathetic Josh knowing that four years later he'd portray a cinematic icon in Psycho's Norman Bates. Ultimately Friendly Persuasion wasn't a bad film but it was stunningly mediocre which is a surprise seeing as it comes from the normally reliable Wyler.

Moving on two years now we finally have a bit of light relief in the form of Auntie Mame, Morton Da Costa's adaptation of the play version of Patrick Dennis' novel. As I've noted in the past, it's very rare that a comedy film actually features in the Best Picture field and so it was a refreshing change to experience some laughter during this challenge. Despite being two and half hours I found that Da Costa's film flew by thanks in part to the fantastically large performance that Rosalind Russell put in as the titular matriarch who loomed large over the screen. The basic plot of the film sees Mame become guardian to her nephew Patrick after his stuffy father dies unexpectedly. From there on the two form an odd couple relationship with Patrick becoming the straight man to Mame's audacious character. The progression of the film sees Patrick grow up and get engaged whilst Mame marries, is widowed and eventually writes her autobiography. I wasn't surprised to learn that Auntie Mame was originally a stage play as each scene is quite easily signposted. In fact, Da Costa doesn't shy away from the film's roots and has the house lights dip when the location of the scene changes. I felt Russell was magnificent throughout the course of the film as she devoured every line magnificently and balanced the comedy of the film with its more tragic elements. Russell was well supported by a fantastic ensemble most notably Forrest Tucker as Mame's first husband and Peggy Cass as dowdy secretary Agnes Gooch. Auntie Mame is also incredibly well-designed with the costumes being a particular highlight as were the many decorative sets. I'm surprised to learn that Auntie Mame didn't win any of the Oscars it was nominated for and I feel it really should have snapped up at least one. However a film that makes people laugh is rarely an awards contender and I think the film should just be happy that it's cheered me up after a run of particularly mediocre fare.

Skipping forward another two years we have a completely different sort of film in The Sundowners, an Australian-set adventure starring Robert Mitchum. Fred Zinneman's film, an adaptation of Jon Cleary's book, introduces us to the Carmody family, a trio of sheep-herders who trek across Australia's back country. Mitchum's patriarch paddy is joined by his wife Ida and their son Sean as they take small jobs, camping through the night before moving on to their next destination. The film looks at the change in mood amongst the family as Ida wants to find somewhere for the family to live with Sean agreeing with her. However, Paddy is dead against it and wants to continue living a nomadic lifestyle for as long as possible. The Carmodys, alongside refined English acquaintance Rupert, end up spending some time at a sheep station where they get to re-evaluate their priorities. Going into The Sundowners I wasn't expecting a great deal so I enjoyed what was an enjoyable film about what it takes to be a family. Deborah Kerr's performance was particularly powerful as she portrayed Ida as a woman who was sick of moving round and wanted to a have a home of her own. For her role in the film, Kerr was nominated for her sixth and final Oscar and I think it's a shame that she didn't win at least one. Peter Ustinov was fantastic in the supporting role of Rupert whilst Glynis Johns, who I only knew from Mary Poppins, gave a scene-stealing turn as landlady Mrs Firth. However, the most prominent aspect of The Sundowners are the fantastic Australian exterior shots which boost the authenticity of the picture. Although it's not an outstanding piece of work, I found The Sundowners an easy watch which was bolstered by some fine performances and an interesting ending.

Next time is the final Days of Future Past post as the blog takes a quick European tour.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 420-422: Days of Future Past Part Six

Welcome once again to our time-travelling trip through the decades as we attempt to fill in the gaps of the challenge.

First of all apologies for jumping around the timeline a bit but at the last minute I managed to get my hands on a copy of 1931 nominee Five Star Final. Although the film was released around the same time as Trader Horn, I found that the newspaper drama felt a lot more contemporary. Mervyn La Roy's film focuses on editor Joseph Randall who finds himself under pressure to increase the distribution of his tabloid. He's talked in to producing a series of articles focusing on the twentieth anniversary of a murder committed by the notorious Nancy Voorhies. Little does he know that Nancy is now happily married and has a daughter who herself is about to tie the knot. The revelation in the papers soon spoils the family's happiness and results in both Nancy and her husband Michael committing suicide. What I initially thought was going to be a drama in the same vain as previous early nominee The Front Page turned dark very quickly. The double suicide coupled with the general reaction to the event meant that Five Star Final was one of the earliest examples of a press satire. It was quite easy to deduce that Five Star Final's origins lay on the stage however LaRoy at least went out of his way to use the cinematic techniques available to him. Most notably he employed some clever editing during a sequence in which Nancy is desperately trying to get Randall to drop the story about her family. As Randall, I thought Edward G. Robinson was brilliant as he conveyed his character's guilt perfectly and his final speech was brilliantly delivered. Although The Front Page is definitely of its time I think it holds up a lot better than the three films in the previous post and I found it to be an incredibly easy watch. It's also no surprise to learn that the film was one of the two that made Robinson a star and I'm only surprised that he hadn't been a big name before Five Star Final was released.

We now move in the right direction for probably the last 1930s film I'll review for as part of this blog. The Citadel is an interesting film that almost feels like three episodes of a miniseries featuring Robert Donat's trainee Doctor Andrew Mason. The first part of the film looks at Mason's training in a small Welsh town in which he meets resistance from the senior doctor's wife but at the same time is able to help out several villagers. The second part of the movie looks at Mason's move to a Welsh mining village and his marriage to beloved schoolteacher Christine. Once again Andrew faces opposition, this time from the miners who don't want him to change the way they've been doing things for years. Andrew refuses to punch their unfit for work cards and wants to explore the troubling coughs that the miners develop. Eventually frustrated he leaves Wales for London but he struggles to find patients for his burgeoning clinic. The final third of the film looks at Mason's corruption at the hands of the Harley Street set and the fact that he makes a lot of money from doing very little. I personally found the general structure of The Citadel to be quite frustrating as, just as one plot starting to develop, director King Vidor changed the action to another location. The one memorable moment of the film comes halfway through when Mason helps rescue several people from a collapsed mine. However, the film then gets a little dreary as we see Andrew become more and more enchanted with the superficial London lifestyle. I have to say that the point The Citadel was making was quite an obvious one and I found the ending completely anticlimactic. In fact the only thing that saved it was the central turn from Robert Donat who certainly showed qualities that would later see him cast in his Oscar-winning role in Goodbye Mr. Chips. Aside from Donat though there was very little about The Citadel that was memorable and at the end of the day it feels like yet another also-ran nominee.

But describing our next film; The Yearling as an also-ran nominee would almost be giving it too much credit as its one of the most inconsequential pieces of cinema I think I've ever seen. Set in 1878, The Yearling follows the adventures of the Baxter family - former Civil War soldier Penny, his withdrawn wife Ora and their son Jody. Throughout the film Ora's emotional state is explained away by the fact that she'd lost all of her other children and only Jody remained. I have to say if I was in Ora's position I'd be a little annoyed to as Jody is especially annoying. Films like The Yearling only work if the cute child star isn't annoying and unfortunately in this movie that isn't the case. It's particularly annoying as the majority of the film deals with Jody's relationship with a young fawn named Flag who he tries to raise. But, when the time comes to set him free, Jody doesn't take it and instead experiences proper loss for the first time. Whilst I can see what director Clarence Brown was trying to achieve with The Yearling the results are incredibly mediocre. Aside from Claude Jarman Jr's cloying performance as Jody, the cast are uniformly forgettable. Most surprising was the fact that Jane Wyman, who was so superb in Johnny Belinda, made little impression in her role as Ora. To be fair to Wyman the role didn't require much of her apart from sitting sour-faced whilst performing some menial task. Though Gregory Peck tried his best to make us warm to Penny, I found him a little too squeaky clean and didn't think he came down hard enough on his son. Surprisingly The Yearling was nominated for seven Oscars including for the performances given by Peck and Wyman. The fact it won in the colour cinematography and art direction categories leads me to believe that its main appeal to the Academy was its bright colours. Indeed, when films were primarily still shot in black and white, I'd feel that The Yearling would definitely stand out in the crowd. But it's a film that hasn't aged well and at the end of the day I don't think it would've been nominated at all were it not for the fact that it had been filmed in colour.

The only good think about watching The Yearling was the fact that it was the last Best Picture Nominee of the 1940s that I was yet to watch. To that end the next post looks at my completion of both the 1950s and 1960s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Days 417-419: Days of Future Past Part Five

After completing the first decade of the 21st century I find myself almost eighty years back in the past as I look at three more films that I've unearthed from the 1930s.

We start with a film from the 1931 ceremony in the rather controversial Trader Horn. The film itself was ground-breaking as it was the first non-documentary film to be shot on location in Africa. Trader Horn certainly makes use of this fact by including plenty of facts about the country's various wildlife population. In fact at times these scenes, some of which were shot in Mexico, felt like they were straight out of a nature documentary as lead actor Harry Carey informed the audience of the beasts' various attributes. The story, which was very slight, saw Carey's titular ivory trader take his new apprentice down the Nile whilst avoiding hungry native tribes and the brainwashed missing daughter of a missionary. At times the film would just stop and start without a lot of explanation whilst a lot of the sound recording was patchy at best. Part of the reason for this would be that a lot of the sound was re-recorded in the States although this led to suspicion that the film hadn't actually been shot in Africa at all. Trader Horn is almost more interesting for its behind-the-scenes stories including the fact that two crew members died; one eaten by a crocodile whilst the other was gored by a charging rhino. Meanwhile lead actress Edwina Booth's career was effectively ended when she contracted a disease, possibly malaria, which she took the next six years to recover from. Although viewed by modern eyes Trader Horn is quite hokey, there's no denying that it's influential in the way it shot on location. If you take into consideration that film-making was still in its infancy then director W.S. Van Dyke needs applauding for the risks he took whilst making Trader Horn. Ultimately, even though it doesn't hold up today I believe that Trader Horn's historical significance at least justifies it a place amongst its fellow best picture nominees.

Moving forward three years we have Sidney Franklin's The Barretts of Wimpole Street which essentially tells the story of how Elizabeth Barrett married Robert Browning. The majority of the film felt like a play that had simply been put on the big screen primarily as it was almost all in set in one room. The room in question was the one in which Elizabeth had been recuperating following an illness that had left her incredibly weak. The illness was being used by her despicable father Edward to keep her with him for as long as possible as he felt all of his children were deserting him. Elizabeth's redemption came through her correspondence with Browning who later appeared at the house in person and eventually convinced her that she wasn't as ill as she believed. Everything about The Barretts of Wimpole Street is pure melodrama from Herbert Stothart's overly dramatic score to the performances given by the primary cast members. Norma Shearer definitely plays to her strengths as the damsel in distress who is both subdued and rescued by seemingly stronger men. Meanwhile Frederic March is every inch the dashing hero as Browning who isn't particularly convincing as one of literature's most famous figures. Meanwhile, as Edward, Charles Laughton hams it up big time as he delivers all of his evil lines with great aplomb. If there was an image that perfectly summed up the film then it would be one of the many times that Laughton appears out of nowhere to confront one of his troublesome daughters. His arrival is coupled with ominous music whilst Laughton himself lays on an expression that just screams out villain of the piece. I think the film best demonstrates the fact that ten nominees during the 1930s was just too many especially if movies like The Barretts of Wimpole Street rank among the year's best.

I would echo that sentiment when it comes to another Frederic March vehicle, Anthony Adverse. The film is based on Hervey Allen's epic novel and is directed by the dependable Mervyn La Roy. Anthony Adverse is essentially a nuts and bolts literary adaptation filled with overblown exterior shots and cloying heart-to-hearts between characters. The titular character initially grew up in an orphanage after his mother's despicable husband dropped him off after learning he was the product of an affair. As chance would have it, Anthony ends up working for and living with his grandfather who knows of his identity but never informs him of it. As Anthony grows up, and is eventually portrayed by March, he falls in love with Angela; the daughter of the housekeeper. Angela and Anthony eventually marry but are separated soon after as he goes to Cuba and then Africa where he attempts to recoup his family fortune by participating in the slave trade. If this doesn't sound far-fetched enough then the film climaxes with Anthony learning that opera singing Andrea is now Napoleon's mistress but not before giving birth to her husband's baby. There were only a couple of things I liked about Anthony Adverse the first being an enthralling carriage ride that climaxed in an unfortunate servant plummeting to his death. Additionally I felt that Claude Rains delivered the best performance of the bunch as the despicable Don Luis who attempts to bring down Anthony several times as revenge for his mother's infidelity. Unfortunately March and female lead Olivia De Havilland don't make much of an impression and the adapted screenplay makes the whole plot feel even more overblown than it is. Anthony Adverse's only lasting legacy is the fact that it made Oscar history by containing the winner of the first ever Best Supporting Actress Award. The performer in question was Gale Sondergaard who played Don Luis' partner in crime, devious ladies' maid Faith. Whilst Sondergaard did thrive in her handful of scenes, I don't think she did that much to warrant being awarded an Oscar. Thankfully the recipients of the prize only got better from here on in and I would say that Anthony Adverse was another nominee that didn't really deserve its place amongst the Best Picture contenders.

I will return soon with more films from the 1930s and 1940s.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge: Reviewing the Ceremonies 72-81 (2000-2009)

So we've come to the end of our final full decade and it's been a particular joy for me to relive some of the films that got me hooked on cinema in the first place. From a personal point-of-view this decade was also when I got really hooked on the Oscars staying up late for most of the ceremonies starting at number 74.

In terms of the film themselves I think the 21st century saw the academy take a diverse view of what sort of films should be included in their line-up. There did seem to be a shift away from costume drama and war movies in favour of big-budget fantasy fare or more subtle film-making. At the same time there were still a lot of people complaining that certain bigger films were being ignored by the Oscars, especially during the latter half of the decade. That's part of the reason that, as we shall shortly see, the Academy decided to widen the field again and honour up to ten films a year.

Ceremony 72 (2000)
Winner: American Beauty
Nominees: The Cider House Rules, The Green Mile, The Insider, The Sixth Sense
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
There's no denying that American Beauty is an accomplished, well-written film filled with fine performances and therefore it's one of the better films to win Best Picture. At the same time, in my opinion, The Insider is the better film overall and ultimately deserved the win more.

Ceremony 73 (2001)
Winner: Gladiator
Nominees: Chocolat, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Erin Brockovich, Traffic
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
I think from an overall stand point Gladiator succeeded in combining stunning visuals, fine performances and a well-paced story. The only film that came close to equally Gladiator was Traffic I think that was a little much of a contemporary tale for the Academy to honour.

Ceremony 74 (2002)
Winner: A Beautiful Mind
Nominees: Gosford Park, In the Bedroom, The Lord of The Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Moulin Rouge
Did the Right Film Win? No
This was one of those rare occasions where all four films were in some way better than A Beautiful Mind. My pick would be the emotionally gripping In the Bedroom or the incredibly unique Moulin Rouge but any of the four would've been better than the long-winded biographical affair that ultimately clinched the prize.

Ceremony 75 (2003)
Winner: Chicago
Nominees: Gangs of New York, The Hours, The Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers, The Pianist
Did the Right Film Win? No
Don't get me wrong I like Chicago but there are at least two superior films in this list of nominees. Whilst overblown, Gangs of New York is at least a worthier candidate however I'd select The Pianist as a great historical film with real heart. I suspect the only reason that it didn't win on the night is that the Academy didn't want to bestow two awards on the infamous Roman Polanski.

Ceremony 76 (2004)
Winner: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Nominees: Lost in Translation, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Mystic River, Seabiscuit
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
I feel that Oscar had to honour the Lord of the Rings trilogy at some point and it was fitting that it was the franchise's final instalment that swept the board. That being said this ceremony featured a rather strong field with the possible exception of racehorse saga Seabiscuit.

Ceremony 77 (2005)
Winner: Million Dollar Baby
Nominees: The Aviator, Finding Neverland, Ray, Sideways
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
This is one of those years were I'm completely undecided on what film should have won the prize. In my opinion Sideways is the best film of the five but at the same time it doesn't feel like an Oscar winner. Whilst Million Dollar Baby was a worthy winner it's last act was a little too mawkish for my liking and it's nearest competition, the opulent The Aviator may just have edged it out in terms of quality. But I have no problem with Million Dollar Baby being that year's Best Picture recipient as it still stacks up nicely against previous winners.

Ceremony 78 (2006)
Winner: Crash
Nominees: Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Good Night and Good Luck, Munich
Did the Right Film Win? No
While not, as some claim, the worst Best Picture winner ever it's true to say that Crash wasn't the most accomplished nominee that year. In a year that was packed full of serious 'issue-based' films I'm going to have to go with the majority and say that Brokeback Mountain was the film that stuck with me the most. However, I also believe that Good Night and Good Luck felt more like an Oscar winner than Crash and would've been happy if either that or Brokeback had clinched the title in 2006.

Ceremony 79 (2007)
Winner: The Departed
Nominees: Babel, Letters from Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine, The Queen
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
Whilst there are no dud nominees this year I feel that Martin Scorsese's crime epic was the rightful winner from this group of five. It was also great to see him pick up his long-awaited Best Director Oscar after many prior nominations.

Ceremony 80 (2008)
Winner: No Country for Old Men
Nominees: Atonement, Juno, Michael Clayton, There Will Be Blood
Did the Right Film Win? Maybe
I really like No Country for Old Men but Oscar's eightieth ceremony had one of its best field of contenders ever. I personally think that There Will be Blood is the better film and feels more like a Best Picture winner than No Country but at the same time I do feel that the Coens did deserve their awards.

Ceremony 81 (2009)
Winner: Slumdog Millionaire
Nominees: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader
Did the Right Film Win? Yes
It's fair to say that, after the strong field of nominees the year before this was a rather weak offering in comparison. Despite its faults, Slumdog's feelgood ending and superb visuals best any other of its rival with Milk being the next best film on the list.

Next time I have more filling in the gaps to do as I go back several decades in more Days of Future Past specials.

Matt's Big Oscar Challenge Day 416: Coen Country

Although they've only featured once on the blog up to now, when their big Oscar moment came Joel and Ethan Cohen had already been making critically acclaimed movies for twenty years. Whilst Fargo was their biggest hit on the awards scene they'd also made big noise with such hits as O Brother Where Art Thou, The Big Lebowski and Barton Fink. However, their biggest success would come at the 2008 ceremony where they would go on to win three awards for screenwriting, directing and producing that year's Best Picture winner. 

The film was No Country for Old Men, which the Coens adapted from the book by Cormac McCarthy. The book's primary focus is on grizzled but kindly Texas sheriff Ed Tom Bell who isn't happy about the fact that his quaint town is used for big money drug deals. Although Bell's words start and the film the focus is instead on one of those aforementioned deals that went awry. Local welder Llewelyn Moss gets himself tangled up in the deal when he finds a bag of money and decides to keep it for himself. However, although he'd know that there'd be people after him, he didn't quite reckon on the ferocity of the film's antagonists. The antagonist in question is Anton Chigurh a fearsome, humourless man who uses a captive bolt pistol as his weapon of choice. Anton has been hired to recover the money and realising what Llewelyn has done tracks him across Texas in attempt to get the cash back. At times No Country for Old Men plays like a silent movie as there are five minute chunks of the film that have no dialogue at all. I feel that this makes the cat-and-mouse game between Llewelyn and Anton all the more interesting especially after both suffer serious injuries. However, even though I've watched the film a handful of times, the ending featuring Bell recounting his dreams to his wife doesn't sit quite right with me. After a shocking scene involving Anton and Llewelyn's wife, there's no denying that an old man relaying memories of his father is going to be at least a little anticlimactic. 

I think it's this ending that made some people gravitate towards No Country as they praised it for its subtle tone and character development. Whilst the ending doesn't sit well with me, I agree that No Country for Old Men is a masterclass is subtle film-making. The Coen brothers make sure that the audience has to fully concentrate on the screen in order to immerse themselves in the world of Llewelyn and Anton. For what was their eighth collaboration at the time, The Coens enlisted brilliant cinematographer Roger Deakins to capture the Texas exteriors. Deakins' style for the piece gives it the tone of a classic western, which is certainly odd for a film set in 1980. That being said there's more than a touch of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly when you think about the characters of Bell, Anton and Llewelyn. Tommy Lee Jones is perfectly cast as the laconic Sheriff Bell and he particularly comes to life every time he has to deliver one of his character's monologues. Josh Brolin brings an intensity to the role of out-of-his-depth everyman Llewelyn Moss. Despite his character being quite selfish at times, Brolin is still a brooding screen presence and therefore makes the audience care about Llewelyn's fate. Woody Harrelson livens thinks up briefly as an associate of Anton's who tries to cut a bargain with the hapless Llewelyn. However, the film does belong to Javier Bardem who makes Anton the most memorable element of the film. From the opening scene in which he chokes a cop to death with his handcuffs to how he deals with Llewelyn's wife, Bardem completely owns the screen. Bardem's performance as the intense hitman won him the Best Supporting Actor award that year and I can't say that it wasn't deserved. While this wasn't the Coen Brothers' best film it was certainly an excellent achievement as they combined the old west with a more contemporary thriller element. I think it's also good to see a Best Picture winner that presents its story in a subtle way and doesn't have to rely on special effects or big budget sets to woo the Academy. 

And with that we're done with the noughties, next time I review the ten Oscar ceremonies that comprised the decade.