Nominated for Best Actress (Joan Crawford) in 1947.
When I think of old school Hollywood sirens, images of histrionics, of smashing perfect eyebrows and pouty mouths on brawny men's chests, and lots of clutching of chests and faces are the first to come to mind. That's a terrible way to think, because these women are so much more than that, and also because there's surprisingly little of those images that actually occur in the movies.
Except in this one. There's a lot of flailing, but for good reason. Joan Crawford plays a home nurse who falls for the local gigolo. He spurns her love, and in an unrelated turn of events, she slowly loses her mind. The movie gave a surprisingly accurate depiction of the onset and diagnosis of schizophrenia, so accurate in fact that the film is sited in a 2003 text called "Reel Psychiatry" (which I highly recommend). I never would have imagined such a portrayal could have come in 1947, especially since mental illness is almost infallibly misrepresented in modern films. Curtis Bernhardt did a wonderful job of setting up tension and making the audience question Louise's reality.
So am still getting used to the styles of films made over half a century ago, but I am enjoying every minute of it. It's actually becoming more immersive for me, I think because of what I am so used to watching for 30 years. So I got that going for me. Which is nice.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Passion of the Christ
Nominated for Cinematography, Makeup, and Music in 2004.
*long, long, drawn out sigh*
I really feel like there has been enough talk about this movie. I'm definitely going to try to not raise any theological opinions here, because . . . well, just because. It's been done to death and I don't know anything, truly, about either side of the argument. I will admit to avoiding this movie for a very long time. Partly because it was described to me as anything from torture porn to Christian propaganda. I don't really think I agree with either of those assessments (and will note that the folks who called it torture porn have obviously never seen torture porn). It's also getting harder and harder for me to separate Mel Gibson from the art he makes, sadly.
It really was a beautifully made movie. The shots were incredible, a few of them actually breathtaking, but in all fairness - how could they not be with literal centuries of iconography from which they came? And casting actors who are largely (if not completely) unknown in the country you intend to distribute shows a true commitment to your subject, which I respect no matter how much I may agree or disagree with your vision. Not to mention the choice to make the film in a two thousand year old dead language.
My biggest complaint about the movie is that I felt it presumed that the viewer would already know the story of the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus. I don't, so I was a little lost at a couple points in the movie.
Last Summer
Nominated for Best Supporting Actress (Catherine Burns) in 1969.
"Last Summer" is pretty high on my list of The Most Disturbing Movies I Have Ever Seen.
Sandy, Dan, and Peter meet while their families vacation for a summer on Fire Island. The three rescue a wounded seagull, and thus ends any redemptive acts. Sandy is manipulative, Dan is arrogant, and Peter might have had a chance to be sensitive and kind had he never met the other two. They get drunk, get high, play games that center around revealing terrible secrets, and face no accountability due to absent and clueless parents. The three meet Rhoda, a nervous and shy girl who is also vacationing, and she tries to befriend the three. This angers Sandy, as she is very possessive of her male friends, and Rhoda quickly becomes the butt of many an antic.
This is a character driven movie. The beach scenes are of course beautiful, but other than that scenery and sets are unremarkable. The focus remains entirely on the deviant personalities of the stars and the flawed persona of Rhoda, and to that end it is completely successful.
The movie ends so painfully and abruptly that it is jaw dropping. My jaw literally dropped. I've been thinking about this movie for a few days now, wondering how to write about it. I think if you asked "well, did you like the movie?" I would answer that yes, I did, but I don't know if could tell you why, and I certainly would advise you to proceed with awareness that you will not feel good when it is over.
"Last Summer" is pretty high on my list of The Most Disturbing Movies I Have Ever Seen.
Sandy, Dan, and Peter meet while their families vacation for a summer on Fire Island. The three rescue a wounded seagull, and thus ends any redemptive acts. Sandy is manipulative, Dan is arrogant, and Peter might have had a chance to be sensitive and kind had he never met the other two. They get drunk, get high, play games that center around revealing terrible secrets, and face no accountability due to absent and clueless parents. The three meet Rhoda, a nervous and shy girl who is also vacationing, and she tries to befriend the three. This angers Sandy, as she is very possessive of her male friends, and Rhoda quickly becomes the butt of many an antic.
This is a character driven movie. The beach scenes are of course beautiful, but other than that scenery and sets are unremarkable. The focus remains entirely on the deviant personalities of the stars and the flawed persona of Rhoda, and to that end it is completely successful.
The movie ends so painfully and abruptly that it is jaw dropping. My jaw literally dropped. I've been thinking about this movie for a few days now, wondering how to write about it. I think if you asked "well, did you like the movie?" I would answer that yes, I did, but I don't know if could tell you why, and I certainly would advise you to proceed with awareness that you will not feel good when it is over.
The Brave One
Nominated for Film Editing and Original Screenplay in 1956.
When the opening credits rolled on this movie, I was really excited to fall in love. Unfortunately, the star, a young boy, got wildly annoying wildly fast. "The Brave One" tells the story of a young boy in Mexico who rescues a bull and expects to raise it as a pet. Things go well for a while, but via politics and the Mexican tradition and expectations of bull fighting, young Leonardo loses his bull. A lot. Like, a lot. For the better part of a two hour film. He appeals to a rich playboy and eventually takes his plea all the way to El Presidente and the fighting ring in Mexico City.
There were lots of pros here, honestly. The scenery was completely astounding. Everyone always talks about NYC being a main player in every movie in which its featured, but I have never seen a picture in which Mexico City is a star. I might be displaying my ignorance in full form here, but it seems to me pretty progressive that a film was made in Mexico and starred mostly (to the best of my knowledge) unknown Mexican actors in 1956.
I really like the idea of this movie. But the execution, including the performance of the star and the length of the bullfighting sequence, were just a little too much. I would very much like to see a child's reaction as it was made for a younger audience.
Super Fun Oscar Trivia: Dalton Trumbo won an Oscar for his screenplay, but as he was still considered part of the notorious Hollywood 10 he was unable to work in Hollywood during the time this movie was made. His Oscar was given to his pseudonym, but corrected to reflect the correct name in 1975.
When the opening credits rolled on this movie, I was really excited to fall in love. Unfortunately, the star, a young boy, got wildly annoying wildly fast. "The Brave One" tells the story of a young boy in Mexico who rescues a bull and expects to raise it as a pet. Things go well for a while, but via politics and the Mexican tradition and expectations of bull fighting, young Leonardo loses his bull. A lot. Like, a lot. For the better part of a two hour film. He appeals to a rich playboy and eventually takes his plea all the way to El Presidente and the fighting ring in Mexico City.
There were lots of pros here, honestly. The scenery was completely astounding. Everyone always talks about NYC being a main player in every movie in which its featured, but I have never seen a picture in which Mexico City is a star. I might be displaying my ignorance in full form here, but it seems to me pretty progressive that a film was made in Mexico and starred mostly (to the best of my knowledge) unknown Mexican actors in 1956.
I really like the idea of this movie. But the execution, including the performance of the star and the length of the bullfighting sequence, were just a little too much. I would very much like to see a child's reaction as it was made for a younger audience.
Super Fun Oscar Trivia: Dalton Trumbo won an Oscar for his screenplay, but as he was still considered part of the notorious Hollywood 10 he was unable to work in Hollywood during the time this movie was made. His Oscar was given to his pseudonym, but corrected to reflect the correct name in 1975.
Monday, June 18, 2012
A Star is Born
Nominated for Best Actor (James Mason), Best Actress (Judy Garland), Art Direction (Color), Costume Design (Color), and Music Scoring in 1954.
When I tell people that I watched nothing but Judy Garland movies one rainy Sunday, and that this one was my favorite, the reaction is inevitably "EW! That one is my least favorite!" They cite length, heavy handedness, and "it's just so depressing" as reasons, which either speaks volumes of the company I keep or of myself. Probably both, eh? Anyway.
This movie completely blew me away. From Garland's torch song performance to her first starring medley, the music gave me goosebumps. And I am wildly picky about my musicals, man. I tend to not like 'em. But these numbers were beautiful, and the cinematography? Shut. Up. I still marvel at the fact that the cinematographer was not recognized because the shots (especially in the aforementioned famous medley) seemed progressive and visionary.
I will fess up and admit that I go into movies that predate the 70's with certain negative expectations. I'm not proud of that and I am hoping that this project teaches me the err of my opinions. This movie certainly did. I always expect a certain crackle to costumes and clomp to sets that ruins my experience, but I certainly didn't get that here. Everything was lush and dreamlike (sometimes nightmarish), but never crisp and cheap. And the final shot actually made me completely weepy.
Super Oscar Fun Fact - this movie is a remake, and both the stars of this picture and the original were nominated for their performances.
When I tell people that I watched nothing but Judy Garland movies one rainy Sunday, and that this one was my favorite, the reaction is inevitably "EW! That one is my least favorite!" They cite length, heavy handedness, and "it's just so depressing" as reasons, which either speaks volumes of the company I keep or of myself. Probably both, eh? Anyway.
This movie completely blew me away. From Garland's torch song performance to her first starring medley, the music gave me goosebumps. And I am wildly picky about my musicals, man. I tend to not like 'em. But these numbers were beautiful, and the cinematography? Shut. Up. I still marvel at the fact that the cinematographer was not recognized because the shots (especially in the aforementioned famous medley) seemed progressive and visionary.
I will fess up and admit that I go into movies that predate the 70's with certain negative expectations. I'm not proud of that and I am hoping that this project teaches me the err of my opinions. This movie certainly did. I always expect a certain crackle to costumes and clomp to sets that ruins my experience, but I certainly didn't get that here. Everything was lush and dreamlike (sometimes nightmarish), but never crisp and cheap. And the final shot actually made me completely weepy.
Super Oscar Fun Fact - this movie is a remake, and both the stars of this picture and the original were nominated for their performances.
Fat City
Nominated for Best Supporting Actress (Susan Tyrrell) in 1972.
This is another defining 1970's movie for me. Everything looks dirty and like it might smell like my grandfather's old apartment (i.e. smoke and cheese). My first impression of the story was that it was telling the opposing trajectories of two boxers - one up and coming, one down on his luck and struggling. First impression can be gravely wrong however, and the movie strongly comments on race and class struggle. Jeff Bridges is young but otherwise mostly unremarkable, and Stacy Keach (yeah, THAT Stacy Keach) is heartbreaking, but Susan Tyrell will pull your heart out through the back of your chest and then cry sherry soaked tears all over it. We've seen hundreds of drunks in twice as many movies, but this woman gives the most infuriatingly real performance of an alcoholic that I have ever seen.
Also of note is that John Huston, MEGADIRECTOR of the 1940's, directed this movie. He adapted seamlessly into the styles popular by Hal Ashby and Peter Bogdanovich, and might have even done it better than they did. The movie is dated by more than the costumes and cars, unfortunately, down to the pop song that plays over the opening credits and the score (Marvin Hamlisch. AMIRITE?!!?). But the trials the characters face are still relevant to what I see going on in small town America every day.
This is another defining 1970's movie for me. Everything looks dirty and like it might smell like my grandfather's old apartment (i.e. smoke and cheese). My first impression of the story was that it was telling the opposing trajectories of two boxers - one up and coming, one down on his luck and struggling. First impression can be gravely wrong however, and the movie strongly comments on race and class struggle. Jeff Bridges is young but otherwise mostly unremarkable, and Stacy Keach (yeah, THAT Stacy Keach) is heartbreaking, but Susan Tyrell will pull your heart out through the back of your chest and then cry sherry soaked tears all over it. We've seen hundreds of drunks in twice as many movies, but this woman gives the most infuriatingly real performance of an alcoholic that I have ever seen.
Also of note is that John Huston, MEGADIRECTOR of the 1940's, directed this movie. He adapted seamlessly into the styles popular by Hal Ashby and Peter Bogdanovich, and might have even done it better than they did. The movie is dated by more than the costumes and cars, unfortunately, down to the pop song that plays over the opening credits and the score (Marvin Hamlisch. AMIRITE?!!?). But the trials the characters face are still relevant to what I see going on in small town America every day.
The Wizard of Oz
Nominated for Art Direction,
Cinematography, Music, Outstanding Production, and Special Effects in 1939.
If you have not had a soft spot for
this movie at one point in your life, there is a good chance that you
are in fact a robot. I'm not going to run through all the trivia and
tribulations with which we are all so familiar already. There's no
need. All I need to say is that this is a perfect musical, the film
I would probably chose to represent American Cinema, and a wonderful
choice to instill a lifelong love of movies in children.
“The Wizard of Oz” only won one
Oscar, for music.
Kramer vs. Kramer
Nominated for Best Actor (Dustin Hoffman), Best Supporting Actor (Justin Henry, who you also might remember as the shitty younger brother in "16 Candles"), Best Supporting Actress (Jane Alexander and Meryl Streep), Directing, Film Editing, Best Picture, and Adapted Screenplay in 1979.
So, I think this is a perfect screenplay. That's my uneducated but wildly hungry assertion. It's perfect. If you're a screenwriter, get your hands on a copy of this screenplay. Take the time to write out all the gunk that could have appeared in the movie, and then give yourself the satisfaction and the muscle memory of scratching it out. Perfect screenplay, perfect performances. And sadly still relevant in its statements on the family and the roll of the sexes at work and at home. Not much else to say. Just perfect.
So, I think this is a perfect screenplay. That's my uneducated but wildly hungry assertion. It's perfect. If you're a screenwriter, get your hands on a copy of this screenplay. Take the time to write out all the gunk that could have appeared in the movie, and then give yourself the satisfaction and the muscle memory of scratching it out. Perfect screenplay, perfect performances. And sadly still relevant in its statements on the family and the roll of the sexes at work and at home. Not much else to say. Just perfect.
For Me and My Gal
Nominated for Musical Scoring in 1942.
“For Me and My Gal” is a musical
that tells the love story of a Vaudeville star, Harry Palmer, and a
struggling young girl, Jo Hayden, who wants to be a star. The meet,
their romantic and performance chemistry grows, and just as they are
about to become the biggest stars in the world, he gets drafted. But
Harry pulls a pretty bullshit move, and in trying to delay his
deployment he accidentally cripples his hand for life. Jo calls him
on the cowardly move, leaves him, and they forfeit their exploding
stardom. As so often happens with star crossed lovers, they meet by
chance after the war and reunite on the stage they longed to play for
an encore performance of the very first song they ever sang together.
It's hard to be impartial in films like
this, as the plots often seem trite and predictable. But is that a
fair assertion, when this film came so early? It's a problem often
faced by movie lovers of my generation who saw the imitation rather
than the inspiration first. But even a tired love story can be saved
by chemistry, performances, or great writing. This, unfortunately,
had none. But it did have Gene Kelly in his very first cinematic
role, and was saved by the always mesmerizing Judy Garland. None of
the musical numbers featured traditional Busby Berkely choreography
or choruses, but the songs were joyous and fun to watch. I don't
think this one will warrant a rewatch at any time, but I am glad I
watched it.
“For Me and My Gal” did not win in
its nominated category.
The Way We Were
Nominated for Best Actress (Barbara Streisand), Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume Design, and Music (Original Dramatic Score) in 1973.
I watched pieces of this movie probably once a week when I was in college. I called myself a movie nerd back then, but hadn't really explored many films that were made before I was born. Sitting down to watch this as an adult brings a lot of realizations and epiphanies; one, that it is very exemplary to my definition of American Cinema in the 1970's. Real. Not opulent. Dirty. None of the costumes or sets jump out at me as memorable, yet those things were singled out as being some of the best in film of the year. The second? People can be wholly unlikeable. That's my favorite aspect of this film, in fact which is very rare for me. Both characters behave shamefully on more than one occasion. I don't know that I would want either one of them to be my friend. But damn do I want them to win. And I don't just want to pick a side for either character to win in one of their many arguments, but I want them to survive as a Them. That a writer can make me root so hard for people I find despicable more often than not, well that's just damn good storytelling.
I watched pieces of this movie probably once a week when I was in college. I called myself a movie nerd back then, but hadn't really explored many films that were made before I was born. Sitting down to watch this as an adult brings a lot of realizations and epiphanies; one, that it is very exemplary to my definition of American Cinema in the 1970's. Real. Not opulent. Dirty. None of the costumes or sets jump out at me as memorable, yet those things were singled out as being some of the best in film of the year. The second? People can be wholly unlikeable. That's my favorite aspect of this film, in fact which is very rare for me. Both characters behave shamefully on more than one occasion. I don't know that I would want either one of them to be my friend. But damn do I want them to win. And I don't just want to pick a side for either character to win in one of their many arguments, but I want them to survive as a Them. That a writer can make me root so hard for people I find despicable more often than not, well that's just damn good storytelling.
Snow White and the Seven Dwarves
Nominated in the Music category in 1937.
What can be said about this movie that
hasn't been said before? It was the first full length cel-animated
motion picture, it was the first in color, and the first Walt Disney
Classic. It also, I would say with great confidence, set the
standard for every single American animated film that has come since.
It's hard for me to give any kind of
opinion on this film that isn't based solely on nostalgia. I have
crystal memories of seeing this movie at the Melody Drive-In with my
mother, and during one of the dwarves' musical numbers a thunderstorm
came and it rained so heavily that we couldn't see the movie screen.
It was an amazing experience, and every time I have watched since
it's that memory that overwhelms me.
It's impossible to tell if I would find
the animation so beautiful if I hadn't been raised on later Disney
pictures, but watching “Snow White and the Seven Dwarves” always
gives me goosebumps. Every incarnation of Snow White since 1938 gets
compared to Disney's, and few have been up to that challenge. I have
quite a few films that predate this one in the Oscar annals, but I'm
going to go ahead and call this now: “Snow White and the Seven
Dwarves” is the original feel good movie – the watch when your
tummy hurts, watch when you're sad . . . the first Warm Fuzzy movie.
It is complete insanity to think that the movie almost never got made
– Walt Disney mortgaged his own home to finance and the movie's
production costs totaled well over one million dollars, which in 1937
was unheard of.
Special Oscar fun fact – this movie
was nominated only for music, but received a special award for
recognition “as a significant screen innovation which has charmed
millions and pioneered a great new entertainment field for the motion
picture cartoon.” The award was one large Oscar and seven
miniature statues on a steeped base.
“Snow White and the Seven
Dwarves” did not win in its only nominated category.
Hugo
Nominated for Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume Design, Directing, Film Editing, Best Picture, Visual Effects, and Adapted Screenplay in 2011.
I think this is probably the movie that Martin Scorsese was destined to make. Most Scorsese fans, at least the ones that I know, love his gangster movies - their violence and caricatures and soundtracks. But this is definitively HIS love letter to the cinema, and I don't think any other human being could have poured such love into every three dimensional frame. The film is an adaptation of the novel "The Invention of Hugo Cabret," which I have unfortunately not yet read. It tells the story of an orphan boy and the lesson he teaches to the disillusioned grownups that fill his world (I suppose one could argue that disillusioned adults is a theme through all Scorsese's movies). I knew nothing else about the story going in, and if you're a movie lover, I think you should experience it the same way.
The juxtaposition of color's in Hugo's mechanical world and his fantastic world are perfection; his life is filled with muted blues and earth tones but his discoveries are fairy purples and mermen green. The sets . . . I mean, come on. The sets, man! I found myself wishing that every single place visited was real, a place where I could go play.
To borrow a phrase from the good men at MYMHM, I have to give "Hugo" one Dubious Award, and I regretfully advise that you will probably see me make this complaint ad nauseum. This is an American film, set in Paris - but all the actors, even the American ones, have British accents. Drives. Me. Crazy. That being said, I still think - oh my god, is she gonna say it? I think she's gonna say it - this is my favorite Scorsese movie.
I think this is probably the movie that Martin Scorsese was destined to make. Most Scorsese fans, at least the ones that I know, love his gangster movies - their violence and caricatures and soundtracks. But this is definitively HIS love letter to the cinema, and I don't think any other human being could have poured such love into every three dimensional frame. The film is an adaptation of the novel "The Invention of Hugo Cabret," which I have unfortunately not yet read. It tells the story of an orphan boy and the lesson he teaches to the disillusioned grownups that fill his world (I suppose one could argue that disillusioned adults is a theme through all Scorsese's movies). I knew nothing else about the story going in, and if you're a movie lover, I think you should experience it the same way.
The juxtaposition of color's in Hugo's mechanical world and his fantastic world are perfection; his life is filled with muted blues and earth tones but his discoveries are fairy purples and mermen green. The sets . . . I mean, come on. The sets, man! I found myself wishing that every single place visited was real, a place where I could go play.
To borrow a phrase from the good men at MYMHM, I have to give "Hugo" one Dubious Award, and I regretfully advise that you will probably see me make this complaint ad nauseum. This is an American film, set in Paris - but all the actors, even the American ones, have British accents. Drives. Me. Crazy. That being said, I still think - oh my god, is she gonna say it? I think she's gonna say it - this is my favorite Scorsese movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)