1996 is almost over! It feels so good because I've always kinda looked at 1995 as the mark for when I'd really feel like I've started to make some progress in this project. And I feel like I have! I've completed 21 years and that's a whole lot of films I've watched. It's also a whole lot of films I've still got to watch. I love the 90's, though, and the nostalgia trip will be nice plus seeing all the films I've missed out on. Just got to get these one's out of the way first!
1996 Best Picture
The English Patient
This was one of those mythical Best Picture winners that I've heard talked about for years. I've read countless articles and comments about it being a shitty winner because it was boring, too long, didn't make sense, blah. Well I finally watched it for myself and I've got to say that I don't think it's one of the worst BP winners at all. It absolutely is too long which is my main gripe, but it's not awful or anything like that. It has some really great acting which is why three of it's actors got nominated for an Oscar and one of them won. This is an epic tale and I will swear it goes on too long for it's own good until someone listens. I feel you can excise the Willem Dafoe and Naveen Andrews plots and have a much better, more tightly focused film that goes on for about two hours. I honestly don't get the point of Dafoe in the film at all. Sure, he was in Fiennes' past but Dafoe is hunting him down then hears his story and then that's it. No retribution, no oh sorry mate, just a confession and then a glossing over of his purpose there. Dafoe is pointless to the overall story. Naveen is less so but still could be trimmed down. The English Patient is about Thomas and Fiennes and Binoche to a lesser extent. That's the fucking film! It's not extraneous crap, it's those three characters so they need to be built up and expanded upon because who cares about the rest? I want to see more Thomas, I want Binoche to confront Fiennes, I want Ralph to be on screen the whole film. That's what The English Patient is about! If not for Miramax, I'm not sure this film wins BP. I think Fargo was right on it's heels. I read that it was initially over 4 hours long and I'd like to see that version because it could allow the Dafoe and Naveen plots to pay off. And I definitely wanted more of Thomas, Fiennes, and Binoche. As it is, The English Patient could be tweaked to make it much better. But The English Patient is a really good film in it's own right! It's just not as good as it could be.
Fargo
I love the Coen Brothers' films. Absolutely love them and Fargo is no exception. In fact, it's one of their best films they've ever done as far as I'm concerned. Now, I'm not a total Coen Bros fanboy as they have a couple films that aren't that great but there's no doubting Fargo's greatness. It has all the typical charms of a Coen Bros film: quirky, interesting, ridiculous characters, death and violence, fantastic acting supported by fantastic dialogue, great cinematography from Roger Deakins and top notch directing from the brothers. It's only an hour and a half but it feels like such a complete story. We get a couple perfect performances out of this film which that alone should qualify it for classic status. Thing is, when people think about Fargo, they always think about how great of a film it is and usually call it a classic, especially compared to the rest of the year. No one has heard of Shine or Secrets and Lies and all anyone can do is quote some lines from Jerry Maguire but no one would call it a Best Picture worthy film. People know The English Patient as a long film with a historical romance and war plot and that's probably it. People remember Fargo. Hell, now we've got a TV series on FX that is a spin off of the film itself! If that doesn't tell you the lasting impact of Fargo, nothing will. It's a cultural touchstone, it's a film people use to tell time. They know it was from 1996 and can base things in their memory off of that fact. It's a simple story but it's done so well that it sticks in our minds as something bigger. There's a lot more that I want to say about Fargo but I'm just not finding the words. I don't mean that in any sanctimonious way, just that Fargo is a great film on a lot of accounts we've already covered. Fargo is simply a great film that deserved to be recognized as such with a Best Picture win.
Jerry Maguire
This was the lone studio picture in a sea of indies so I think partly for that reason, besides raking in a ton of money, is why Jerry Maguire made the Best Picture list. It's a feel good romantic dramedy that did really well at the box office and starred Tom Cruise, it's a film with broad appeal. Because let's be honest, this isn't really Best Picture material. This is a cliche filled film that ticks off the boxes for the type of film it is. Likable lead actor loses his successful job and must scramble to rebuild his life. Along the way he falls for the plain Jane, they marry but have issues later that get resolved in the big emotional finale. The story uses it's supporting characters only when necessary and everyone has a laugh and a cry and go home feeling good. It's stuff we've seen a million times before and I really don't think this is a perfect example of the genre to build up as an all-timer. It's enjoyable, sure, but it's got a lot of flaws, too. The romance is generic and cheesy even with some of the inspired writing that would later become cliche itself. All the quotable lines now just make the film seem overly hokey and cheesy. The romance also confused me at times because they get together easily but then quickly have marriage troubles that seems very forced and out of nowhere meant to only lead to the ending where they can spout off their one liners and reconcile in the big emotional exclamation point. I didn't fully get why they were having marriage issues, though. I get that he was away a lot and I guess Zellweger's friend was putting the idea into her head that he'd leave when successful again or something? It wasn't clear to me and it didn't seem to be as important as the film wanted it to be so I just never bought into their turmoil. The little kid was super annoying and might as well have been a dog because that's all the story treated him as anyway. The scene where Cuba is injured catching a touchdown was supposed to be super dramatic but was really only super hokey when he gets up and starts dancing around the field. That display would have been flagged in the NFL! Even the impetus for Cruise getting fired was ridiculous. I'm a little overly harsh but this is a Best Picture nominee and should at least be a good film first and not just a crowdpleaser. I'd probably be more forgiving if this was included in a group of 8-10 nominees, but in 1996 it just takes up a spot for a more deserving film like say The Crucible, which I loved. I just think that films like these should be pretty great when held up to scrutiny instead of just falling back on the well it made a lot of money excuse.
Secrets and Lies
I've seen a couple Mike Leigh films now and his creative process has been mentioned by me before. He likes to get his actors together and allow them to create back stories for their characters and then they rehearse for awhile and come up with the story and film that way. In this one, the first meeting between Cynthia and Hortense is the first time those two actresses ever met and so the reaction we get is authentic because Cynthia didn't know her daughter would be black. On one hand it's kind of a cool concept seeing the honest reactions of characters when they don't know something is coming. But on the other hand, you can get some meandering storylines that don't feel fully fleshed out and do feel gimmicky and made up on the fly. What is the point of when Timothy Spall's previous shop owner comes into his photography studio drunk and talking smack? There's no need for that at all, cut it and it's a more focused story. Spall, however, was fantastic in this. He has become an actor that I really love seeing work. He should have been nominated for another Mike Leigh film: Mr. Turner but sadly was not. The acting from everyone else is a bit all over the place. Maybe that comes from letting your actors take the characters wherever they want but it stands out as wildly all over the place. Jean-Baptiste gets a deserved nomination for a realistic performance and is the standout along with Spall for me. The rest act in broad terms and can be a bit one note. I did like the direction and the hand held camerawork of some of the scenes that made it seem like we the audience were butting in these people's lives or peering around a corner, eavesdropping. Leigh at least knows how to make a film even if the process can let down the story itself. It could have easily been tighter and the characters more defined but overall it's an interesting look at identity and family. There are some great scenes like Cynthia and Hortense meeting and talking for 7-8 minutes straight in a really intense and well done scene. It has it's faults, but Secrets and Lies is a pretty good film.
Shine
I don't know what it was with this year but we have yet another indie film, which is fine as long as they are good! But I don't know about Shine here. I don't know why this captured the attention of critics and the Academy. I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. It's your standard musical genius biopic that has quirky acting from the lead and shows the horrible childhood he endures and his rise and fall and return to greatness. Except this is about a prodigy that no one's ever heard of, who plays piano well enough but not exactly mind blowingly well even if Shine tells me Rachmaninoff is supremely difficult to play, especially when younger. Standard stuff all around and I actually liked the second/middle actor of David Helfgott, who was pretty nerdy but not so obviously trying to be nerdy, he just was. I guess the main attraction is Geoffrey Rush's performance which is steeped in mannerisms you'll be left wondering where the character is underneath. The story is told in non-linear format, jumping between young, middle, and older Helfgott. So we see Helfgott's troubled childhood, his potential as a pianist, and his present day schizophrenic self. However, I don't think it was really articulated well just how David became schizophrenic. I guess we are supposed to be satisfied with his overbearing father emotionally abusing David before David collapses at a piano concert. That must have been a breakdown but it's so skimmed over that it doesn't even matter except that it's the whole point of the film! I feel like up until then in the timeline it's a decent film, but after that point it's like let's just show how weird and quirky and odd David is with his fast talking, squinty eyes, cooing laughs, and stooped shoulders. That seems to be the focus of the last third of the film and it sacrifices everything the film had built up to that point. It's a showcase for Rush, who yeah is technically great, but not all that emotionally compelling. This is the kind of film that would do real well at Sundance nowadays and get some rave reviews, get some Oscar talk then fade away until nomination day where it might pick up a nom or two - or zero. This film was a puffed up indie darling that made it all the way despite being mediocre. I just never connected with David and was never given a reason to connect with him. Bad childhood aside, I need more than just another piano prodigy with strange mannerisms to hook me in. I don't know what the Academy was thinking here.
This was an odd year on account of there being 4 indies and 1 big studio film. I'm all for indies making it in but this year could have excised at least one and have been okay. Shine just fails to really interest me as I don't really care about the piano genius, no matter how weird he is. I think if you added something else this would be a really great group. It's pretty good as it is. Jerry Maguire would be my 4th because even though it's the crowdpleaser and big studio film. It's kinda cliche even for what it is and the story doesn't like developing itself before moving on which hurts it. Secrets and Lies is smack in the middle because it is a pretty good film that stumbles at times but nothing major to detract from being an interesting film. It's kind of amazing that it was included in this group along with the Australian Shine since they both seem to fill an Academy niche for Best Picture. But it was the year of the indie so I guess that's why. Now, my top spot is easily Fargo because I feel like it's an all-time Oscar winner. It's one you can easily remember and is really entertaining all the way through, to boot. It would have been a perfect winner. The English Patient would be runner-up simply because of the issues of the extra storylines. Fix that and it may be an outright winner because the love story part was so engrossing for me. I really did enjoy most of it so I'm glad I didn't hate it as much as some people out there! All in all, a pretty good year even if I disagreed with the Academy.
Oscar Winner: The English Patient
My Winner: Fargo
The English Patient
Secrets and Lies
Jerry Maguire
Shine
No comments:
Post a Comment