Have I mentioned lately how glad I am that this category is only 5 films? Because I am. Though it would be awesome to see what other films would have made a 5-10 film list, this is plenty enough for me. By the time I get here, I'm usually a bit burnt out on the year and am glad I only have one or two left to watch since these get filtered out through the other categories. I'm always eager to move on to the next year and also watch films I've seen listed forever that seem larger than life to me. It's a cool feeling when I finally do both.
1995 Best Picture
Braveheart
There is certainly a lot to discuss when it comes to Braveheart. I'd be remiss if I didn't start off by mentioning the tons of historical inaccuracies this film propagates about William Wallace and history in general. Unforgivable is the fact that the Scots didn't even where kilts until hundreds of years after the events of the film. Then you can go down the list and mention that names, events, dates, characters meeting and existing are all inaccurate or just plain made up. It's almost too much to ignore. Yes, the film is compelling and full of action and adventure and beautiful scenery and amazing battles but if a historical epic isn't very accurate at all, should that detract from the film even if it's a fun watch? I say yes. It's all about William Wallace yet doesn't get all that much right about his life or the time period so this becomes just a fun, manly movie to watch instead of look to as some sort of high water mark for cinema. Then you can also talk about Mel Gibson's behavior toward gays and all of his controversies that were already very prevalent back in 1995. The treatment of gays in this film is obviously very laughable but not in the good comedic way. They are treated as a cheap joke and props instead of real characters. But that's more to Gibson's personality rather than the film though the film does no favors in that regard. With all of these issues, the film is still wildly entertaining. It may not be historically accurate but it is a fun ride to go on. It's beautifully shot and deserved it's Oscar for Cinematography. There's no doubt that Gibson has a good eye as a director even if he sacrifices reality for entertainment. I think as with all Director's who direct themselves in a film, most of the juicy, actorly moments go to Gibson himself. He gets all these big, flashy moments that work for the most part but can feel like scenes designed to showcase Gibson instead of William Wallace. All of the big speeches and soundbites sort of drive that theory home. But these are memorable scenes, too, so what does that say about Gibson as both actor and director? That he's very good at both! I think everyone has seen Braveheart at least once and it's one of those films that has entered the public's collective mind so everyone remembers at least something about it which is pretty remarkable. I don't mind Braveheart getting a nomination but I'm with a lot of others that say it's not a good winner just based on all of the above. A lot of blogs and people rank it as one of the worst Oscar winners in history because of all of that and I agree it's not a good winner. Not sure if it's one of the worst as I have a whole lot more to watch but I can see their point. I definitely wish something else had won this year.
Apollo 13
It had been so long since I had watched this film, so I was pretty pumped to finally watch it again. As I figured, it didn't disappoint at all. Apollo 13 has a lot of great things going for it. The main thing I like about it is that it takes the first 30 minutes and gets all the boring family stuff out of the way. We also see some of the training and have Gary Sinise get replaced by Kevin Bacon. Then it spends the remainder of the time focused on the mission itself and the three astronauts as they have to deal with their crisis. We do get some reactionary shots of the families every once in awhile and some fun scenes of mission control scrambling around and trying to figure out solutions to the problems the guys are facing. That's all fine but I'm glad that Ron Howard kept the focus on the astronauts without too much superfluous crap. The story sells itself. It doesn't need any extra familial tensions or whatever else you could throw in to make it I guess more accessible or something. Stay with the story and you'll have everyone on the edge of their seat as to what's going to happen next even when we already know they make it home safely. So I think that was a good choice by Howard because those scenes are so tense and captivating. The film also gets some great acting out of its leads and supporting players. Though I think my one main issue is that any female in this film gets short shrift because they don't have anything else to do other than look worried. Kathleen Quinlan got a nomination out of it but that's simply because the film itself did well. I think the women could have been better handled instead of relegated to nothing status. But I kinda get it because it's a manly movie about astronauts. I also have to say that the film looks wonderful, even after all these years. The space shots were remarkable and still impressive even though we've been spoiled in recent years with some great space films. I just wonder if this film were made today if it could be improved upon, because I'm not sure. Maybe some of the shots would look better and we'd spend more time looking at the spacecraft from the outside or something but Apollo 13 did a great job with it's effects. One other thing I wanted to mention is that it doesn't feel too rah rah American. The subject allows for that to happen but Howard doesn't overplay that side of the story instead sticking with a group of men trying to solve a problem and get home alive. I like that about Apollo 13. This is a film that easily could have won Best Picture and may get my vote after it's all said and done.
Babe
You might look down the list of Best Picture nominees and see this one and say what the heck, Babe?? That's a kids movie! And you'd be stating the obvious, but Babe is one hell of a film, no doubt about it and it totally deserves it's Best Picture nomination. Watching it just makes you feel good because it's that kind of film. It's about a pig that goes to a farm and thinks he's a sheep pig, rounding up the sheep like a sheepdog. It's told in these vignettes, which break the film up in about 10 minute or so increments though the story throughout is consistent. The film is only an hour and a half but it packs a great deal of story in those 90 minutes. There's so much going on that is really entertaining that I wish some other films would take note about the economy of force going on here. You don't need 3 hours if you can tell it in 90 minutes. The film also has great animatronic animal work by the Jim Henson Company to the point that I have no idea where the actual special effects are besides the mouths of the animals. Like did they use fake animals at any point? I don't know because the effects are so good and it never takes you out of the film in trying to guess where it is. It all feels natural and organic to the film which is great. The direction is actually fantastic, getting lots of great shots of the farm and the animals up close and capturing the action of the animals out in the fields. It's unobtrusive but also very dynamic which makes the film hum along at a great pace. The film is sad and dark at times but also heart warming, funny, and extremely likable. The sad parts are the selling of the sheep dogs and the killing of Maa and almost killing of Babe. I love that this kids film is willing to go to the dark places to tell it's story and get the point across about belonging and accepting and not rushing to judgment. I also love that a lot of scenes look like they are out of a kids book because it adds to the overall tone of the film as this small kids film but elevates it to this grandiose, important film. Babe is a credible film and a great addition to the list of Best Picture nominees and I'm so glad the Academy decided to reward it. I love this film.
Il Postino
Alright, so I wasn't really wanting to say more than like two sentences for this film. One, it doesn't deserve to be a Best Picture nominated film, at all. Two, it's Oscar nominated actor is not very good or interesting. I wanted to leave it at that but I must keep up appearances. The film is about Massimo Troisi's character who starts delivering mail, hence Il Postino (or The Postman), to Chilean poet, Pablo Neruda. It's kind of a slow film and it's only an hour and forty minutes. Troisi pesters Neruda to explain poetry and metaphors to him and then try and help him to win over Beatrice, a bar maid he likes. Troisi keeps to the background while the Neruda character dominates the story and the audience's attention. The story is also most entertaining when Neruda is around because he disappears in the last 30 minutes and the film just absolutely flounders. The time jumps considerably and often in the last 30 minutes that you forget that the characters have gone through years and years of change and I hate it. The end is sort of this wash of the story where everything is rushed through to get to the character dying. It runs out of steam when Neruda leaves the story because Troisi isn't interesting enough to sustain the film. It's also a very light film which isn't necessarily a bad thing but here it works against the film. Troisi is so sedated in his performance that it drags the film down for me. Like, okay he's learning what metaphors are - how cute. But then it goes on and on and then all the sudden the guy is married and having a kid and then dead. I don't care if that ruins it for you because you're not even going to watch it. It's really not all that interesting except for Neruda and besides that the film fails to entertain. If not for the sad circumstances surrounding this one since Troisi died the day after it wrapped filming, well, it wouldn't even have sniffed the Oscars. It's boring and very casual stuff. Not a good look for the Academy giving in to yet another Miramax bullying.
Sense and Sensibility
When it comes to thinking about 90s films, these are the type of films I first think about. Those old fashioned period pieces and Merchant-Ivory films that everyone lampoons but I'm highly looking forward to because they are always put down for being boring and for old women. Sense and Sensibility is a Jane Austen book and this adaptation (which won Emma Thompson an Adapted Screenplay Oscar) was filmed by Ang Lee. That's a lot of things going for it that keep it from being the stuffy old period pieces made strictly for women. From what I've read, Thompson changed the characters a bit to make them more likable and appealing for modern audiences and made the family more poor to highlight the depths of their fall. These changes work so well because the film and the story does feel more modern even though it is a period piece. The story is more relatable and the dialogue is not the stilted, wooden 18th Century word salad that other films are. It's nice to understand the characters and their motivations without having to digest dialogue meant to sound intelligent and proper. The acting is great throughout as the sisters are the standouts but also the suitors as well to some extent. We do get Hugh Grant's bumbling persona though it is tapered down quite a bit and Alan Rickman gives his Colonel Brandon some warmth and compassion you forget he's capable of after seeing him as a villain so much. The set pieces look great and Ang Lee does bring a bit of liveliness to the direction contributing to the modern feel. Most of all I found the story to be rather engaging. I wasn't sure if this would be a film I'd sit down and watch and get bored and have to finish over 2-3 days, but once I started it I was very much engrossed on what was going to happen to the sisters. The ending is a bit of a rushed let down but if the story is faithful to Austen's vision then that's more an indictment on her than on Lee or Thompson. This is one of the period piece films that makes sense as a Best Picture nominee and doesn't feel out of place in the slightest. I liked Sense and Sensibility a lot and am glad I've undertaken this project as I probably wouldn't have given it a chance otherwise.
A pretty interesting year when you really look at it, especially when you compare it to 1996. Big studio films winning out here over the indies, though Miramax does shoehorn one in on us. I definitely disliked Il Postino the most and really believe that without it's tragic backstory, it would never have made it on this list - and shouldn't have made it on here. It's not that good and it's not Oscar quality stuff. Would have loved to see Leaving Las Vegas or something else in this spot. Surprisingly, Braveheart is my 4th spot. It's inaccuracies are hard to forgive even if the film is entertaining. Not a good Best Picture winner. My middle film is Sense and Sensibility which I liked way more than I thought I would. It has a very modern feel even today so that was a nice bonus. Babe is such a likable film and very entertaining and a surprising Best Picture nominee. I can't quite pick it for my winner because it's so slight but I still love it anyway. My winner would be Apollo 13 which still holds up well years later for it's technical achievements. It's a very good film and an easy winner in this group. I think it would have held up as a good Oscar winner if it was chosen. All in all, not a bad year with some good surprises. Very much looking forward to 1994!
Oscar Winner: Braveheart
My Winner: Apollo 13
Babe
Sense and Sensibility
Braveheart
Il Postino
No comments:
Post a Comment