Best Picture 1986

Platoon was my favorite movie of all time growing up. I love that film a ton and have seen it a whole bunch of times. Nothing will beat it this year but I guess for continuity sake, I'll watch the other four that are nominated.

1986 Best Picture

Platoon

For the longest time this was my favorite film of all time. I thought it was the greatest film ever made and I grew up watching it over and over and romanticized about the war aspect of it even though the point was not to glamorize war. I'd say it had a very strong impact on me joining the Army in some noble, misguided way. Not that I'm an idiot that can't separate film from reality but I just loved the film so much that I know it seeped into my subconscious. I think this film is a complete package. You have some of the best acting ever from Tom Berenger and Willem Dafoe as the two competing platoon sergeants. Then factor in all the other supporting players from a terrific Keith David (who is such a great guy to meet in person) to Kevin Dillon, John C. McGinley, Forest Whitaker, Johnny Depp, Corey Glover all giving something special to the film. It captures so many raw elements of war that I could never really grasp as a kid and only understood after I myself deployed. It was made by Oliver Stone as a response to the rah rah films of John Wayne in The Green Berets (which I still love) and shows the flip side of combat. It's not all heroic and is mostly terrible and chaotic and frustrating. When I think of Platoon, the first thing that pops into my head is Samuel Barber's Adagio for Strings. It is haunting and beautiful and emotional and just absolutely perfect as the soundtrack to the film. The two are inseparable for me. It might as well have been written explicitly for the film because anytime I hear it in another film I get angry that it's ripping off Platoon. The emotional attachment with that song is very high for me. Stone isn't a very subtle guy with the movies he makes and in his writing and directing but I feel even Platoon eschews that and uses his not so subtle ways to great effect. This is unequivocally his masterpiece, having lived the events himself you know this is from his soul. It shows. This is my second favorite film of all time and I love it even more every time I watch it. Simply a perfect film that I'm glad the Academy was able to reward for others to see.

Children of a Lesser God

I was pretty excited to finally watch this film. Way back when I always got this mixed up with Children of the Corn, which would make for an interesting choice here for sure. But this film is juuust slightly better than the Stephen King film. It tells the story of a new teacher who comes to a small school to help teach deaf kids and notices a young female janitor who is super smart, yet angry and tries to woo her and teach her at the same time. Sounds like some Good Will Hunting type shit, huh? I kinda thought it might really echo that film a bit but it did of course forge it's own way. It's all about the relationship between William Hurt and Marlee Matlin. My first real issue is that the relationship is sprung on us so quickly. I guess that the film didn't want to take an hour leading up to them hooking up and being a couple so we got sort of an abridged version of the events that led up to all that. We establish that she is smart and angry and that he is a quirky teacher who gets results and really likes Matlin almost from the start. That's probably the one major thing I'd change, just make it a bit longer and not make the romance seem so abrupt and forced. Once it gets going, it is great. Lots of sign language without subtitles so you're in the lurch at times if no subtitles, but I feel like that's a purposeful decision to make you feel like the deaf kids in this. Hurt and Matlin have good chemistry and even shacked up together right after filming before I guess they had a tumultuous real life relationship. But the chemistry is there which makes the film better. Eventually you do care about them staying together even if Matlin's conversion is convenient. She becomes less angry and more accepting to Hurt's belief. The big issue in the film is that Matlin doesn't want to have to speak and enter the world of the hearing, she wants guys to learn sign language and be content with silence. The film has it's limitations, though. Why can't either of them compromise earlier and meet in the middle? The deafness feels like a new twist on a way to complicate a love story. The acting is phenomenal and I like the overall film but it isn't as strong as it could be. But also, what other films are dealing this directly with deafness and introducing us to that world? For that, the film is a must see and deserves to be on this list. It's probably the runner up since nothing will beat Platoon and we could all stand to watch this film and learn a little.

Hannah and Her Sisters

This is the first time I've been able to talk about a Woody Allen film at length without focusing on a specific performance since Midnight in Paris in 2011. That's like 25 years in between Best Picture nominations for Allen. One of the things I've been doing alongside this project is watching every single Woody Allen film (going backwards, of course) even if nothing was nominated because he has so many of his films in the Oscar discussion somewhere. Plus, I felt that I needed to educate myself on Allen's oeuvre because he's so prolific and such a part of film history and Oscar history. It's been a fun ride and there's a lot of good stuff from Allen and a lot of shit, too. This film is classic Woody. About three sisters who are upper class intellectuals with a large family and a nice apartment/house, they spout off about operas and art and fancy things. It's the same mold he was doing over and over but this one feels more full, more complete. It's also got a lot going on and is very wordy. We follow the three sisters and their loves over three Thanksgivings which means a lot changes. It's interesting and I like the use of title cards with quotes from the scenes or allusions to upcoming scenes. Allen always is imaginative in his stories. He is always trying something new or different or riffing off another director he loves. I've always thought that his films would be stronger if he didn't act in them and I do think his scenes are the most uninteresting and forced. When I see him I automatically think of him instead of a character and he can never really become much more than just an exaggerated version of himself anyway. I also didn't really like Michael Caine in this one. He was not a very good surrogate for Allen and I don't think he did anything especially well. He was his typical charming self but with the bumbling of Allen thrown in for good measure. A lot of people absolutely love this film and now after watching it, I think I would actually prefer Crimes and Misdemeanors and Husbands and Wives over this. I'd rather this film ended on a more realistic note where Caine's wife finds out he was cheating with her sister and all hell breaks loose but the studio didn't want that. I think I prefer the much more serious Allen, even if he's pretty great at writing about women. I just feel like the film could have been more important and more intense, which is what I think it needed. Especially if you're going to have Allen married to two of the sisters and Caine banging two of the sisters. There needed to be some serious looks at sisterhood and family and love and all that kinda stuff. It's a decent film and it's a very good Allen film but I'm wanting more since this scored a Best Picture nomination. I really do mean that this is top Allen stuff, I've seen enough of his hurried garbage to realize this is why people love his films. And I know I have a couple beloved films of his to watch going back in time but I was hoping for more from this one.

The Mission

This is a very interesting film. It would make a great companion piece to this year's Scorsese film, Silence. It's about Jesuit priests in South America who because of some treaty, lose the protection of the Catholic Church when the mission they have changes hands between Spanish and Portuguese forces. The Portuguese are pro-slavery and plan on taking the natives and this film shows the struggle the mission faces. A lot of the reviews I read online paint this as a boring film where not much happens and I don't get it. Yes, this is a slower film with long stretches of no dialogue but hardly boring. The cinematography won an Oscar and for good reason: the film is luscious and beautiful to look at. It's the strength of the film, for sure, and makes those stretches of silence not matter. The score is fantastic as well from Ennio Morricone and some research shows it consistently showing up near the top of Best Score ever lists. It really adds to the feeling of the film. The acting, though, is really great. Jeremy Irons is perfect as the head Jesuit priest of the mission and while I have my issues with Robert De Niro in this, he's still really good as the intense slaver turned priest. My issue with De Niro is that he sounds like De Niro. Now, the film doesn't really try at any authentic accents but I can't buy De Niro as a priest in 1750 South America with a New York Italian accent. I would have liked some attempt at authenticity, though. His character arc is pretty good, however, and makes for a decent performance. He was once a slaver operating near the mission and then gets arrested and Irons takes him on as he drags a big bag of his things behind him in penitence. He eventually becomes a priest and then defends the mission from the Portuguese who come to destroy everyone. It's a satisfying arc and De Niro is all in with his character, giving it an intensity that makes it worth a watch. And that's the thing about the film: it's a hopeless story. The Jesuit priests are trying to convert natives in South America way back when and then have to realize that because of far off decisions, their territory is now in Portuguese hands and the Catholic Church has abandoned them and they are left to wait for the eventual slaughter. It's a tough film in that respect because there is no Hollywood ending and that's a big reason why I really like it. It's bleak yet beautiful and contemplative. If it wasn't for Platoon, this would be my winner hands down. I'm very glad this was nominated because it's terrific.

A Room with a View

I will have to check but this might be the last of the Merchant-Ivory films I have to watch for the project. I've been a fan of most of them as they have been pretty interesting and decent literary adaptations with some good performances. This film has a very young Helena Bonham Carter, Maggie Smith, and a wonderfully proper and pretentious Daniel Day-Lewis in some of the roles so you think it would be a lot better than it is. I found this film to be mostly boring, though. And really it's the fault of the story and maybe a little bit with the direction. The story is about Carter going to Italy for vacation with her overseer/cousin/chaperone, Maggie Smith. They switch rooms with a father and son so they can have a room with a view. Carter falls for the son who is very progressive and free spirited which is a change from the restrictive and oppressive England so it's a nice little change of pace for her. Smith isn't too keen on Carter and this boy flirting and getting together and tries to keep them apart and tells Carter to not say anything. When they return to England, Carter becomes engaged to DDL, though she isn't all that interested in him. By coincidence, the boy she met in Italy (who is English played by Julian Sands) moves near her in England and they start spending time together and she calls off her engagement and they marry and life is happy. Simple enough stuff but the telling it of it isn't very interesting to me. This film should be very passionate and romantic and have some great drama to it and intrigue and comedy and all that but it doesn't. Subsequent Merchant-Ivory films have more of that type of vibrant writing and direction so maybe it's just the source material for this film? I'm not sure, but I just could not really get into the film even though I wanted to, given the talent involved. It's just dry and boring, unfortunately. I did like that it used title cards to separate scenes into chapters almost and used some of the text from the book as descriptors. That was somewhat fresh feeling and didn't make this film a complete dud for me. It's interesting that this is the second Best Picture film after Hannah and Her Sisters that uses the same sort of technique. The acting is good just underwhelming. And Merchant-Ivory films never lack for great art direction and costumes and all that period piece stuff you come to expect. All in all, this seems like what people think of when they think of stuffy, British period dramas that seem to plague the Oscars and keep people from getting too excited about them. Can't blame them on this one.


Thus concludes 1986. Kind of a mixed bag as far as all the categories go. Best Picture field was pretty good, though. One of my favorite films and one of the strongest BP winners ever helps this year be pretty awesome. And then I find a film in The Mission that is surprisingly great. Like I really liked that film even if a lot of people think it's boring. It's right up my alley and just looks beautiful. Children of a Lesser God is pretty good, also, though it could have been better. Either of these may have won in different years because they seem to tick off a lot of Academy sweet spots and are good films to boot. Hannah and Her Sisters has it's moments but I'm not sure why this Woody Allen film got so much love over some of his other films. A Room with a View is pretty boring, sadly. It has some good performances but they can't save the film for me. I'll take three really good films for a year every time, though. And really the bottom two aren't super terrible or anything. This is a decent year all things considered.

Oscar Winner: Platoon
My Winner:  Platoon
The Mission
Children of a Lesser God
Hannah and Her Sisters
A Room with a View