"Annie Hall" (1977) - can't hold a candle to "Mega-Shark"

For the life of me I don’t understand the appeal of Woody Allen. Maybe I’m just coloured by the knowledge that he actually turned out to be an incestuous paedophile. Maybe I’m still sore that this piece of crap robbed ‘Star Wars’ of an Oscar. Honestly though, I think I’m just shallow and judgemental and the idea that a weedy, nerdy, puny little bald guy could actually be deemed irresistible by a veritable who’s who of 70s actresses just leaves me shaking my head in disbelief.

Woody Allen is at his obsessive compulsive peak in this reportedly ‘romantic adventure’ that follows the rise and demise of a narcissistic, neurotic comedian’s relationship with a narcissistic, neurotic singer. The shots are long and plodding, like their rambling and apparently never-ending psychotherapy sessions and nothing seems to have a particular beginning or end – not the shots, not the acts, not the script not even the core relationship we’re supposed to give a damn about!

There are some cutesy and accurate zings at the movie/tv business in general, and the LA/New York divide, but they mostly come across as the observations of a petulant child who isn’t allowed to sit at the grown ups table.

Annie: It’s so clean out here.

Alvy: That’s because they don’t throw their garbage away, they turn it into television shows.

Woody Allen, like Kenneth Branagh and the man who Allen pipped at the post with this offering, Mr George Lucas, would all be far better served by letting someone else tell their stories. When someone else directs and manages their artistic temperament and ‘vision’, the product becomes far less indulgent and much more compelling (see, ‘Scenes From a Mall’ versus ‘Annie Hall’, ‘Othello’ versus ‘Hamlet’ and ‘Empire Strikes Back’ versus any of the prequels!).

In all honesty the only way we managed to talk ourselves into watching this one all the way through was by bribing ourselves with the promise of ‘Mega-Shark versus Giant Octopus’ (which I may have to review at a later date). But the really sad part was, this schlock-mock horror movie with Deborah Gibson (of 80s big hair, pop light, lycra tights fame) tracking a prehistoric mega-shark and giant octopus through the ocean while they attack cruiseships and airplanes was 1000 times more entertaining than 1977’s Best Picture Winner, ‘Annie Hall’.

I did manage a 34 (which puts it in front of ‘Tom Jones’) and did manage to stay awake for this watching, but Mat only pulled out a 28 (probably because he had to spend so much time keeping me awake!)

Sex-BOMB - "Tom Jones" (1963)

Wow this was bad. So bad. Can’t tell you how much we wanted to turn this off. Mat has actually said he’d rather sit through ‘Forrest Gump’ again than this one!

So where to begin? I guess with the beginning which was actually kind of promising. It was quite a slapstick, funny opening, quite different for the times but the occasional witty dialogue and comical situations soon degenerated into a farce that Monty Python would have been embarrassed to produce.

This is a costume/period drama set amongst the English countryside and aristocracy and Tom Jones is the natural child of someone (e.g., illegitimate) who grows into a debaucherous, lecherous tramp. The plot (if we can stretch it to that) is that Tom is set up by the jealous ‘good and true’ son/nephew and kicked out of the manor to traipse around the country side getting into scraps. At one point he even has sex with someone who may or may not be his mother – and that’s not even the most distasteful scene!

The only reason it has scored even in the 20s (Mat = 22, D=24) is because annoyingly Albert Finney who plays Tom is actually really good. Despite the trainwreck of a movie, he displays a great control and presence and doesn’t ham things up like his co-stars. He almost succeeds in making this incredibly unlikeable character sort of likeable.

The other saving grace were elements of the script (that I believe were lifted straight from the book) which were actually very well written and could have produced a decent film if the filmmakers hadn’t decided to make a gyroscopic film version of Benny Hill meets Pride and Prejudice.

Please don’t ever watch this one! No-one else should have to suffer through this piece of poorly executed, insulting, nauseating and discombobulating mess!

Going Bing's Way - "Going My Way" (1944)

Mat here.

'Going My Way' won Best Picture in 1944, and is a pleasant, but ultimately forgettable, star-vehicle for Bing Crosby. Bing plays Father Chuck O'Malley, a young, hip Catholic priest sent to help a failing New York church.

Father O'Malley has some wacky ideas, like turning the local delinquents into a choir to keep them off the streets. His new-fangled ways don't sit well with old-fashioned Father Fitzgibbon (played by Barry Fitzgerald, who was nominated in both the lead and supporting actor categories for this role, and won best supporting - the rules have since changed so that this can't happen any more), but Father O'Malley's success gradually wins him over.

The songs are definitely a highlight of the film, with Bing & Co. breaking into song often. The classic 'Swinging On A Star' comes from this film, and right picked up it's own Best Song Oscar.

Between songs it tended to be a little dull, and the film is almost half an hour too long - there's a scene where the collection plate is going round and it's clear the church is going to be OK, then there's all this other stuff, including a giant church fire, that was all unnecessary. Cut from the collection plate scene to Bing packing up to go help another church in need and it would have scored better.

I gave this one 54/100 and Danielle gave it 61/100.

Play it again, king of the world - 'Titanic' (1997) and 'Casablanca' (1943)

We’re combining these two reviews because we’re running horribly behind with our weekly film-watching and reviewing goals but also because they’re almost at opposite ends of the classics spectrum and make for a good contrast! That’s what we’re telling ourselves anyway.

They both deal with epic love stories against historically important backdrops and they both have key scenes that have worked their way into the cultural zeitgeist – albeit for fairly different reasons. How many people have caught a ferry in the last 10 years without trying to replicate Kate and Leo’s king of the world moment? And who doesn’t know the line, “this is the start of a beautiful friendship”?

However, ‘Casablanca’ manages to deliver a poignant portrayal of one love story that reflected the choices, the conflicts and the sacrifice of so many people in wartime, while ‘Titanic’ takes an epic tragedy and turns it into an amusement park ride, complete with water features.

'Casablanca' endures because whether you like Bogart or not (mat – yes!, me – no), you care about the situation he finds himself in. You know this girl has hurt him and he’s learnt to rely on himself and do what’s best for him. Suddenly his loyalty and moral code are tested against his selfish desire for self-preservation and love. At the same time, Ingrid Bergman is faced with the ultimate pull between duty and love and I think we can all relate to the struggle between what we want to do and what we know we need to do.

The war, the location and the stories of those in limbo in Casablanca only augment the themes of love, duty, honour and sacrifice. The whole film displays the tug-of-war between the values you have the luxury to treasure in ‘normal society’ versus what needs to be done in the extraordinary circumstances of war. Mat scored this a 96 (making it one of his best rated movies), but I only gave it 82 (although I think my Bogart-bias is showing here!).

In the same way that ‘Casablanca’ managed to comment on life’s truths by showing us at our most stressed and vulnerable, ‘Titanic’ tried to comment on more overarching themes than ‘count the lifeboats before you sail’, but just can’t pull it off. The story is too manipulated and fabricated and that is the real tragedy. You only get snippets of what could actually have served as pivotal and important moments; the young Irish woman in the doomed third-class berths telling her children a bedtime story about everlasting youth or the elderly couple quietly holding hands on their gilded bed even as the water rushes in under them.

Didn’t Cameron think there was enough drama with the sinking of the ‘unsinkable ship’ without having to throw in a class war, a forbidden love, then (god help us) a frame-up and chase scene complete with firearms through the sinking ship?!?!

Having said all that, ‘Titanic’ is still pretty fun to watch, the underwater footage they shot of the real Titanic at the bottom of the Atlantic is incredible and haunting, and the stars are likeable and watchable . Mat scored it a 62, but I could only get to a 56 – I don’t like knowing when they’re trying to jerk my heart strings! A decent script and some heavy editing really could have pushed this into the lasting classics rather than the generational classic I believe it’s destined to be.

Mat here.

I had to add a quick word about Casablanca, as my score of 96/100 has put Casablanca ahead of all the other Best Picture winners I've watched.

All of the elements of Casablanca come together to produce a film as close to perfect as I can imagine. Everything I look for in a film is here: engaging characters, an exciting setting, clever dialogue, actors at the top of their game, some of the best cinematography I have seen, genuine emotion and capped off with a very un-Hollywood ending.

What more is left to say? Casablanca is not only the best Best Picture winner in my book, I would also argue that Casablanca is probably the best movie of all time. We haven't finished every film on the Best Picture list yet (not by a long shot), but I'm doubtful anything will approach the heights of Casablanca.

Green in Black and White - "How Green Was My Valley" (1941)

Mat here.

The next film we reviewed was 1941’s ‘How Green Was My Valley’, based on Robert Llewellyn’s book of the same name. It tells the story of Huw Morgan (Roddy McDowall) as he recalls his formative years growing up with his family in a small Welsh coal-mining village.

The once-happy family is soon embroiled in a mining strike, Huw’s sister (the very pretty Maureen O’Hara) has an ill-fated romance with the local pastor and Huw is sent off to a very nasty school, even though he wants to be in the mines with his father and brothers.

The acting from the entire cast is excellent, with Roddy McDowall putting in a very touching performance, and his parents (played by Donald Crisp and Sara Allgood) make a believable pair.

Whilst not a tear-jerker like ‘Terms of Endearment’ (or ‘Toy Story 3’), there are a lot of hard times for the Morgan family, and the emotion of the film is heightened by the Welsh folk songs sung by the townsfolk.

This film was shot in black-and-white because they couldn’t shoot in the United Kingdom due to WWII, and the area of California they filmed in did not match the colours of Wales at all.

‘How Green’ is also notable as it took the Best Picture award away from a film that is widely considered to be the greatest of all time: ‘Citizen Kane’. Apparently William Hearst’s vicious media campaign against Orson Welles and ‘Citizen Kane’ (his little ego was bruised from the lashing it received as the thinly veiled subject of the esteemed film) ensured it did not receive the votes from the Academy, only scoring one award (script) to ‘How Green’s five.

The five awards were Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor, Best Black-and-White Cinematography and Best Black-and-White Art Direction, and it was nominated for an additional five awards.

We both loved this movie, with all of its heart and tragedy. Danielle gave it 79 and I gave it 82.

"My Fair Lady" - (1964) - as the Queen of Transylvania puts it 'est charmant'

"Women are irrational, that's all there is to that! Their heads are full of cotton, hay, and rags. They're nothing but exasperating, irritating, vacillating, calculating, agitating, maddening and infuriating hags"

As a young girl lines like this infuriated me to no end and made it very hard to enjoy the musical numbers and pretty clothes. 8 year olds don't know much about irony and the portrayal of misogynistic snobs as representations of the English (and European-inspired) patriarchal caste system - they just think Prof Higgins is a knob and don't understand why Eliza didn't throw his damn slippers at his arrogant head!

Granted, I'd still like to see that (note to Emma Thompson who is currently working on the remake) but I can get a lot more positives from this movie and the enduring story of Pygmalion as presented in the 1964 Oscar winner, "My Fair Lady".

Everyone is familiar with the movie itself, I'm sure, Eliza Doolittle is plucked from the streets of London by the emotionally stunted phonetics expert Prof Henry Higgins to win a bet that it is only the cockney slur of their speech that keeps the 'common class' from ascending in society.

What had escaped my notice on earlier, more indignant viewings is that it is Eliza herself who seeks out his teachings to 'better herself' and gain employment in a flower shop. It is Eliza who works her butt off under his grating tutelage and endures hours of abuse with no sympathy from his equally unfeeling staff to grasp her class-raising grammar and enunciation and it is Eliza who decides to leave once the coup at the ball is achieved and who decides to return once Higgins has revealed his attachment to her and proven that he needs her far more than she needs him.

But gender power struggles aside, the really interesting stuff was the politicking that was going on behind the scenes of this film! Rex Harrison plays Higgins with the self-assuredness that he earned in the role on Broadway, but was mightily displeased that his Broadway leading lady (Julie Andrews) was not to be cast as his film Eliza.

The studio (specifically Jack Warner) decided she wasn't well known enough and wanted Audrey Hepburn for the role instead. Poor old Audrey (I think undeservedly) went on to cop decades of flack for this particular casting maneuvering. She spent months taking singing lessons on the understanding that it would be her voice used in the film, indeed she recorded all the songs for the movie and during filming her voice was what she was lip-syncing too, but the more accomplished Marni Nixon's voice was used in the end in all but a few sections of two songs (play the 'can you spot them' game for yourself!).

Julie got her revenge 3 years later though! By this time "Mary Poppins" and "Sound of Music" had made her a star and Jack Warner was begging her to star in his version of Camelot - she refused and because of this, Warner lost his 3 other leads. The film flopped and Warner was fired!

Almost like a real life Pygmalion!

As for the movie itself, the set work is done really well (although again, why can't they go outside just once?!) and the choreography and shot set-up is remarkable. The songs are well-known and timeless and the arrangements flawless.

And of course there's Audrey. Audrey is charming, I really don't care what anyone says! While the caterwauling and 'garn-ing' to begin with is painful to the ears, she does it with great comic timing and pathos and her dignified rise to the object of Prof Higgins eventual quasi-emotional awakening as he has 'grown accustomed to her face' is breathtaking and makes the movie the enduring classic it is today.

Overall, Mat scored it 65 and I gave it 78 and I'll be happy to watch it again with my new found perspective on just who was teaching who in this transformation marvel.

"Terms of Endearment" (1983) - Stays dear

Chick flicks often get a bad name and sometimes deservedly so. Often the female characters spend most of their time obsessing over every minutiae of small village life with their small minds occupied with nothing but quilting patterns and 'will he call' dilemmas. The male characters (if they make an appearance at all) are usually portrayed as shallow, insincere and 1-dimensional idiots.

I am so happy to report that none of those stereotypes hold true in this Best Picture Winner! The writing is superb and captures all the nuances and subtlety of the central mother/daughter relationship that leaves most outsiders utterly bewildered.

The supporting male cast, Jeff Daniels, Jack Nicholson and John Lithgow, while sometimes flawed, are completely believable and well-realised characters who play an important role in their women's lives, but are not central to their well-being or happiness.

Overall it is a picture about strength and the 'slings and arrows' we endure because we have to; but in the midst of the melodrama, there are moments of beautiful sweetness and levity between the cantankerous and repressed Aurora and her seemingly long-suffering daughter, Emma. Jack Nicholson's portrayal of the amorous astronaut is the stuff Oscars are made of, but in true chick flick style it is the female protagonists played with such pathos by Shirley Maclaine and Debra Winger that steal the show.

Whether it is Aurora arguing with her doctor at the head of a table full of male admirers about how old she actually is or Emma having a 'mother meltdown moment' in a supermarket, the ladies are always true to their characters and very true to life.

Mat scored it 85 and I gave it 83 and although it was heart-wrenching at times, it is easily one of the more rewatchable Oscar winners we have encountered to date simply for the care and beauty it takes and shows between these wonderful characters.

Around the World in 80 Days (1956) - felt like 100 days

Where to begin really…. So this was up against “The Ten Commandments” which I think beat it on the epic scale and “The King and I” which actually may be the only other film that could match this on political incorrectness.

I’m sure you’re all familiar with the concept; it’s 1872 and foppish, honour-bound Brit, Phineas Fogg makes a bet (for no apparent reason) that he can make it around the world in 80 days. What follows is the 50s version of a mismatched buddy road movie with Phineas and his Mexican side kick, Passepartout, played by Cantinflas, (who was the highest paid Mexican actor of the 20th Century).

So what follows is 183 mins (over 2 dvds!) of shockingly clichéd and stereotyped scenes from different countries on their whirlwind passage around the world; bull-fighting and flamenco dancing in Spain, elephant rides and human sacrifice in India and wild west brothels and arrow shooting, train-hijacking Indians in America. The best bit was probably when they save the Indian princess from ritual sacrifice only for us to discover that the heavily faked tanned damsel was played by Shirley Maclaine in what she has admitted was her most hideously miscast role.

David Niven is suitably uptight and obsessive-compulsive as the globe-trotting Phineas and Cantinflas is actually very impressive in the role reprised by Jackie Chan in the 2004 remake, bull-fighting his way through the movie and avoiding becoming the comic relief to no purpose.

Best of all, while painted up like an orange, Shirley Maclaine mercifully doesn’t attempt an Indian accent – which is explained away by her being ‘educated at Oxford’. It was interesting to get a look at the 1870s world through a 1950s lens and contains some incredible photography and very few trick shots. The main problem with the film is the sheer length. The entertainment value drops exponentially with every additional minute added and so many of the scenes are actually quite fun and interesting for the first 2 or 3 minutes, but once they’ve continued on for no apparent reason and supplied no further momentum or purpose to the overall story, they just get kind of boring. Overall Mat scored it 62 out of 100 and I gave it 54.

Saying goodbye to a friend - "Toy Story 3"

We had to make special mention of "Toy Story 3" the end of a trilogy and the end of an era, but most of all a beautiful example of what the movies should be.

Sweet, real and all heart.

Andy is all grown up and heading to college and leaving behind all childish things and this includes his old best friends. So what do you do when your sole purpose in life no longer needs you? You self destruct, then realise what life is all about and get on with it!

All in 3D splendour and fun.

Thank you Pixar! You have yet to disappoint.

"Grand Hotel" (1932) - A grand disappointment

This is the oldest Oscar winner we’ve watched to date, it won Best Picture at the 5th annual academy awards ceremony, before the nickname ‘Oscar’ was actually introduced to the Academy Awards (that didn’t happen officially until 1939).

Tellingly this is the only Best Picture Winner in 82 years to not have a single other nomination in any other category and we can really see why. I think this was possibly one of the first ‘mega-cast disasters’. Recent films under that category would include; “The Player” (1992), (actually anything by Robert Altman in the 90s) and “Valentine’s Day” (2010) – these are the movies that you pay your money to see and walk out shaking your head, rubbing sleep from your eyes and saying, “But it was such a good cast…”

And in the same grand tradition, “Grand Hotel” did have a stellar cast of who’s who in the 1930s. MGM broke the mould by using 5 of its top-ranked stars in this movie; Greta Garbo, John Barrymore, Joan Crawford, Lionel Barrymore and Wallace Beery. Prior to this film, the conventional wisdom was to only use one or two stars and keep costs down – after this movie, they realised it wasn’t as important to keep the costs down as it was to keep the egos in check!

Garbo wouldn’t speak to or even deign to be in the same room as Crawford. Crawford retaliated by constantly playing Marlene Dietrich songs between takes (Garbo and Dietrich had a long running rivalry). Beery insisted that for him to take the role of the amoral magnate he be the only cast member allowed to speak with a German accent (despite the entire film being set in Berlin and populated entirely with German characters like Felix von Gaigern and Flaemmchen) and reportedly did his best to steal every scene he shared with his famous co-stars.

If you, my dear readers are wondering why I’ve gone on for 4 paragraphs without mentioning the movie it’s because it was a colossal disappointment to us! It was the first Garbo movie for Mat and myself and despite her delivering one of the most famous lines in history, “I want to be alone”, her performance bordered on the ridiculous. Whether it was completely her interpretation of her character or the director getting back at her for insisting on reshoots so she had equal screen time with Crawford, or perhaps that she couldn’t actually act, she was painful to watch.

The majority of the relationships between the characters felt strained and false and even before we did some background reading we knew that this movie was not produced on a happy set. Several of the characters who were supposed to be in love seemed to actively despise each other.

The real disappointment was that it starts off quite promising. There are some witty script moments, with some true 30s snap and sass, “Oh, you're a little stenographess? Fascinating. I don't suppose you'd, uh, take some dictation from me sometime, would you?” [said while he has her up against a pillar]. Some of the establishing shots of the hotel and background characters are really spectacular, but overall it’s just let down by the haphazard dénouement of the story and the forced feel of the characters relationships and predicaments.

I scored it 46/100 and Mat a generous 42/100!

"Marty" (1955) - This ain't no dog!

We picked this because we were tired and it’s the shortest Best Picture Winner, but we were so glad we did! It kept us awake and interested and chatting long into the night! If there were one word to describe “Marty” it would have to be charming. Just charming.

It’s a simple story of two lonely people defying societal expectations, familial pressures and their own pasts to find happiness with each other; not because their families are at war, or one is from ‘the wrong side of the tracks’ or has some hideous disability, but just because they’re both kind of ordinary looking and have faced rejection far too many times. One of my favourite lines comes from Marty himself and sums up the feeling of the two main characters before they meet, “You don't get to be good-hearted by accident. You get kicked around long enough, you become a professor of pain.”

We follow their first date and watch as they gently encourage each other to come out of their respective shells and face life again. Then we see their struggles as they try and break out of the roles their families have happily but innocuously kept them in for so long; changing one part of any system will always necessitate change in the rest of the system, but those systems can be mighty resistant!

This is a beautiful, simple and charming movie that was a lot of fun to watch (despite the occasional cringe factor as Marty clumsily tries to compliment his new friend “You know, us dogs aren't really so much of the dogs that we think we are.”) and an odd and (through modern eyes) seemingly misogynistic outburst from Marty 2/3rds of the way in.

Overall I scored it 83% and Mat gave it, 76/100. We’d recommend this to anyone who has ever doubted they deserve to be loved or questioned if they would ever really find it.

"The Greatest Show on Earth" (1952) - my arse!

Shite. Utter shite.

The best part of this movie was literally when it was over.

Ok. There were some other positives. The circus stunts and photography were amazing. Really incredible and you really got into the rivalry between the two trapeze artists. I mean you knew one of them was going to be horribly maimed at some point, and I must admit after the first half hour I was just begging for one of them to fall just to break up the monotony of the rest of the film – but still their work was impressive.

This is especially true because Cecile B. De Mille (aside from being a McCarthy loving rat) was apparently a bit of a ‘method’ director and insisted all his stars do their own stunts – which entailed all the leads learning highwire, trapeze and elephant training! Again, considering one of the male leads was terrified of heights, this is especially impressive to watch and does increase your involvement with those stunts.

But overall this completely deserves its reputation as the least deserving Best Picture Winner. Given the poor acting, the terrible script, the plodding plot line, the predictability and the overly long and pointless musical numbers we couldn’t understand why it had ever been nominated, let alone how it won! Then we did some research and discovered that De Mille was a loyal fan of McCarthy who was well and truly on his commie witch hunt at the time and the other films nominated that year all had some sort of connection to ‘black-listed’ writers, directors or producers.

As if McCarthy didn’t do enough damage – he had to destroy the Oscars as well! Nothing makes that clearer than the fact that 1952 saw the release of arguably the greatest (certainly one of the most enduring) movie musicals ever made, Gene Kelly and “Singing in the Rain”, but with a writer on the ‘black-list’ and directors leaving left (haha) right and centre ‘under suspicion’ it didn’t even rate a nomination.

By far the funniest moment came when Sebastian (the renegade trapeze artist) corners the young yet competitive ingénue, Holly on a haystack. In a scene seemingly ripped off completely from a Pepe Le Peau cartoon he whispers haltingly (in a terrible French accent), “The girl may say no, but the woman in you says yes”.

By far the most disappointing element was the climactic train crash (spoilers are ok because really, we don’t want anyone subjecting themselves to this thing – ever!) with lions and tigers on the loose through the wreckage and not a single person gets eaten! Or even nipped a little! And you’re seriously dying for someone to get eaten by that point! It just drove home what a fluff piece this was, the good ol’ American way of life and how it should be preserved for all.

On the upside, the lead male, Charlton Heston clearly inspired Steven Spielberg, whose father took him to see it (instead of taking him to a real circus!) and that bit of childhood disappointment resulted in the iconic image of Indiana Jones which I'm sure you can recognise from the poster pic of Charlton.

Overall, I scored it 33% and Mat, 32% making this the lowest scored Best Pic Winner to date, and dear god I don’t see how any could be worse!

Sailing to byzantium - "No Country for Old Men" (2007)

Jen’s not going to like us after this, but we loved this movie. In the way you love getting a really big, nasty splinter out – it’s not fun and it’s usually gross, but damn it’s satisfying at the end!

This was an incredible movie, and like so many of the Coen brother’s pictures (where so much rests on their shoulders as editors, directors, writers and producers) it is truly a joy when it all comes together. The film, based very closely on the novel by Cormac McCarthy, follows one of the oddest cat and mouse games ever played out on screen; absolutely epic at times, yet fundamentally simple and tragically inevitable without once being predictable.

This is definitely not for the squeamish as the main bad guy’s weapon of choice is a cattle stunning captive bolt pistol and everyone ends up bleeding profusely at some point. The hitman who is the source of much blood shed is played with understated, psychopathic glee by Javier Bardem who deservedly won the Best Actor Oscar for this role, despite initially turning it down because he couldn’t drive, spoke bad English and hates violence! You really couldn’t pick it!!!

Tommy Lee Jones delivers such a peaceful and solid performance that it encouraged us to watch “The Missing” that same weekend, just to keep watching him (of course that was a mistake), but he is really enjoyable in his role as the small town sheriff dismayed at the creatures he finds invading his world and knowingly outclassed by their sheer bravado and psychopathy.

This is not a happy story, and not one to watch when you’re distracted, but it’s well worth the effort of paying some attention and allowing yourself to get caught up and taken away by the character’s and their journeys. I gave it 83/100 (it lost points on social relevance and ‘did it make you think’ and Mat gave it 92/100 because he liked the idea of the comment on an increasingly violent society and the people who are sometimes ill-equipped to deal with such evil. While we loved “Juno” which was also up for Best Pic that year, we think this did deserve the coveted Best Picture Oscar for 2007.

"I coulda been a contender" - On The Waterfront (1954)

Mat here.

This week we watched the Marlon Brando classic 'On the Waterfront' (or 'Fronte del Porto' as we have on the Spanish movie poster Danielle found to illustrate the film for this week).

Brando plays Terry, a former boxer turned dockworker. The film throws us into the middle of the action with Terry unwittingly setting his friend up to be murdered by thugs working for local dock boss and gangster Johnny Friendly. Terry wrestles with the tough choice of keeping his mouth shut and maintaining the status quo or breaking ranks and angering both the gangsters and his fellow dockers.

Brando owns this role (for which he won Best Actor), and you really feel for this tough guy trapped in this life and struggling to figure out why he feels so bad and what the right thing to do is.

Here we have another great performance from Karl Malden (whom we last saw in fellow best picture winner Patton) as the drinkin', fightin' & swearin' preacher encouraging the oppressed dockers to stand up against the men controlling the waterfront. He was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for this.

The visual language was very strong with lots of shots using barriers like fences and pigeon cages to separate characters and enforce the idea that the characters are trapped in this life. Danielle felt this was not subtle enough, but it worked for me.

The music deserves singling out for being awful! So intrusive and overblown, emotional moments were blunted by the score's sledgehammer approach. The score was nominated for an Oscar, which baffles me.

On the Waterfront won eight Academy Awards. In addition to Best Picture & Actor, it also was awarded Best Director, Screenplay, Supporting Actress, Set Decoration, Cinematography and Editing.

Danielle gave this 67 and I gave this one 78. This is a fairly large difference in the scores (although not as large as the 30-point gap in Forrest Gump), which I'm attributing to this being the first time I've seen the movie, whereas Danielle had seen it before.

Another glimpse at a bygone era - "The Last Emperor" (1987)

We had a guest reviewer join us for our on-theme dinner and viewing tonight. We ate salt and pepper squid with julienne stir fried vegetables and drank Tiger beer while watching the Best Picture winner from 1987. This was an odd movie. An incredibly epic movie and the scale and logistics behind it were phenomenally detailed and grand, but an odd movie. It maps a fascinating time in Chinese history, from the coronation of ‘the last emperor’ at age 3 in the Forbidden City to his abdication in 1912 (that he didn’t know about, because he was still only 7 years old) and traces his life of opulence and absolute rule as the all powerful ‘Lord of 10,000 years’ at age 3 to the life of peasant gardener in the communist China of the 60s.

It is this illustration of the extremes of his life that make it such interesting, odd, but compelling viewing. In the midst of this epic movie (nearly 15,000 people were hired as extras) and life, the director is able to find and highlight some painfully sweet and subtle moments; the young boy climbing roof tops to get a glimpse at his ‘kingdom’ beyond the Forbidden City, the young man asking his new tutor not to tell his minders of the existence of his pet mouse – his one true friend.

There are some gaps in the story-telling - but it does justice to the span of his life and his humbling journey as he faces truths few of us would have the courage to confront.The script is simple, but to the point and the photography is breath-taking in places and suitably claustrophobic in others. The outstanding element for us was the quality of the (for us) mainly unknown actors amongst the more seasoned faces; Peter O’Toole is there as the new tutor determined to open the eyes of his isolated pupil and Joan Chen is the 17-year old Empress eager to please her 12-year old Emperor. The stand-out though was John Lone as the adult Pu Yi. His performance was understated, soulful and suitably constrained but the confusion is always evident on his face. Wherever he happens to be imprisoned at the time; his own palace, with the Japanese, the Russians, finally his own people, he never lets you forget that he is striving to find his place and challenge the system from within.

We didn't know too much about it's contenders in 1987 - but I can say categorically it absolutely deserved to kick "Moonstruck" and it's overwrought arse! Overall, Mat scored it 69 out of 100, Anthony gave it 65/100 and I came out with the highest score at 70/100 – I think in part due to my overall interest in Chinese history which would definitely increase the enjoyment factor for any viewer (I think the salt and pepper squid helped too).

The Hills Fill My Heart with "The Sound of Music" (1965)

I’m not too sure how many people in the world don’t thrill just a little to the image of Julie Andrews swirling atop an Alp and breaking into “The hills are alive with the sound of music…” If you know anyone, I put it to you now, that they are lying. Certainly amongst our generation it is one of the most successful and enduring musicals; the story of the love between a wannabe nun and a stern sea captain in the time of Nazis is as timeless as Rodger and Hammerstein’s specially written score. The original von Trapp’s musical selections were considered just a little too folksy for the wider audience and hence, the music we know and love today was created, “Sixteen Going on Seventeen”, “Favourite Things” and “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria”.

I knew this was going to be a difficult review to remain objective on – this movie revolves around some of my fondest childhood memories and I can’t help but feel happy when I watch it now. I did promise I would try and remain objective though, so here goes…

From the opening shot flying over the Alps you know you’re in for something different – apparently the downdraft from that helicopter nearly blew Julie clear off the mountain – but you would never know it from the shot. According to back stage rumours Christopher Plummer didn’t enjoy working with Julie Andrews, he likened it to “getting hit over the head with a Valentine” and didn’t care for any of the children, insisting that the child he carries up the mountain in the final scene be switched because the actor playing Gretal had put on too much weight on location. Here’s the thing though. You would never know it. The film immerses you completely in that changing world – the first half keeps you in engaged in the burgeoning relationship between Maria and the children, then Maria and the Captain. The second act is all about how those relationships are going to be affected by the charge of the Nazis into Austria and the sacrifices the Captain is willing to make to keep those relationships intact.

Mat thinks the second act drags as the focus shifts to the politics of the Anschluss and the family’s escape from Austria and the mood definitely shifts and the pace slows – in that way it almost becomes like a different movie. However I wonder if we were able to watch it fresh and not after 20 years of watching it with a child’s eyes and interpretations if we could enjoy the second half more because the first half invests us in the characters and what happens to them towards the end of the movie.

Or maybe it would still just drag! We may never know!

Regardless and with full bias in mind - I gave it an objective 79% and Mat a very generous 74%. We both really did try to watch with an open mind – but this film is so well-known to us and so pervasive in our culture we may not have quite succeeded – but then that speaks to the resonance of the film anyway and makes it a worthy Best Picture Winner in our blog!

Tap-dancing into the bottom - "An American in Paris" (1951)

“That’s quite a dress, what holds it up?”
“Modesty.”

As we sat munching on traditional “I have a cold and don’t care” Friday night fare of chicken nuggets and potato gems, the film was broken up by a call from Sharon who recounted the horrors of giving birth to her second child in the NSW public hospital system – maybe the gritty realism altered my ability to receive this paisley and pastel offering from the master tapper.

Cut back to 1951 and the film-making was obviously broken up by Minneli divorcing Judy Garland, the leading lady (Cyd Charisse) getting knocked up and the replacement 19-year old leading lady recovering from post-war malnutrition. Somehow, they danced gaily on. But why? And why did it capture the hearts of a usually far more cynical academy?

It started off with a quick and witty script, and some great performances, but apparently they overtaxed the writer so much that the last 20 minutes of the movie has no dialogue at all as they dance their way through the French masters. I’m a wannabe dancer at heart and Mat’s an artist (of the fine kind) and neither of us got anything pleasant from that experience.

A struggling artist, a French ballerina, a blonde and saucy sugar mama (perhaps the first celluloid cougar?) and an incredibly cantankerous and talented pianist should have been and started off to be pure MGM gold. We’re treated to numerous dance numbers as Kelly hangs in mid-air and delivers his usual flawless performance, but why that has to be in a beige Wiggles skivvy and matching skin tight pants I just don’t know.

Mat thinks I’m being too harsh, but it is in concert with my level of disappointment – this was a Gene Kelly dancing movie that won Best Picture up against “Streetcar Named Desire”, I was really expecting something special et ca n’est pas ca.

I gave it 58/100 and Mat was even less impressed with 57/100.

So “Out of Africa” and “Forrest Gump” are left in the dust and “An American in Paris” takes the lead as the worst of the Best Picture Winners.

'I had a farm in Africa' - "Out of Africa" (1985)

Here’s the problem with “Out of Africa” in a nutshell. It’s just not inspiring. That’s why it hasn’t scored well and it’s why it’s the last of our movies that I’ve gotten around to reviewing, despite it being watched well over a month ago.

I was utterly disappointed because it had everything, Meryl Strep (and we know how much I love and admire her), Robert Redford (and we know how much my mother-in-law loves and admires him), actually shot in Africa with real lions really menacing Meryl Strep. But even with all of that it’s just really underwhelming.

The photography is impeccable, the scenery and Africa, as a character in the film is beautiful, but you just never feel the chemistry; not between Redford and Streep (except for one brief shining hair-washing moment) and not between Streep and the country her character purportedly loves so much. This means there’s no way you can feel for them once they’re separated which kind of kills the emotional impact of the main plot points.

Given this was up against the stunning movie, “The Colour Purple” we just really can’t figure out why it won. Streep is good as always, her Danish/African accent is flawless (I’m judging that on the basis of knowing a man from that region of Africa and she sounds a lot like his mother!) and there are some wonderfully subtle moments. When she’s told she has contracted syphilis from her philandering husband - her reaction is pricelessly Victorian and painfully understated. Maybe that was the problem – they overdid it on the understatement!

Despite the presence of some redeeming features and interesting behind the scenes tidbits (e.g., Meryl completing an extended take with her normal poise and elegance despite the fact that a large flying insect had made it’s way into her underclothes moments before ‘action’ was called), this didn’t score well with any of us – including our enamoured Lyn or our visiting reviewer, Stella and actually falls to the bottom of the list of Best Pics to date.

Lyn = 58/100
Mat = 60/100
Stella = 61/100
D = 68/100

I still love you Meryl!

Extraordinary Film - "Ordinary People" (1980)

Mat here.

Ordinary People (1980) tells the story of Conrad, a teenager who has gone through some painful times and now struggles to face the banal monotony of everyday life. His parents want to carry on as if nothing's wrong (though in very different ways), and Conrad eventually seeks help from a therapist.

We came to this movie with no expectations and were floored by the quality of the acting, writing, direction and cinematography.

The three principle actors, Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore and Timothy Hutton, all give the performance of their careers. Hutton's performance in particular outshines just about any actor and role I'd care to name - early in the film, his anxiety is so palpable it's like he's vibrating off the screen. He was awarded a well deserved Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his work (despite having more screen time than Mary Tyler Moore was nominated for Best Actress).

The tragic banality of the dialogue is masterful, ramping up the discomfort and disconnection Conrad feels, and the therapy scenes are some of the best of their kind. Special mention from me goes to the cinematography - their are some truly exceptional sequences, compositions and one-shots (longs scenes where there are no edits), and they are all the more impressive given the bland suburban settings of the story.

This film marks the directorial debut of Robert Redford who won Best Director, and Alvin Sargent received Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay).

This film is not easy to watch, with lots of uncomfortable truths and themes of guilt, suicide and grief, but it is extremely rewarding and believable and we can understand it's nomination and win for Best Picture this year.

Danielle gave this a 94/100 and I gave it 95/100, equalling my score for Silence of the Lambs, and making it equal first place so far. My mum, Lyn scored it 75/100 - but she's a hard marker and it beat out "Coal Miner's Daughter" which is a personal fave of hers! Lyn's main complaint was the lack of exposition, which didn't bother us as much, probably because of the amount of time we've spent studying psych!

D here - and I had to add as a budding therapist myself it was great to see some serious therapy going on onscreen - no "Good Will Hunting" breakthroughs on the last session before his 18th birthday. Nasty and gritty and confrontational - just the way it should be! (Although I have yet to advocate masturbation to a patient - I'm usually trying to encourage them to cut down or at least stop doing it in public - but we're talking pretty different patient populations!

He Said/She Said - "Forrest Gump" (1994)

Mat and I are usually in fairly close agreement on a lot of these movies - not this time though!

The only fair thing to do seems to be to include both our views on this one, so, Mat's review is up first in blue and mine follows in purple (I know it looks pink, but it's purple!)

"Stupid is as stupid does"

This is the first time our project has felt like hard work. We watched this travesty with our friends Jen and Adam, an act that is bound to test the friendship. Jen, Adam and I agree that this is probably the worst movie to win the Best Picture Oscar (although Titanic might be a close second).

Despite being a terrible movie, there were some things Forrest Gump scored well on. Well, two things. First, the soundtrack was excellent with really great music from the 1960's and 1970's. And the visuals, always Robert Zemeckis' strength, were also impressive with nice long shots, stunning landscapes and cutting-edge special effects (Lt. Dan's legs, inserting Gump into old footage etc).

Pity it was all stuck inside such a shallow and manipulative piece of manufactured Hollywood schmaltz-shlock.

In order to win Best Picture, it was judged to be more entertaining than Four Weddings and Funeral, more interesting than Quiz Show and superior to The Shawshank Redemption, which to me is insanity.

I scored it 44/100 and I was being generous.

And that's all I have to say about that.


"I'm not a smart man, but I know what love is"

When we first started compiling lists of Best Picture winners, I will admit this was not on the top of my ‘can’t wait to see’ list, but no way it’s worse than Titanic! (Of course the scores aren’t in yet).

I will admit that it’s manipulative and not particularly subtle about it.

I will also admit that I can’t see why it beat out “The Shawshank Redemption” which was an incredible movie.

But I can’t say it’s the least deserving ever. What’s wrong with a little schmaltz?!

All we’ve been watching for the last several months has been war and crime, blown up, shot up or skinned up bodies and psychopaths eating people’s livers! So again, what’s wrong with some schmaltz!?!?

It was a visually beautiful movie – there’s a shot (ok, in the war scenes) where a helicopter comes into frame just as another takes off behind it and the composition of that logistically difficult shoot was perfect.

Gary Sinese puts in one of the most moving portrayals of a man trying to reconcile himself with a new destiny that I have ever seen and Tom Hanks spends the entire movie mimicking the kid who played Forrest as a child. And doing it well!

Apparently the original book was intended as (or at least has been interpreted as)an attempt to portray the baby boomer generation’s blindness to what was going on around them through a man too stupid to realise what he was involved in.

I took a different message away from the film, which I actually enjoyed watching (despite the odd derisive laugh at clumsy attempts to jerk the heart strings) and scored it 74/100.

I saw it as an example of living up to expectations. It would have been easy (and more hygienic) for his ‘mama’ to give up on him and let him go to special school and let his back stay crooked; she never expected below average for him and he never delivered below average. And finally, despite all the money, fame and success in the world, love is the hardest but most precious asset you can ever attain.

And that’s all I have to say about that.

Off topic - "Julie & Julia" (2009)

We're now 3 movies behind ("Out of Africa", "Ordinary People" and "Forrest Gump") but I had to make special mention of 2009's "Julie and Julia" considering it tells the parallel stories of the two "Js" making their mark on life and features a blog poster prominently.

It was such a charming movie - so nicely split between the two stories and I was so glad they didn't give in and go for the more Hollywood of endings (no spoilers, as promised). Meryl is, as always, incredible - you'd swear Julia Childs was back to life and Amy Adams is her usual adorable self - even when playing a self-obsessed narcissist!

But most importantly and why I chose to include this in a blog of Best Picture winners is, I just want it on the record now that we are totally open to book deals, movie/tv offers, anything that involves copious amounts of cash to offset our spending on this experiment! We'll spruik your short films and student assignments (hell I'll edit your assignments if you want and the pay's right!) and generally sell out to 'the man' anytime and for pretty much any price.

We clear?

Ok good. Now up next is "Out of Africa" (and more of the incomparable Meryl Strep) but soon to come will be a 'throw down' of insignificant proportions as Mat and I go head to head over "Forrest Gump". This could actually signal the end of our marriage - well at the least the happy part of it! But we're willing to do it for you, our loyal (and as yet anonymous) reading public!

An offer we couldn't refuse - "The Godfather, Part I" (1972)

Mat here. It was time for the godfather of all mafia movies.

Our gracious hosts for this film were Jen and Adam. Jen had never seen The Godfather, but afterwards she said it felt like she had already seen it due to how much pop culture has borrowed from the film.

The Godfather (1972) is the first in a trilogy of films based on Mario Puzo's award-winning novel of the same name. The first film tells the story of the Corleone crime family during the 1940's and 1950's. Don Corleone (Marlon Brando) tries to keep his business respectable by refusing to buy into drugs, but this results in an attempt on his life. His son Michael (Al Pacino in his first major role) takes his place as part of the crime family and avenges his father, which sparks a war between the families.

Pacino is excellent, portraying a young man certain he's never taking part in the family's criminal activities who gradually becomes more calculating and ruthless than any of his initiated bothers. Director Francis Ford Coppola campaigned hard for Marlon Brando to play Don Corleone. Brando was notoriously difficult to work with and the movie studio Paramount was against the idea. True to form, Brando read much of his dialogue from cue cards and refused to accept his Best Actor Academy Award, instead sending along Native American actress Sacheen Littlefeather in his place.

George Lucas, a good friend of Coppola, put together the 'To The Mattresses' newspaper montage of real footage from the 1930s mob wars. This was in return for Coppola’s work on “American Graffiti” so Lucas asked to go uncredited. This sequence was supposed to bring us back from the intermission Coppola was going to include, due to the length of the film.

The film also won the Best Writing (Adapted Screenplay) Oscar for Coppola and Puzo.

Unsurprisingly, we scored The Godfather well across the board with Danielle giving it 80%, Adam 83%, Jen 84% and 89% from me.

In addition to the outstanding acting; the direction, dialogue, cultural importance and believability all contributed to the film's high marks.

We're also looking forward to watching The Godfather Part II, as it also won a Best Picture Oscar.

NB – from Danielle: if you’re interested in movie making/mob history then check out the making of/behind the scenes stuff on the Godfather. Reportedly, when Coppola asked one of the supporting characters if he could spin a revolver for the shot, he replied “What, are you kidding?” And in true life imitating art (imitating the mafia) one character supposedly won the part based more ‘who he knew’ than sheer talent! But I can’t say anymore!

"Good Evening Clarice" - "The Silence of the Lambs" (1991)

So this was the first movie we watched with a bit of a broader audience – our two best friends, Jen and Adam. We all decided we didn’t want war or tear jerkers but psychopathic serial killers would be fine!

This is one of only 3 movies to win the ‘grand slam’ top 5 Oscars – we’ve already watched the first grand slam winner, “It Happened One Night” and I have to say expectations were high. Not least because this is such a well-known film (“I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti”!) and because to date it is the only horror film to win a Best Picture Oscar. So it must have been pretty good, right? Right?!

I’m no good with the misdirection - it was great! So entertaining! Anthony Hopkins is the living embodiment of gleeful evil and Jodie Foster’s portrayal of the floundering Starling with the first assignment from hell is completely compelling. Jen and Adam’s chief complaints were about the 'emotional response' and ‘did it make you think’categories but for me, way back in 1991 it started a love affair with all things true crime and may have lead (in some strange and small way) to my chosen profession. I love a psychological thriller that’s true to the psychology of it’s characters, as I told Clarice to wait for morning to search “Yourself Storage” Adam rightly pointed out, she wouldn’t do that – she’s a boots and all kind of girl!

Jen didn’t care much for the lambs, which probably contributed to her lower score (given that the whole ‘screaming lamb’ thing is kind of important to Starling), but we all agreed it deserved to win against it’s competitors that year (“Beauty and the Beast”, “Prince of Tides”, “Bugsy” and “JFK”). Of course anything that doesn’t require catheterisation to get through beats “JFK”.

We thoroughly relished the pure entertainment value of such great actors really getting to sink their teeth into such extreme characters and I loved the exposure it provided to criminologists and forensic specialists. Anything that increases understanding of the incomprehensible aspects of human nature scores well in my view! Like “The Hurt Locker” it makes you ask yourself what these people give up to keep us safe from the horrors in this world.

One of my favourite (and horribly disturbing) anecdotes comes from John Douglas, the FBI profiler who was the inspiration (and consultant) for the Jack Crawford character. He had returned home from a devastating body recovery scene involving multiple child victims to find his wife cooking dinner. As she chopped the carrots she managed to take off a portion of her finger. Crying in pain and surprise and trying to bandage her bleeding hand she called for help. Dispassionately her husband surveyed the scene and responded, “It’s not that bad, what’s the fuss?”

Needless to say that his marriage did not survive, but who knows how many people did survive because of his sacrifices? I think that’s a story worth telling and “The Silence of the Lambs” does make you consider those kinds of stories. “You don’t want Hannibal Lector in your head.” But sometimes that’s the only way to catch them!

Overall we scored it 85% (Jen), 87% (Adam), 91% (D) and 95% (Mat), putting the delectable Hannibal Lector and ‘good bag, cheap shoes’ Clarice Starling well ahead in the Best of the Best Picture stakes!

Back to basics - "Rebecca" (1940)

This blog thing is hard! I want to make the entries as interesting as possible, but I also want to catch up as less than a month in, we’re already nearly a month behind!

We had “Rebecca” delivered via our Bigpond account (essential for all movie lovers without limitless budgets!) and as soon as it arrived I wanted to watch it. I had studied the book in highschool and always loved the story, so I wanted to see how it was adapted to film. We were both really curious to see Hitchcock’s only Oscar winner and we both enjoy watching Hitchcock torture his female leads (on and offscreen) and this certainly didn’t disappoint.

Joan Fontaine is absolutely stunning and suitably awkward as the young and naïve new Mrs De Winter next to the frosty and inscrutable Laurence Olivier. Apparently poor Joan was detested by her onscreen love interest, Laurence, who had wanted his then real-life girlfriend, Vivien Leigh in the role. In true Hitchcock style this was used to enhance her discomfort on set; he told her that the entire cast hated her and she spent most of her time between takes hiding in her trailer and I think that really comes across in the film! She just doesn’t fit in (as of course she isn’t supposed to).

Our biggest problem with this film is our chief complaint with many of Hitchcock’s films; he was such a control freak he would film most scenes against a screen rather than risk having outdoor conditions interfere with his ‘process’. This really distracted us in some scenes; they were having an emotional discussion about the drowning of the first Mrs DeWinter on top of a cliff and it’s supposed to be a very tense, emotional scene, but you’re just watching the bad screen effects.

Mrs Danvers was suitably creepy and cold and you really feel the new Mrs DeWinter's discomfort and awkwardness. One of my favourite scenes involves her breaking a small ornament and hiding it in the back of a drawer because she’s too intimidated by the house staff to tell them she’s broken it.

It’s a great story, full of the twists from Daphne Du Maurier’s original book, masterfully adapted by the master of the twist (and the original blue screen) Hitchcock. The acting was a little overwrought, which was interesting considering how natural the acting was in “It Happened One Night” which was made 6 years earlier.

Apparently the film was so big in Spain that even now, the two-piece cardigans that Joan Fontaine wears in the movie are still called ‘rebeccas’; so that has to bump the score up on Social Context/Relevance scale! (which we use to take into account pop culture value).

Our final scores were: Mat – 77%, Danielle – 73%.