The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

[tarpilot]

I agree that Hereafter was pretty wretched (I wouldn't hesitate to call the "afterlife" visualizations the absolute aesthetic and conceptual nadir of Eastwood's career), but I saw it right after I saw Never Let Me Go which I hated so I'm willing to give it another shot with a clean slate...

[knives]

1971
A Clockwork Orange-Is there anything unique I can say about this one? Is there any better evidence that Kubrick is great for cinematic beginners? I suppose it's easiest to just say he hits it out of the park.

Fiddler on the Roof-I am probably not the best judge of this movie since I grew up with it as such an essential aspect to my life, but even as I try to push that nostalgia to the side it comes across as a really good movie to me with great performances (though Mostel was better), perfect music and Jewison's tendency to over direct being kept in check for the most part.

Now I remember someone on the board having trouble with the way the movie concerning the third daughter's predicament and upon this watching I looked to that as best as I could. I have to say though that I disagree. Tevye may have come to a terrible decision, but it seems the film mourns that decision. That is his failing and where he is ultimately not able to accept that tradition must change for the good. Consider how throughout the rest of the movie tradition is shown as something to be broken when it oppresses and it only becomes more clear that the film and Tevye part on this point.

The French Connection-Finally a movie I haven't seen before. I feel terrible judging this one as a whole bunch of cop films from the same time had me realize in seconds that Doyle was going to fail. That said if you're going to use something as a jumping point there are far worse things Friedkin could have chosen than Peter Yates at his pop best. There are so many elements that work so well here that even though they're so used up even this early in the game it doesn't hinder the enjoyment. A large amount of this is how Hackman plays Doyle in addition to how he's written. The man comes across as somewhere between Bullit and Dirty Harry. The way they spin the character though makes me unsure by how much is him being terrible and how much the expectations of the genre are playing with me. Like that big scene in the bar. I take it that it's supposed to show Doyle as having some racist qualities, but they never make that explicit so it could be simple coincidence. A lot of little things like that are worked through the film and it builds up in a way that is thrilling. Definitely a perfect example of less is more at work. Though it's not my choice this time I still feel it's one of the stronger winners I've seen. At the very least I appreciate one of these being noticeably under two hours.

The Last Picture Show-It's really amazing how much better this is than my memory from just six months ago indicated. I think it still manages to be my least favorite Bogdanovich, but that's more a high compliment to him than anything else. It's really tied for first place both for how wonderful it looks and how it touches upon so many aspects of perspective in just the right way. I think in many ways it one ups some of Midnight in Paris' themes of looking forward and backward as hindrances for existing in this present.

Nicholas and Alexandra-I'll admit this is the weakest BP nominee of the year and also for Schaffner's amazing run that this centers on, but that still makes it better than most. The run time is used perfectly and once you get into it's Merchant-Ivory form of storytelling it becomes tremendously fun. It really started to run for me during Alexandra's speech before the first revolt being shown. From there it has a quiet energy that hides behind it's mannered appearance that makes it not boring despite outward appearances.

The look of the film is magnificent too communicating a painterly that gets smashed to pieces in sudden bursts. Actually that may be where the genius of the sedate style is. The scenes with the upper crust is this mannered little charade, but when we get to the lower classes things explode in a way that's more familiar of Schaffner. It makes such a distinct line that the class commentary doesn't need to really even be spoken of it's so visually at the forefront. This movie surprisingly comes together as a truly good experience I must admit despite initial reservations. Maybe I would have preferred Shaft to fill in that fifth wheel, but this is still a very pleasant option.

Also Tom Baker as Rasputin is one of the best casting ideas ever. I just want to see a movie of that for three hours instead.

My vote-A Clockwork Orange

[movielocke]

1972
overall, 46th

Cabaret - I still remember being struck by how incredible a moment that three way kiss was, but ultimately I've never got the appeal of Minnelli, who is ugly, or the bizarre guy emceeing the film who ridiculously won an oscar for making goggly eyes and gasping out lines while in mime makeup.

Deliverance - The film is oft cited for two reasons, the dueling banjos scene and for breaking the taboo by the onscreen male-on-male rape. But the film is so much more than those two moments. it's a brutal and astounding piece of filmmaking and that is unforgettable.

The Emigrants - To me, I didn't care much for this film at first because it is so harsh, and so bleak. This is one of those films that reminds you that it is better to have to be on medicaid in today's world than to live as a rich man in the world of yesteryear. As Woody Allen says in Midnight in Paris, describing the key problem with the past, "It's the 1920s, you don't even have penicillin". Everything in the film is so bleak, dreary and depressing (I wonder how much of that is the creaky VHS transfer though...), yet somehow the slog of the horrific old country life combined with the even more horrific journey of emigrating is redeemed by The New Land sequel (a film I like much more on the whole, but which also made me appreciate this more). Looking forward to an eventual dvd or blu release, hopefully a release that gives options for the original cuts and the american cuts, preserves the excellent dubbing and allows me to finally hear the original language tracks. And hopefully it looks a bit better.

The Godfather - Having watched these first two films so many times, particularly in the theatre, both before and after the recent, controversial restorations, I've gone back and forth. I think I've settled on Godfather being the best, for the compact clarity of its narrative, the flawless sense of pace and timing and the precise and exacting cinematic brilliance in every frame. Part II is nearly as good, the editing/pacing is more self consciously arty, but it works so brilliantly for the film, I think it loses out just by a fraction in how the writing unfolds some of the character interpersonal drama, losing some of the compactness and clarity of the narrative. Like an author given an extra hundred pages for his second novel after the first novel was a huge success there's just a slight indulgence to the second part that isn't as present in the first part, even though, thematically, the second part is richer and stronger by a hair's breadth.

Sounder - I know I liked the film. I know I liked the book. So why is it that both feel rather forgettable? I think it's somewhat a problem of paling in comparison to four such memorable films. Never rises above 'likes and doesn't find much to dislike" for me. A bit of a throwback and an odd duck out in this slate of nominees.

My vote, Godfather of course.

[knives]

1996
The English Patient-Apparently Willem Dafoe can save any movie. The picture isn't bad as much as overextended and lacking in interesting characters. Fiennes is usually great in this regard, but even he can't make a corpse compelling so it's up to Dafoe to liven the proceedings (that said the ending gives Fiennes some great moments and Firth does as expected in a part beneath him). So I just view this one with a shrug and might just use it the next time somebody back talks the Merchant Ivory films. They at least know to keep short.

Fargo-Can I say anything about this that isn't already universally agreed upon?

Jerry Maguire-I don't know what the official logline on the board is with this film, but I love it to death. It's the one film in this set to earn it's two hours plus alongside some great work in happiness. It really is just a crack ball of joy, but in spite of reputation it really earns that happiness by putting it's characters through a ringer that doesn't come across as needlessly cruel. I probably can't be eloquent on this effect, but it really strikes the perfect balance between melodrama and relief.

Secrets & Lies-Meh, Timothy Spall makes everything better and this is probably the best Leigh I've seen (though I prefer Vera Drake, but that's not saying much. The film is interesting enough to where I have no complaints, but I just hate the way he deals with emotion in every film he has seemingly ever made. I just feel like he's limiting these characters (and ostensibly actors) with his inability to view people complexly even as his film is very complex in a way that needs what he simply doesn't have. I don't know, I guess this feels like a good film that could have been great.

Shine-Is Rush's character supposed to be a little retarded in addition to being crazy from the stress later on? There were definitely a few odd moments from before his breakdown. That question aside this was a whole lot better than I expected with great performances, quiet direction that never feels lethargic, gorgeous editing, and just a generally strong story. The movie doesn't lean on any one of it's points too hard or take the easy way out. I suppose that's slightly because of indecisiveness, but it all works to the film's benefit. Not a great film, but one that at least made me interested in it's story which is more than can be said of a lot of these films. As far as oscar bait stories go I would have preferred infinitely so for this to have won.

My Vote: Fargo

[matrixschmatrix]

Secrets & Lies-Meh, Timothy Spall makes everything better and this is probably the best Leigh I've seen (though I prefer Vera Drake, but that's not saying much. The film is interesting enough to where I have no complaints, but I just hate the way he deals with emotion in every film he has seemingly ever made. I just feel like he's limiting these characters (and ostensibly actors) with his inability to view people complexly even as his film is very complex in a way that needs what he simply doesn't have. I don't know, I guess this feels like a good film that could have been great.

Haha, you had the same take on Topsy Turvy, and I still have no idea of what the fuck you're talking about. I think Leigh's characters express themselves differently than those in most movies, but his methods lead to a sense of emotional depth and background that I think far exceeds almost any other filmmaker I can think of- with the exception of the occasional one-note character (Jeremy in Naked, say) his creations are immensely complex, feeling to me like people who had lived and felt things for years before we meet them. Honestly, I don't see any hint of emotional limitation imposed on them, in any of Leigh's movies that I've seen.

[knives]

I should say that the only time I felt that sort of thing was particularly ruinous is Happy-Go-Lucky which is just a terrible film. He needs actors of Spall's and Manville's talent to overcome the various problems he seems to have with characterization.

[mfunk9786]

Happy-Go-Lucky is a great film, and the fact that we won't be discussing it in an official capacity in this thread is a travesty.

[matrixschmatrix]

I'm working through 1999, though it might be a while before I finish- but how the fuck did The Green Mile get nominated for anything but an ipecac?

[knives]

Some of the performances are fun? I'll be the first to admit that it made 14 year old me cry like a baby though subsequently the Kingisms have been too much for me to sit through.

[matrixschmatrix]

You can't judge by that, Armageddon made me cry when I was 14.

[colinr0380]

I always assumed that The Green Mile kudos was more about giving praise to the overlooked at the time Shawshank Redemption. Apart from the magical element of Green Mile and the presence of Tom Hanks, they're basically very similar in their 'wrongly convicted, heart melting male bonding across racial boundaries' elements.

1996
The English Patient-Apparently Willem Dafoe can save any movie. The picture isn't bad as much as overextended and lacking in interesting characters. Fiennes is usually great in this regard, but even he can't make a corpse compelling so it's up to Dafoe to liven the proceedings (that said the ending gives Fiennes some great moments and Firth does as expected in a part beneath him). So I just view this one with a shrug and might just use it the next time somebody back talks the Merchant Ivory films. They at least know to keep short.

For those without the patience to sit through the entire film again (or at least without fast forwarding through the scenes set in France), here's the Adam and Joe summary involving stuffed toys.

Shine-Is Rush's character supposed to be a little retarded in addition to being crazy from the stress later on? There were definitely a few odd moments from before his breakdown. That question aside this was a whole lot better than I expected with great performances, quiet direction that never feels lethargic, gorgeous editing, and just a generally strong story. The movie doesn't lean on any one of it's points too hard or take the easy way out. I suppose that's slightly because of indecisiveness, but it all works to the film's benefit. Not a great film, but one that at least made me interested in it's story which is more than can be said of a lot of these films. As far as oscar bait stories go I would have preferred infinitely so for this to have won.

And here's the one for Shine!

[Lighthouse]

I think The English Patient is a great film. Great film, great novel, both are different enough from each other to enjoy them without thinking of the other one.

Other Minghella films are not half as good.

[Mike_S]

1970
Airport (Seaton): R1 Universal
Love Story (Hiller): R1 Paramount

While it would be easy to scoff at both of these movies, and I have done enough of that in my time, they do what they set out to do with considerable skill and while that might not make them award-worthy, it does make them worth serious comment. The problem with Airport lies largely with the original novel and its woefully cardboard characters and contrived situations but Seaton is good with the actors and some of them - Van Heflin, Maureen Stapleton, Jean Seberg - almost seem like real people. It also builds up enough tension to make the last half hour genuinely exciting. As for Love Story, it works perfectly on its own level and therein lies the rub. It seems to me to be too slick, and every element is triple-tested to get the audience weeping into their popcorn. There's none of the messy, spilling-over emotional turmoil which love creates in real life - I suspect I'm asking for a Nic Roeg film and not an Arthur Hiller one. But it's worth a look for Ryan O'Neal's commendably underplayed performance and Francis Lai's score - however much you hate it - was as much a part of 1970 as Apollo 13 and the My Lai massacre.


Patton (Schaffner): R1 Fox (DVD and Blu)

My problem with this movie is that it's a stunning performance in search of a point of view. It bounds about unable to decide whether Patton was a rebel, a madman, an inspiring war hero or a sadistic sonuvabitch - which wouldn't matter so much in a smaller movie but leaves this Dimension 150 epic with a hole in its centre. The truth, perhaps, was that he was all of those things and more besides but the conventional biopic and war movie structures around which the film was built can't contain such ambiguity and the film never seems to me to resolve into a coherent whole. Nor is it sufficiently well cast to give George C. Scott any serious competition.

So for me the Oscar is a toss-up between M*A*S*H and Five Easy Pieces.

I've always found the former hilariously funny and there's something very noble and weirdly Hawksian about the way it despises everything except for professional skill. As for the latter, it's still one of Jack Nicholson's two or three best performances and the scene where he's on the hill with his mute father is spectacular.

On the whole, I'd give it to M*A*S*H

[Siddon]

2011

The Artist - I enjoyed it, I felt like it was an all around solid film. The biggest knock I have on it is that the trailer basically gives away the entire film which is a sad byproduct of how one enjoys a film. The only way I can think of the movie surviving the trailer would be if it had gone more into the Cromwell and Goodman characters or done more with lavish set pieces. It was a good film I enjoyed it but it's not my number 1.

The Descendents - One of my favorite films of the year, just an exercise in subtlety and melancholia. I loved how the characters just kind of went on a journey without any real conclusions. It was a movie about growing not growth something that is rare and precious. I felt like so many scenes just packed an emotional wallop because it never went over the top or cinematic.

The Help - This was an old fashioned film, something that feels like it came out of the 1980-1994 film era. I felt genuine sentimentality and empathy for these women and the small battles they dealt with every day. At no point did it feel like a masterpiece but I enjoyed it, I thought the leads were the weakest points and it was Spencer, Howard, and Chastain that elevated the movie.

Hugo - Well constructed, witty, and charming, visually this was my favorite film of the bunch. I had seen so many films like this from this time period I think a certain amount of the originality was missing. Scorsese's attempts at French whimsy were admirable perhaps even inspiring for those that don't bother with these sorts of films. If the film has a drawback it's that the lead is greatly overshadowed by Ben Kinsley and Chloe Moretz.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close - It's a divisive film, so much of it didn't make sense. But I admire it's ambition, telling a story about 9/11 through the eyes of a child with some sort of mental disability was quite the undertaking. I thought it was a good film as long as you don't give it any extra thought.

Midnight in Paris - For me this was a fairy tale for grownups, I loved this movie. I think the hardest thing for a filmmaker to do is to make a film feel magical and not treat the audience like they are children. The root of the film is a meditation on love, love of a city, of culture and of eash other. In the end you can leave the film with an idea of the sadness of nostalgia or you can focus on the nature of love.

Moneyball - As a dramedy I think it works well, just not as well as all the other comedies that came out this year. I sort of hated Jonah Hill in it, I felt like the character was so out of place and not realistic that it sort of took me out of the movie.

Tree of Life - I only saw it once so I don't think I can truly review this film, lets just say it will take me a few years to gather up the nerve to indulge this one again. For what it was I know it was good but by far my least favorite Mallick film.

War Horse - The older I get the more angry I become with Spielberg. This was perhaps the single most emotionally manipulative film I've seen in years. Everytime a character was killed it was so over the top and emotionally aggravating. Anytime a minor character showed any joy you knew their death was coming soon, I truly hated this film.

Best Picture - Midnight in Paris
2. Hugo
3. Descendents
4. The Artist
5. Moneyball
6. The Help
7. Tree of Life
8. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
9. War Horse

2010

The King's Speech - I didn't care for this one, I thought it was a well made made for television film you would see on HBO. I actually groaned everytime they winked and nodded to Queen Elizabeth and Winston Churchill. This was an okay film but not the Best Picture of the year.

Black Swan - As a man who considers himself a huge horror fan I went into this film with high expectations, everyone of them was met. I thought Natalie Portman really sold the horror and tension in her face, her woman on a verge was breathtaking and as the character became more frantic so did the pacing, tone, and subject matter.

The Fighter - As a four lead acting showcase I found it to be good. I wish it would have gone further because I felt like it could have been a classic but for some reason it loses momentum. For me the best performance in the film was Amy Adams as she truly demonstrated what a supporting role can do with other actors. Every scene she's in you see a tangible improvement from the other actors, sad that the flashier Bale and Leo won.

Inception - As ambitious a film that came out that year, I love how it captures the essence of a dream. My only regret is that I wish it would have chosen between ambiguity or imagination as neither were served as well as they could have been.

The Kids Are Alright - I thought that it was a masterclass in character study but nothing that really stood out as a great film. It reminded me of all the great independent films from the 90's. I just wish their was more to the movie.

127 Hours - I'm always a sucker for a good man vs nature film and I thought James Franco did an admirable job commanding the screen for the film. I thought he should have won the Oscar for best actor but instead it went to the prestige project with the overlooked Firth.

The Social Network - I didn't care for it. It felt to much like a message film, almost like it was telling you this is what's important for this generation of kids. Almost felt like a lecture on popular culture and less a genuine film.

Toy Story 3 - A remarkable animated feature that closes out an animated trilogy but I kept feeling an emptiness by the end, like this was just a really good finale to a long story. I don't know if it holds up on it's own.

True Grit - I really loved this movie, while other films were a little more Oscar baity this one was almost dialectically opposed. A remake and a genre picture done by two of the flashier directors of this era, this sort of thing almost always blows up in our faces but this movie worked and worked well. The dialogue was almost shakespearian with everything spoken in a poetic and metaphorical nature and it was combined with breathtaking shots. My favorite scene of this year was the river sequence in that it was so simple yet so effective.

Winters Bone - Methodical, stunning and heartbreaking, I loved this neo noir film and all the colorful characters in the story. I half expected Sam Spade to show up at some point in the movie and give the film a new direction. But very good film, Jon Hawkes and Jennifer Lawrence really earned their nominations and likely future awards.

Best Picture - Black Swan
2. True Grit
3. Winters Bone
4. 127 Hours
5. Inception
6. The Fighter
7. The Kids are Alright
8. Toy Story 3
9. The Kings Speech
10. Social Network

[tarpilot]

Inception - As ambitious a film that came out that year, I love how it captures the essence of a dream.

You must have the most boring dreams in the world.

[zedz]

Inception - As ambitious a film that came out that year, I love how it captures the essence of a dream.

You must have the most boring dreams in the world.

Maybe he just plays a lot of video games before he goes to bed?

[movielocke]

Inception is brilliant for how self-reflexively it examines the problems and powers of cinema on a metaphoric level (the dream as a cinema, the dreamer as director, "inception" as 'smuggling', shared dreaming as audience etc), it's just a stunning piece of work and one of the most outstanding uses of science fiction in film by someone not named Tarkovsky.

[knives]

Been a long time since I posted in here. Been waiting to rewatch Five Easy Pieces and in the meantime accidentally got a completely unrelated one done.

1970
Airport (Seaton)
Really I can't do this justice better than the DVD itself: Van Heflin as a bomb-toting maniac.

Five Easy Pieces (Rafelson)
No matter how many times I watch this film I really can't manage to feel anything toward it. It's not a bad movie, but it really doesn't communicate anything to me and even Nicholson's performance doesn't render much. I'll respect what it has accomplished culturally, but I really can't manage more than that.

Love Story (Hiller)
Best Nicholas Sparks adaptation ever. All joking aside I think this one's popularity at the time made it more easily a punching bag down the road than it deserved to be. It's a perfectly okay occasionally sweet little romance and Graw's not particularly annoying even if she looks silly in glasses. It's also worth it just for the novelty of seeing a very young Tommy Lee Jones. It's no best picture, but it's a fine two hours.

MASH (Altman)
This hasn't happened before, I was really annoyed by Sutherland here. Everyone else gives a great performance, but there is something terribly off about him here. I've never seen a bad performance from Sutherland before so I'll blame Alda instead. Bud Cort especially was a pleasant surprise both because I didn't know he was in the film and because it's so different from the other roles I've seen him in. He really does look pleasantly pathetic. Gould's really good too.

That said I wasn't very enamored with the film. It's very middle of the road with a few funny bits and a good enough message, but it doesn't have the right push. I suppose part of what makes a Altman film 'great' is how interested one is in the subject matter and frankly anti-Vietnam sentiment is played out for me. That said for someone interested in this I could see why they would consider the film great. I also prefer the sort of comedy expressed in Brewster McCloud (though Radar looking in on the sex murdered me), but that's just me being a mad man.

All this said one aspect really didn't do it for me to the extent I see no excuse being made. The treatment of the nurse and Duvall was just loathsome to me. There are ways to show the negative sorts of people that are present in war, the show did it all the time, but here it seemed like cruelty for the sake of it. I don't know how anyone could find that shower scene funny. It disgusted me like no other. I just don't get this one.

Patton (Schaffner)
Now here's a movie I can put my all into (I suspect I'm the only one). It's speedy with a great set of performances especially from Scott and Malden with some old school directing muscle and a sturdy script laced with some of the best dialogue you can get. It's not necessarily one of the greatest, but just as entertainment it hardly gets better.

My Vote: Patton

1976
All the President's Men (Pakula)
This is far better than any film about journalist directed by Robert Mulligan's producer should be. Of course the Watergate story is a fascinating one, but it really doesn't scream cinema and a laid back style focusing on Woodward and Bernstein is probably the weakest way to go about things (I'd personally say Altman tackled the most exciting). Despite all of this possibility for failure (not even mentioning Peck 2.0 as one of the leads) the film manages to not just be great, but as great as these sort of things get. It's presenting a wonderful dissertation of the role of the journalist, presenting as factually as possible the ultimate tale of American corruption, and presenting a wonderful labyrinth of lies that finally reveal the truth. We have to believe these liars and understand the nature of the liar to work towards that golden object, truth. Best yet it does all of this in as entertaining a way as possible (had to be the inspiration for Zodiac) and further proves that everything is better with more Jason Robards.

Bound for Glory (Ashby)
This is a bit like catnip for me considering the director and subject matter and while it is not one of Ashby's best it still is great with some amazing camera work and a bizarre take on the subject matter. In all seriousness more of these musical biopics need to take a cue from this film which much like Andrei Rublev sidelines the art and even the artist to show the truth of this past period to subtly highlight the present. As great a character as Guthrie is it really doesn't matter if he gets married or finds success. What stands out as narrative propulsion is the grass and the people who work on it and really there's no other way to handle Guthrie if you really care about his music.

Network (Lumet)
This is one of the strongest years for the oscars I've ever seen with even this the sole bad entry being amazingly ambitious and relevant even to this day. The more Chayefsky moments are god awful particularly with the really painful attempts at being ironic just coming across as self absorption. That said a few of the big monologs work particularly from Ned Beatty and Robert Duvall. Lumet's attempts to make the film cartoonish and artificial help slightly, but it ultimately bungles things for the film. I probably wouldn't be so kind if it had won though.

Rocky (Avildsen)
This is so much more than what the sequels have turned it into. Leaving behind all of the crap that would follow the film manages to be a fantastic and tough personal journey barely about the sport and filled with rich characters. It manages to be representative of what its era wanted out of cinema (what other decade would have the happy ending be the one where the hero loses) while also seeming classical to the point of gaining a universal sense. It may not be the greatest film of the year or even this bunch, but it's a good and logical choice all the same.

Taxi Driver (Scorsese)
I know this is the generic choice for the year, but I really don't think its any better than what actually won. Sacrilege, I know. There are many good things about the film that's already been talked to death about, but I must say my favorite is how all the machinations have dated and become symbolic of the era. The film works in a lot of ways like Antonioni's later films work.

My Vote: All the President's Men (such an insanely tough choice)

[movielocke]

Patton (Schaffner)
Now here's a movie I can put my all into (I suspect I'm the only one). It's speedy with a great set of performances especially from Scott and Malden with some old school directing muscle and a sturdy script laced with some of the best dialogue you can get. It's not necessarily one of the greatest, but just as entertainment it hardly gets better.

My Vote: Patton

Not the only one, and I think you're spot on with all your other 1970 assessments as well.

[Dylan]

I want to say that I'm kind of happy Love Story isn't exactly getting trashed on here. It's actually 2/3 of a pretty good movie, I think, and beautifully shot. If it had played out the relationship on a basic dramatic level and not sunk into "disease of the week" it'd be a solid film & a better example of period (circa 1970) college romance. And maybe I'm alone on this, but Francis Lai is a great film composer and this score deserved its Oscar and success - I heard somebody humming the theme the other day, and I was delighted to hear it. I went up and told this person how great of a score I felt Love Story was, and they had no idea what I was talking about - they were under the impression that it was Mozart or Beethoven! Props to Francis Lai for that. And in case you couldn't tell, I think the music is far and away the best part about Love Story.

[knives]

Yeah, out of the bad oscar noms Love Story doesn't really deserve a mention as it is perfectly adequate. Though maybe it is that base okay-ness which gets under some people's craw.

[domino harvey]

Given that I won't have the next genre list to monopolize my time, I've been amassing discs in preparation for this list (and topping off the previous era's)-- mothers, lock up your supporting actresses!

1973
A Touch of Class Forgotten Hollywood master Melvin Frank delivers a rare late-period triumph with this charming romantic comedy that seeks to provide adult entertainment without losing the sense of play and wit that defined the studio era at its best. When the film winds down towards more serious inclinations, it feels true, and George Segal and Glenda Jackson, who won the Oscar for her work, are more than equipped to enliven the proceedings.

American Graffiti Considering that the era depicted is my Midnight in Paris nostalgia fantasy, this film basically functions as pornography for me. Regardless of existent period predilections, though, Lucas' film intelligently delivers one of those fabled "Important Night" teen pics and peppers it with characters that at first seem to exist only to fill archetypal roles, only to blossom as the film progresses. Personal favs are Paul Le Mat's hot rodding greaser who finds himself keeping a flirtatious twelve-year-old company, and the justly Oscar-nommed Candy Clark as the dim pick-up who blithely falls for the resident nerd's self-aggrandizements. It's a rare treat to see a film like this that avoids period fetishization while still selling an audience on the merits of its begone era through more organic means.

Cries and Whispers A mid-range Bergman, but one that surprisingly found popular favor despite being one of his harshest films-- who'd have thought that the film with crucifix masturbation wouldn't be the most gynecologically disturbing Best Pic nom? As much as the Academy loved the pic, it's bizarre that none of its strong performances garnered acting noms.

the Exorcist Perhaps this would be the most terrifying movie 4ever if you are a Christian. All others need not apply for this oddly-paced and unevenly executed cultural milestone. The first sequel at least has the decency to be insane (while the third entry is inane, apologies to the board's defenders).

the Sting An amusing but slight run-through of con artists at work. There's nothing here that can't be better enjoyed by just reading Maurer's the Big Con or watching a Mamet movie instead, though. Perhaps it hit harder upon release out of novelty, but it all feels overly familiar without the inherent quality that would justify high honors outside of contextualization. Honestly, I found the poker game machinations early in the film more entertaining than the Long Con the picture occupies itself with!

My Vote: American Graffiti


1980
Coal Miner's Daughter This is a year where even the best nominees are just alright, but I reckon this one gets my vote by virtue of Sissy Spacek's marvelous performance as Loretta Lynn. The film of course hits all the notes a biopic must, but Spacek is so good in her role that I stopped minding after a while and just sat back in appreciation. Hard to believe she and Beverly D'Angelo (as Patsy Cline) performed all their own songs! Tommy Lee Jones is afforded a surprisingly multifaceted character as well-- his brusque husband seems set up to be a cad and then both lives up and against those expectations as Lynn's story unfolds. She basically married her father, but that same conflicting accumulation of traits her beau possessed directly led to her success.

The Elephant Man I am not nearly as enamored with Lynch as most, but this seems damned in either extreme-- it's not nearly "normal" enough to function as a traditional biopic, but the weirdness Lynch does fit in feels inorganic and frankly embarrassing. The film alleges to paint its subject with sympathy but trots out the disgusting responses and indignities suffered by the titular character far too often and for far too little positive effect. This is a fancily-attired and outwardly respectable freak show, but a freak show nonetheless.

Ordinary People While I like it just a touch less than Coal Miner's Daughter, I can't fault the Academy for awarding this somber character piece the grand prize. It's a nice little actorly retreat-- Timothy Hutton and Elizabeth McGovern are quite good as the young couple, and Mary Tyler Moore makes a surprisingly effective Ice Queen-- but the net narrative effect is slightly less substantial than anticipated.

Raging Bull I try to limit my use of the word "overrated" for cases such as this. I did not enjoy the two-plus hours I spent with this character in this movie, nor did I find his flaws interesting or to be presented in such a way as to garner praise, lavish or otherwise.

Tess Polanski-lite, but a fine adaptation nonetheless. Nothing here is worth going out of the way to experience, but one gets their three-plus hours' worth of Tumblr-ready Nastassja Kinski photography in the bargain should they indulge.

My Vote: Coal Miner's Daughter

[domino harvey]

1974
Chinatown I don't know what's to be said that hasn't already been said, but this is intelligent filmmaking that engages its audience on an adult level, a rare treat in any decade.

the Conversation It's a coin-toss between this and Chinatown for best of the lot, but I'll give this one the edge for its exquisitely executed paranoia and small-scale theatrics. Plus Zizek's spiel about the toilet scene has burned the film into my brain for competing reasons!

the Godfather Part II Coppola's followup is well-made and generally an alright film, but like most sequels it is unnecessary. It did not merit a nomination, much less a win in this category. The same can be said for Part III, though that film is about as good as this one-- which is to say, if this made the cut, no complaining about that one!

Lenny I don't find Lenny Bruce to be particularly funny and the only real interest his story has is in its contextualization within the era in which he found infamy. So Fosse's decision to focus so heavily on Dustin Hoffman's labored reenactments of Bruce routines and weird "documentary" inserts with his inner circle is an unwise one. For all its attempts at awkward artistry, the film would have been better served by a more traditional biopic approach (as can be seen in the most traditional and not coincidentally best scene in the film, the final pathetic courtroom "showdown"). I can understand Hoffman's mimicry making the cut have no earthly idea why the poor man's Lee Remick playing his thinly-sketched wife got an Oscar nomination for this.

the Towering Inferno It's funny to see so many above the title stars in this paycheck casher but not nearly as funny as watching their sheer embarrassment any time two or more names has to share the screen-- everyone's generally okay at their phoning-it-in individually, but get Paul Newman and Steve McQueen together in an elevator and they can barely make eye contact! Though it sometimes make for laborious pacing, I appreciated how often the film would slow down and explain exactly what the firemen were doing to fight the blaze. I hadn't really ever thought much about it but the film really does detail quite thoroughly the assorted stops and starts and Plan Bs involved in fighting a high-rise fire. As the fire worsens, the more and more the film devotes to details over melodramatic character fluff, and so it ends up being a far better film than I'd have guessed at its outset. Still, several of the on-screen deaths are gratuitous and one early unnecessary scene in particular involving the exit of Robert Wagner and his secretary left a bad taste that took the film a while to shake. Weirdly, the one character the audience keeps waiting to eat it practically dies off-screen-- and he takes an innocent Hollywood bystander with him almost as an afterthought!

My Vote: the Conversation

Though I know this is a thread focusing on Best Picture noms, I would be bereft in my duties to the 1974 Oscars if I didn't also seek out the film at the heart of arguably the biggest upset in Oscar history, Art Carney's Best Actor win for Paul Mazursky's Harry and Tonto. Unbelievably Carney trumped Albert Finney, Dustin Hoffman, Jack Nicholson, and Al Pacino to walk away with the prize and I can recall many a snide remark from my youth from entertainment reporters around Oscar time that a sitcom star from the 50s some how beat four heavyweights for a movie about an old guy who talks to his cat. Well, now that I've seen Harry and Tonto (and the other films containing nominated perfs), the explanation as to why Carney won is simple: In a rare show of good judgment, the Academy awarded the Best Actor trophy to the best actor. Harry and Tonto is a rambling drift between points of interest that left me delighted at experiencing a film that upended my expectations every couple of minutes. And at the heart of this achievement is Carney's Harry, a former professor who has more literary quotes at his disposal than a Godard film, trying to find his place in the rapidly changing world. Harry doesn't fall into easy categories of character compartmentalization. He's just Harry. And I'm glad to have spent two hours with him and the assorted colorful folk he encounters. Mazursky's commendable humanism shines through each new strongly-sketched character from the moment they arrive on the scene, and (with the exception of a regrettable detour featuring a prostitute) the film doesn't provide the pat or conventional portrayals the given scenarios could foster. Scenes like the jailhouse interaction between Carney and Chief Dan George should be taught in screenwriting classes-- it's not flashy, it doesn't cheapen its subjects or go for melodramatics. It arrives and stays somewhere wonderful, and in the process reminds the viewer how few films ever really do that.

[knives]

I haven't seen it, but a friend of mine lists Harry and Tonto as his favorite movie of all time with such enthusiasm I hadn't even thought that it had any controversy let alone that (Carney's a great actor). Also glad to see that someone agrees with my on The Godfather II. The Fredo stuff is great, but everything else seems reheated from the first film.

[domino harvey]

I just ordered the Late Show, as Art Carney's late-period resurgence has my curiosity piqued. If the award weren't the go to Carney, I'd say Albert Finney's hilarious Poirot from Murder on the Orient Express was the next most deserving of the award. I have no earthly idea why Ingrid Bergman did win Best Supporting Actress for that film, though!