Page 15 of 23

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:37 am
by domino harvey
2004
the Aviator Given how little I've enjoyed anything Scorsese's done in my lifetime, I was surprised at how much I liked this flashy romanticization of Howard Hughes. Scorsese has some fun playing with his color timing and the performances are great. I knew going in that she got raves and an Oscar but I was still stunned at Cate Blanchett's spot-on Katharine Hepburn-- there were several times during the film that I forgot I wasn't watching Hepburn! Kate Beckinsale is laughably wrong for Ava Gardner though-- I thought she was trying for Linda Darnell at first! For a film nearing three hours in length, I was never bored (though of course I am biased towards its subject matter) and that alone puts this above 90% of the stuff that gets nominated in this category.

Finding Neverland One of the most useless, unnecessary, and instantly forgettable films to ever go the distance, this is Exhibit A for why people hate the Weinsteins. No one asked for this movie. I have a hard time believing anyone could be moved to care for anything that happens in this ludicrous docudrama of how JM Barrie allegedly wrote Peter Pan. I know the Oscars love movies that obnoxiously pinpoint the fictionalized/sensationalized influences for accepted classics, but even if this were 100% true or 100% interesting-- which it is not on either account-- who even cares enough about Peter Pan to find out?

Million Dollar Baby My ex-gf and I originally saw this in perfect, unspoiled circumstances-- opening weekend, packed house, and no one having any idea where it was headed. I'll never forget the absolute silence in the audience when the film takes its sudden turn and by the finish the cliched press agent line was true: there wasn't a dry eye in the house. My girlfriend turned to me when it was finished and said, "Now that's a movie." Yes, it is.

Ray This movie would be awful under any viewing circumstances, but watching it after the superior in every way imaginable A Soldier's Story just made this film's jiving, empty-headed biopic nonsense all the more galling. Jewison's film excited me with its insights and internal debates on the subject of race. But here we see what the superficial, easy to digest version of race relations looks like. Isn't Oscar so proud of itself, nominating a film with a mostly black cast where within the world of the film saying that there is racism is now the equivalent of addressing, commenting, or examining racism? I kept thinking of how characters from that film would attempt to engage this film in terms of its simplistic approach to every possible avenue for complexity of thought or purpose. Even if I could forgive and forget Ray's regressive menagerie of actors playing famous people dress-up and saying Serious and Meaningful lines right out of a MOTW, how about the godawful narrative structure of the film? Stupefying flashbacks and hallucinations rubbing elbows with the trashy, Life of Emile Zola-level "explanations" of songs like "Hit the Road Jack"-- a song which not only wasn't the product of an argument between Charles and his mistress as the film claims, it wasn't even written by Charles, according to the credits. I hated this movie. I hated it for not having a brain in its head and yet still thinking it was saying something while saying nothing, over and over.

I don't even care that the central performance is able to mimic its real-life inspiration. Who gives a shit that Jamie Foxx can imitate Ray Charles? So what? If the film doesn't do anything with that performance and doesn't have anything to say in conjunction with that aping, why does its cosmetic accuracy matter? At least Blanchett's perf was placed within a larger context of her family and her relationship to Howard Hughes, both of which are examined with interest and knowledge and insider info and its existence within the film wasn't dependent on recognition only. This film is just like a serious version of Date Movie-- "You know that performer you're familiar with? Here he is, played by someone else, singing songs you've heard!" I know this is the second capsule this year to question a film's very reason for existing, but 2004 is a banner year for Oscar worthlessness and it sadly needs to be asked more than once.

Sideways Oscar-sanctioned Manic Pixie Dream Girl vehicle with inert schlub Paul Giamatti wowing aspiring horticulturalist waitress Virginia Madsen via his insecurity, unattractive personality, and expert knowledge of wine. It's been popularly speculated that critics fawned over this as they felt a kindred bond with Giamatti's character and viewed the film through a bit of wish fulfillment. Nothing wrong with that necessarily, but let's not pretend this is some great cinematic achievement just because a bunch of losers tried to will it into being so. This is supposed to be a comedy but I'm pretty sure I never laughed once, and if it's a drama, that's even worse, as the "deep" moments were eye-rolling (the much-praised pinot metaphor is so self-important and obvious that I held out hope afterwards that it wasn't the scene so many fans singled out, because really?), even if the "wacky" moments are worse (oh ha, I get it, because that's a man we wouldn't want to see naked, it's funny to have him be naked). Nearly a decade later, this film's legacy still seems to rest on the notoriety of Paul Giamatti's Best Actor snub more than anything actually in the film. And that's about right.

My Vote Million Dollar Baby

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 7:42 am
by flyonthewall2983
domino harvey wrote:Million Dollar Baby My ex-gf and I originally saw this in perfect, unspoiled circumstances-- opening weekend, packed house, and no one having any idea where it was headed. I'll never forget the absolute silence in the audience when the film takes its sudden turn and by the finish the cliched press agent line was true: there wasn't a dry eye in the house. My girlfriend turned to me when it was finished and said, "Now that's a movie." Yes, it is.
Seeing it in a theater, even after being spoiled, was still quite the experience. The emotional punch of it just flattened me after I left, not to tears but just a kind of blank feeling that only happens when you see a great film on the big screen.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 7:57 am
by knives
Even without seeing A Soldier's Story Ray smarts since it got in when years back the superior Bird was snubbed in all of the major categories. Also thanks for making me really anticipate revisiting The Killing Fields which at the time I though was okay, but I suspect now I would appreciate more.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:08 am
by colinr0380
Now this is a choice that I can fight with domino on! I really don't like Million Dollar Baby's manipulative set up, particularly the characterisation of an ungrateful benefits-culture redneck family who don't support their daughter that is so broad it unbalances the entire film. Even then the 'visit to Disneyland moment' is face-slappingly blunt.

And I have really big issues with that final big turn into medical drama after the last fight, particularly the deus ex machina way that the boxer Swank is fighting is portrayed as a dirty trickster landing the fatal blow after the bell and whilst Swank's back is turned.

It is almost as if it the entire last act of the film was a set up to avoid Swank having to confront her family issues or the price of success! I think I argued years ago on the forum that one of the big problems sporting films have to deal with is what happens once you are a success and it is only downhill from there. Do you retire gracefully? How do you cope with the knowledge that you have three or maybe four years at the top of your game before your body is unable to keep you at that peak condition, you are being challenged by a younger generation eager for success and you have to move into coaching (or sports presenting) to make your living? This in some ways is an issue that is actually being dealt with in Million Dollar Baby in the boxing gym scenes with Eastwood and Morgan Freeman, but bizarrely Swank is allowed to go out at the top of her game with the knowledge of being a great fighter and in some ways the comfort of a dirty fighter to blame for her enforced retirement.

Her character never has to confront slow and natural, rather than immediate and blameable, physical deterioration. She never has to confront her own inability to play at her peak level, instead she is given the comfort of 'what ifs'. Yet even that slight comfort of being given a tangible enemy to blame for her predicament and a justifiable victim status due to the treatment of her family still cannot prevent an inevitable over-the-top suicide plot (In the real world I'm all for assisted suicide to be available to people when it is justified, but this film never convinced me of that, despite the faux-miseries it piled on Swank), that lets Swank's character take the easy way out without ever having to confront and deal with any of her issues.

In a way that shows that the film isn't about Swank's character development at all but Eastwood's grump learning to care (about his boxers, about individual relationships) again. But even that is undermined by the way that his character doesn't really prepare Swank for any of the obstacles she has to face either inside the ring or out of it, and the assisted suicide scene only serves to legitimise his lack of ability, or even interest in Swank as anything more than as a device to pull him out of his own funk and make him love again.

I know I sometimes jokingly compare the two films because they both end up with the hero breaking into a hospital after hours to put his loved one out of their misery (I'd have liked, or at least been amused by, Million Dollar Baby more if Eastwood had stolen a nurses outfit, complete with skirt and high heels, to get into the hospital room as Jean-Hugues Anglade does!), but really Betty Blue tackles very similar material in its own end section about a man's inability to save the woman he loves from a kind of self-imposed slide into despair, eventually culminating in an 'assisted' suicide, but in a much more emotionally believable manner. Betty Blue even lightly tackles the darker idea that the loss of the female partner is both harrowing but also a kind of much-needed kickstart to the hero's own creative energies in its final scene. (Plus I guess all that time spent having sex with Beatrice Dalle wasn't giving him much time to do anything else!)

Anyway Million Dollar Baby still falls squarely into the 'manipulative Oscar film tradition' for me.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:56 am
by Mr Sausage
Jeez, Colin, you're pretty well slagging it off for not being a different movie. I mean, yes, it doesn't show what it's like to spend a career in sports, but what's wrong with that? I don't think the psychology of a veteran athlete was ever its concern.
Colin wrote:In a way that shows that the film isn't about Swank's character development at all but Eastwood's grump learning to care (about his boxers, about individual relationships) again. But even that is undermined by the way that his character doesn't really prepare Swank for any of the obstacles she has to face either inside the ring or out of it, and the assisted suicide scene only serves to legitimise his lack of ability, or even interest in Swank as anything more than as a device to pull him out of his own funk and make him love again.
It's not an either/or. Both characters develop and get different things out of it. Eastwood's character has a standard tragic arc. He plainly cares too much and is too liable to be hurt (see: how he always delays giving one of his boxers a championship fight, mostly likely out of sheer worry, not wanting to commit his fighter to that do-or-die moment), hence his gruff exterior. His arc is tragic because he really puts himself out there for someone after so many years of avoiding it, doesn't hold the person or himself back, and it ends up totally breaking an already half-way broken man. It's not about him learning to care, it's about a gruff, over-sensitive man being broken after he finally lets down his guard.

Swank's arc is that of achieving her mental and physical potential and finding a surrogate father, and then also having to deal with losing all of that.

I don't know how Eastwood doesn't prepare Swank for the physical obstacles in the ring, and I don't know what he should've prepared her for outside of it. The training seemed accurate to me.

I've never understood why people were bothered by the (much less of a caricature than you'd think) family. We get three rounded central characters and then a couple of minor characters are played more broadly. Isn't this standard for melodrama? It wouldn't be out of place in a melodrama from the 30's or 40's, and considering how old-fashioned the movie is, that feels appropriate. The family makes you feel a bit worse about an already unhappy situation, but they don't create that unhappiness.

By way of nothing, I'd just like to say how much I appreciated them casting probably the best ever female boxer, Lucia Rijker, as Swank's nemesis at the end.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:04 pm
by colinr0380
I think that you are right about my wanting it to be a different (better?) movie. Does Swank actually ever have to deal with her issues, or is she given a way of escaping from having to confront them and maybe come to terms with them, or at least her horrible family? Does Eastwood's character ever get critiqued, or change, or develop, instead just get his preconceptions (prejudices?) confirmed?

There are a whole host of assumptions at play (about the place of women in sport, about real versus surrogate-created families and whether one is more legitimate than the other, about disability, about only a working life having meaning and honour) that I think in a 30s or 40s melodramatic tradition or not, this would be the kind of material that I'd have problems with anywhere.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:11 pm
by Mr Sausage
Colin wrote:I think that you are right about my wanting it to be a different (better?) movie. Does Swank actually ever have to deal with her issues, or is she given a way of escaping from having to confront them and maybe come to terms with them, or at least her horrible family? Does Eastwood's character ever get critiqued, or change, or develop, instead just get his preconceptions (prejudices?) confirmed?
Are you saying her injury and assisted suicide was a way to escape from her family problems? I don't see how--I think it's pretty unrelated. Your criticisms don't make any sense as a response to this film.

The priest character in the movie does quite a bit of critiquing. I don't think there's any question that Eastwood's character is different at the end than he was in either the beginning or middle.

Colin wrote:There are a whole host of assumptions at play (about the place of women in sport, about real versus surrogate-created families and whether one is more legitimate than the other, about disability, about only a working life having meaning and honour) that I think in a 30s or 40s melodramatic tradition or not, this would be the kind of material that I'd have problems with anywhere.
What are these assumptions? Especially the one about women in sport--are you saying the movie is making negative assumptions about female athletes? Where? Also, what assumptions about disability is it making? The film isn't about disibility, so I don't know what assumptions it's making.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 5:48 am
by domino harvey
1993
the Fugitive Revisiting this one for the first time since childhood, in a very strong year for noms this surprisingly turns out to be the swing and a miss. With regards to the Oscars nominating popular films that merit inclusion, why not throw Jurassic Park in instead, especially since this was the year the Academy famously was expected to make reparations to Spielberg? I recall a lot of squawking from Oscar "pundits" during the Lincoln roundups that Tommy Lee Jones didn't merit his win for this film, but having sat through the whole thing I can attest that not only is his performance miles above anything else happening, it's the only reason to watch this rather rote cable-ready thriller. This is in fact exactly the kind of thing the Best Supporting Actor trophy should reward.

In the Name of the Father Wow, I guess I still just remembered all the clips they played during the Oscar ceremony and assumed this was some staid courtroom drama until I actually popped the damned disc in and was treated to a full-on assault of IRA vs Brit violence and startlingly grisly prison-set aggressions (I sure as hell wasn't expecting one unpopular CO to go out via makeshift flamethrower during a screening of the Godfather, that's for sure!). The performances, especially Pete Postlethwaite's, are convincing and the real-life story is an interesting enough anchor to keep this all afloat in-place. A good solid runner-up to the obvious best film nominated this year:

the Piano One of the things I love about this picture is that from the outside it looks like typical fleeting Oscar bait, but the film itself is in reality a complex and lyrical tale that threatens to unleash into a full-on fable at any moment. What struck me while watching this beautiful movie is how rare it is for an independent film of this nature, full of ambiguity and an almost cryptic fluidity, to actually land in the top spot. If only the story this year wasn't apologizing to Spielberg, because the Academy clearly connected with this film enough to give it three of the high profile awards it was nominated for, the most deserved of which was actually the biggest upset of the year: Anna Paquin for Best Supporting Actress. I distinctly remember the shock when she won (and she no doubt ruined many an Oscar pool in the process) but seeing the film now it is far less surprising: Paquin won because she gave one of the best child performances ever, and she's called upon to deliver things far from the comfort zone of the typical precocious child actor role that gets nommed here. If there were true justice in the world Campion would have been the first female Best Director too, but here we are.

the Remains of the Day While I like it a bit less than the other Merchant Ivory productions nominated in this category, this was still a nice attempt at reconciling the death of a rather useless livelihood with the changing tides of time. Anthony Hopkins nicely acclimates to the central role, but I couldn't help think of Ruggles of Red Gap, which tackled a lot of the ideas with more interest and insight than the classier effort delivered here.

Schindler's List The Oscars were always a part of my household for as far back as I can remember, but 1993's nominees have a special place in my heart as this was the first ceremony where I was allowed to stay up and watch and my mom and I filled out ballots from an Entertainment Weekly insert (I still remember that she picked Holly Hunter for the Firm, making her the only human being alive on Earth twentys year ago who thought that might happen). I think her enthusiasm was due in large part to her love of Schindler's List, a film she initially described to me simply as, "I wish I hadn't worn makeup." She was rooting for the winner that was all but destined to walk away with the top award in what might be the biggest non-shocker since, God, Gone With the Wind maybe?

Spielberg's film gets a tough rap now, in some part due to years of it being held as an unquestionable work of Importance, but revisiting it I found myself neither ready to come fully over to the light nor eager to get out the pitchforks. The most interesting stuff here are the easiest targets, especially Ralph Fiennes being a classic Nazi dick, shooting without discrimination and providing a colorful cartoon character of an eight-year-old's idea of evil. The film does have one moment of clarity with regards to the juvenile treatment of both the villain and the savior: Liam Neeson makes a baldfaced appeal to Fiennes' vanity and suggests he try pardoning those who transgress him, which leads to a darkly humorous montage of the Nazi forgiving innocent Jews who commit exceedingly mild slights, until he quickly grows tired of the play-acting and shoots the last little boy he let off with a warning in the back. But Fiennes' flamboyant Nazi only really factors into the middle and on either side we get not especially interesting Holocaust imagery with only a few new touches (I enjoyed the sequence early in the film explaining how Neeson cons his way into the Nazi party's establishment).

As for the questionable morality of how the film presents a "winning" story amidst one of the most indefensible acts of systematic genocide imaginable, the true life premise and contentious scenes like Ben Kingsley getting rescued at the last minute from a train headed to the concentration camp and yet everyone else on board still getting presumably killed didn't bother me, and for a simple reason: We've been trained as viewers to practice our focal length to those in front of us. If you aren't complaining about disaster films or action movies because so many non-foregrounded people die but the narrative favors some of our main characters over the rest of humanity, then you don't get to use that excuse here. Now, maybe you do think that way across the board, but if so you are probably a total chore to deal with in real life.

All that said, I didn't really walk away with much from the film. Certainly it failed to make me tear up or even consider the events of the film from an emotional vantage, nor did it engage me much intellectually or philosophically with its underdeveloped capitalism to compassion tale. I enjoyed Fiennes' colorful performance and the film is generally well-made and directed, but this wasn't even the best film Steven Spielberg made this year, much less the best film in this category.

My Vote the Piano


1995

Apollo 13 Technically proficient and moderately engaging, this is the kind of space pic the Right Stuff taught us we don't need to endure. The true life story of the Apollo 13 mission is indeed strong and interesting story of perseverance, and the cast, particularly nommed supporting players Kathleen Quinlan and Ed Harris, is up to the task, but the end result is still serviceable medicine cinema and never particularly interesting beyond the immediate narrative needs of the docudrama. So much money and on-screen talent went into this, was it asking too much for better written lines than "I could eat the ass out of a dead rhinoceros" or more directorly input than just swirling the camera a lot?

Babe It's a toss-up this year between all the films that aren't Braveheart but I'll give the edge to this family friendly fable if just for how unusual it is for a film like this to get nominated in this category-- though let's be honest, if the Academy was going to nominate a kids' movie this year, it shoulda been Toy Story. James Cromwell is perfect as the quiet farmer who decides he'll let his cute little pig take over for an ailing sheepherding dog. Rewatching it for the first time as an adult, I was struck with how dark the film often is, never sugarcoating the imminent threat of being a meal for the kindly humans in a way that stuff like Charlotte's Web only pretends to address. I understand the sequel takes everything into far different, darker avenues, and I look forward to seeing it at some point. The special effects are understated and convincing-- the FX team's surprise win over Apollo 13 was well-deserved-- and thus the film holds up from a technical standpoint remarkably well.

Braveheart Almost laughably inept "epic" that would be funnier if it hadn't gone the distance. Now, however, it is my enemy and I am sworn by honor to attack it. Admittedly 1995 was a real clusterfuck of a year for noms, with the Academy having no clear favorites and fittingly spreading all their noms out over far more films than could fit here. So Braveheart must have seemed the safest "important" choice to the Oscar voters. And that's a good word to describe the film, safe. Nothing depicted is particularly interesting or well-filmed/acted/written. It's just kind of there. The build-up to the battle sequences works, and Gibson's mismatched modern take on a 13th century Scot grew on me as the film progressed, but this is precisely the kind of movie where the words of one character immediately spell out another's and so forth, and such exemplars of unoriginality stacked one by one atop of each other gets creakier the higher the pile goes. Plus it became increasingly hard to sympathize with our hero: I think the film left out the part where William Wallace was the first person to fall for the ol' "Gullible's not in the Dictionary" bit.

Il Postino A "What?" for the ages, this small little Italian film is only here because no one says no to the Miramax Mafia. Still, it could've happened to a worse film. You can't hold its categorical unworthiness against it since it's quite a sweet little film about the friendship between an adorable local goof and Pablo Neruda (and if you, like Bart Simpson, are familiar with the works of Pablo Neruda, you no doubt recognize this as fiction). The last fifteen minutes are a miscalculation though, as the film decides to take a left into political commentary and does so poorly-- I'm surprised the Miramax Scissor Department didn't just lop off the last reel!

Sense and Sensibility A strong, well-cast Austen adaptation that, while entertaining and fairly true to the book's spirit, is hard to get all that excited over. Lee and Thompson's adaptation does do a good job of highlighting the sad absurdity of familial approval perpetuating generation after generation of James Fox Jrs in the era, but this is ultimately the very kind of polite Oscar bait that people think about if not when they think about the Oscars.

My Vote Babe

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 6:30 am
by flyonthewall2983
I saw Apollo 13 in the theater and remember sitting up pretty close. Whenever it's on cable, I usually stop and watch quite a bit of it. It, The Paper and Parenthood are Ron's best I think. I'll be interested to see if Rush holds up with that group, but I doubt it.

The "dead rhinoceros" line wasn't in the script, it was from Gary Busey who visited the set one day and thought it would be a good country boy line, according to IMDB trivia. It went on to say that it was a line Busey himself said in Point Break, which I'm pretty sure is true.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 6:32 am
by domino harvey
Add "Take tips from Gary Busey" to my "Was it asking too much for this movie to not" list

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 6:44 am
by flyonthewall2983
The one flaw in it for me was the focus on the Lovell family, and the stuff addressing the overall national concern over what was going on. It's not entirely bad, but I think if the movie kept everything between the capsule and Houston it would have been more thrilling.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:16 am
by matrixschmatrix
At least they didn't lift Busey's line about crapping in your hands and rubbing it your face from Point Break, which is full of extremely weird Gary Busey lines.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:59 am
by movielocke
colinr0380 wrote: I think I argued years ago on the forum that one of the big problems sporting films have to deal with is what happens once you are a success and it is only downhill from there. Do you retire gracefully? How do you cope with the knowledge that you have three or maybe four years at the top of your game before your body is unable to keep you at that peak condition, you are being challenged by a younger generation eager for success and you have to move into coaching (or sports presenting) to make your living?
Rocky II is a bit underrated, in my opinion, precisely because it does attempt to ineptly deal with these scenarios, it is interesting to see. there are similar glimmers in the other rocky movies and it is sort of an interesting thought experiment to me of taking the four rocky sequels and cutting them into a single sequel of rocky's rise and demise as a sports star. This would then be the middle movie between Rocky and Rocky Balboa. :-p

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 7:39 pm
by domino harvey
1971
A Clockwork Orange Rewatching it for the first time since college, I have to admit I like it far more than I remembered and it fares best yet of the Kubricks I've been revisiting/seeing for the first time lately. The greatest strengths here are in Kubrick's famous distancing techniques being perfectly matched to the tone of this weird behavior study and Malcolm McDowell's iconic performance. I rarely see McDowell singled out when people praise the film but he makes potentially unsayable lines from Burgess' novel sparkle and work and his physicality portrays the right amount of sexual threat and charm. This is an unusual pic to make the cut, but the Oscars were feeling the heat from not nominating 2001 a few years earlier so it's another politically savvy move-- not bad for a fairly explicit, unsympathetic film like this!

Fiddler on the Roof Overlong, unimaginatively staged big screen musical that succeeds for two reasons: several iconic songs (though I was surprised at how bland all the songs that aren't part of the collective unconscious were) and Topol's wonderfully engaging central performance. The film's popularity at the time makes perfect sense, as the whole thing is a clever stand-in for the gulf felt between parents and their increasingly free children in this era. Of course, so was this year's Taking Off and I'd have much rather seen that one make it here than Jewison's picture, but this was a pleasant enough way to pass the time.

the French Connection If Airport last year proved one of the most influential films of the 70s for big budget Hollywood cinema, this proved the most influential for smaller productions. Indeed, like Pulp Fiction two decades later, one has to resist the urge to grade it on a sliding scale downwards due to all the pisspoor imitators it inspired in the wake of its success. I've never cared for the film but hadn't seen it in a while so I did revisit it for the purpose of this exercise and found myself a little more sympathetic to its alleged charms. Gene Hackman is, as ever, charming even in a less-than-charming role, and his dogged detective is fun to watch as he swings his cock around various NYC locales. But the film's anti-climactic Z-esque "what's the point" finale still feels lacking, and outside of the justly famous chase sequence there are few memorable moments amongst the investigatory morass.

Out of perversity and dedication, I also sought out the John Frankenheimer-directed sequel, the French Connection II, and lord, if anything made the original shine more brightly seeing it back to back with this swill did the trick! Dear God in Heaven, what did we do to deserve this film that takes the most interesting aspect of the first pic-- that Hackman's Popeye Doyle is so much a part and product of NYC that he knows every orifice and functions like a white blood cell sent out into the bloodstream to attack any and all infections-- and plucks him down into fish out of water nonsense. There is a looooong stretch in the middle of this film (I won't spoil it but anyone who's seen it knows exactly what I'm talking about) where no response can register other than slack-jawed awe at the wrong-headedness of every single aspect of what is happening on screen. I understand this film has its share of defenders here, too. What else is new?

the Last Picture Show Never forget that there was once a time when Bogdanovich was loved by everyone and hailed as the next Orson Welles on the strength of this film. Everyone was right, even if they all quickly changed their mind by the time Daisy Miller rolled around three years later.

Nicholas and Alexandra Only one thought got me through this long and dull film: the glorious realization that since Oscars rarely reward these kind of bland, overlong historical epics anymore, the odds of me having to sit through a film like this again by choice are slim. I don't even know what to say about this one other than thanking God it's over.

My Vote the Last Picture Show


1972
Cabaret Ugly musical riff on the Damned where the Nazi level rises with the curtain and ends in the reliable "Oh here we go" mode. I've now seen every Bob Fosse-directed film and only enjoy his first, Sweet Charity (guess he hadn't figured out how to to ruin it yet), but clearly the Academy disagreed-- how did this ever win for Best Director over the Godfather? For that matter, I don't get Liza Minnelli's win either but I find her charmless in general, and Joel Grey's Best Supporting statue for just doing actual cabaret for the whole film is one of the more bizarre wins in this category as well (but at least he's good at it). From the award tally this one did rack up, it's scary to think how close the Oscars came to not giving the top prize to one of the greatest films of all time-- though perhaps it's more surprising still that they did make the right call!

Deliverance Weird choice by the Academy again-- Attempt to stay relevant? Popular favorite? Who knows! At least it's a good choice and this anti-male bonding pic gives some interesting commentary on the whole culture clash of hicks vs city slickers that spawned dozens of horror film imitators in its wake. I'm sure Ned Beatty thanks God he's had such a storied and varied career so that he's not remembered solely for his short end of the stick role here!

the Emigrants While watching this I gradually realized that for some reason my 8th grade history class had watched at least some of this, no doubt the shortened and dubbed VHS version. I'd always thought that film was about the pilgrims, but I'm guessing my coach/teacher (why was it always coaches who got stuck teaching history in middle and high school?) just needed a quick babysitter for a couple days. Nevertheless, seeing the full three-plus hour Swedish-language version let me appreciate the film on its own merits-- I thought it was a handsomely constructed and mostly engaging study in the process of Swedish emigrant arriving in the states and reminded me of Kazan's America America in its focus on the process of arrival more than the American experience itself (though I understand this film's sequel does tackle that subject). That said, I'm not sure how well it benefited from such a lengthy running time and my overall impression of the film in whole didn't match up with the time invested.

the Godfather Well, it's the Godfather.

Sounder While I don't think as highly of it as others here, I did enjoy this peek at a year or so in the life of a poor black sharecropper family. One of the things I appreciated about the film is how a basic plot description makes the picture sound far more melodramatic than it turns out to be, and Paul Winfield's loving father has several great moments of surprising warmth with his son, who is really the central focus here. I have no idea why the film (and the source novel) were named after the dog who is in the film for maybe three minutes, though?

My Vote the Godfather


2001
A Beautiful Mind Now this is what we talk about when we talk about worthless, instantly disposable Oscar bait. There's been worse winners in this category to be sure, but I don't know that there's been a less relevant Best Picture winner in this half of the List Project. Dumb hallucinations and treacly scenes of Russell Crowe writing math equations on windows and circling letters in magazine articles is now the level at which "feel-good" is pitched. I have no idea why Jennifer Connelly won an Oscar for playing such a one-dimensional fantasy that for the majority of the film I was waiting for the revelation that she didn't exist.

Gosford Park It's a hilarious indictment against the Academy that Ron Howard won the Best Director because there was a feeling he was "owed" it, and yet Robert Altman was nominated for this, one of his best films and his last great film, and went away empty handed. Written by the eventual creator of Downton Abbey, this is one of the best examinations of upstairs/downstairs class interactions I've ever seen. Filled with handfuls of talented performers doing their thing in tandem with each other, this is completely in Altman's wheelhouse and he runs with it.

In the Bedroom Tom Wilkenson and Sissy Spacek are two supremely talented actors (and how wonderful has Wilkenson's post-Full Monty career resurgence been?) but this film is so laughably inert that it often feels like a parody of what people who don't watch indie films think independent cinema is: slow-moving, intentionally stilted character performances and a truncated narrative filled out with long spaces. I didn't hate this so much as I was completely bewildered at why anyone thought it was relaying insight or entertainment or anything else other than morbid curiousity.

the Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring What's left to say about these films except that they all run together, they're all okay, and I've already talked about them twice? Well, I remember someone brought me a light-up LOTR mug from Burger King (I think?) around the time of the release of this first film. Isn't that so very interesting!

Moulin Rouge! An obscenity against musicals, against cinema, and against the superior Best Picture nominee from 49 years earlier that will forever be besmirched by sharing a title (sans punctuation). Hyper garbage that assaults the viewer with its florid re-appropriations of modern pop standards in service of the empty pleasure of recognition and nothing more. This is soulless anti-art.

My Vote Gosford Park


2009
A Serious Man So the Academy increases their ballot loads to ten films, ostensibly to not repeat another embarrassment like 2008's nominations, and then things like this slip in instead of the blockbusters pundits had been anticipating. You do have to hand it to the Coens though: they make a movie everyone, even their detractors, loves, and then turn around and make Burn After Reading and this, two of their worst, most Coen-y films ever.

An Education It's still ridiculous that Carey Mulligan didn't win for this star-making performance, though to be fair she hasn't really stretched her muscles since despite starring in several board-popular flicks in the interim. This too is widely believed to only be here thanks to the ten nominee ballots, but at least it merits a charity inclusion. Further discussion by me can be found in its dedicated thread.

Avatar Reading back on my comments in the film's dedicated thread, it's comical how far from the mark my predictions were for this film's failure. Having actually seen the film now, though, I can't say I'd change my predictions one bit, even if they did prove wrong. How is this is the highest grossing film of all time? Are we all collectively that stupid / easily distracted that any loud, brightly-colored moving Lisa Frank Trapper Keeper is capable of vacuuming in any and all easily led viewers? This is without exaggeration one of the most excruciating film-watching experiences in recent memory, a joyless, witless, paint-by-numbers exploration of the most hamfisted cultural and ecological cliches possible. Moments like Giovanni Ribisi derisively laughing at a Lorax-like plea for the trees was only missing organ music and a train-track to complete the mustache-twirling heavy-handedness. This "movie" was the world's longest Windows 2000 screensaver, filled with ugly and predictable creatures operating within easily guessed and executed narrative lines. I hated this film and I pray to whatever God you offer that the forthcoming sequels do not get nominated for Best Picture so that I may be spared ever again entering into the thinly-sketched "world" of Pandora.

the Blind Side I was dreading this but I didn't have much cause for worry. Contrary to my worst fears, this is a film that mostly has its heart in the right place, and the picture's greatest strength is when it forgets Sandra Bullock's showboating and instead depicts how almost every action she takes in the film is to benefit the underprivileged black child her family adopts, not to benefit her growth as a nice white lady. Indeed, the film only devotes maybe five minutes total to the pushback she receives from her former friends and onlookers (and those scenes are as predictable as the sun rising) and the majority to her caring about a nice kid who, with the right environment and resources, is able to excel. None of this is a step above any made for TV movie, but it's still a better film than you might suspect.

District 9 Perfect example of a film I'd have never gone anywhere near without this project shoving my shoulder… not that I'm exactly cheering at the results, though. Even though I didn't get much out of the film, I applaud the Academy for actually taking advantage of the ten nominees to honor a film far outside of their comfort zone and doing so with a flick that reflects several popular trends in modern cinema (mockumentary, sci-fi, cat food eating, &c). The social commentary here, however, is so suffocating and obvious that it boggles the mind that many viewers insist it doesn't exist-- It reminds me of the time my screenwriting class in college had to watch V for Vendetta (it was a random pick for a film then in theaters) and one of my super-conservative classmates could not believe there was any anti-Bush message to the film and was incredulous to the idea of it being present! The special effects here are nicely done and it looks more expensive than it actually was, even if that means the end result of all the light show antics is the same shoot 'em up finale we've seen in a thousand other pics. I thought the best thing here was the strong central performance by Sharlto Copley, and while I'm in no rush to see another Neill Blomkamp film, I'd definitely be interested in another Copley one.

the Hurt Locker One strong distinction between the Vietnam War and the Iraq War is that for whatever reason, audiences haven't been able to engage with films tackling the Iraq war on anything approaching the level they afforded to Vietnam decades earlier. I haven't seen a lot of other examples but if the Hurt Locker is the best of the lot, I think the reason why's fairly obvious: there's little real combat in the traditional war movie context we've been conditioned to expect, and while dismantling bombs and dodging firefights has its own function and value, it doesn't make for a particularly satisfying filmic experience. Jeremy Renner is quite good as the central figure and I give the film credit for bolstering his visibility, but the overall impact of the film doesn't carry it too far.

Inglourious Basterds I've already expounded on this one enough in its dedicated thread, but short version: good performances, occasionally clever script, questionable at-best morals.

Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire One has to question the need to devote so much energy to such a fervently squalid tale of downbeat unhappiness, but that the subject matter is ugly doesn't preclude the film from examining and depicting its material with due diligence. That said, this may be generally well-acted, but its the most over-directed of the films nominated this year, and Lee Daniels' insistence in getting in-between everything else happening in the film betrays a lack of confidence in the material (which is probably justified). Considering I taught kids much like those depicted in the film for several years, my favorite moments in the film were those depicting the alternative school's classroom interactions. One scene, where several of the students share their "fairy tales," is so dead-on in terms of how each girl approaches their assignment that I wanted to give whoever relayed that info to the filmmakers a gold star for actually getting a depiction of inner city schoolwork correct. Outside of the interplay between the troubled girls in this small class environment, though, I didn't walk away with much else to praise, though overall this like the Blind Side was a lot better than I'd feared.

Up A bittersweet first ten minutes and a subsequent cute twenty minutes gave a lot of false promise to this story that takes all of the possibility its premise promises and then… turns into a tedious South American "adventure" with talking dogs and a goofy bird and a villainous blimp pilot and so on until I was counting down the clock. I don't understand who thought it'd be funnier/more interesting to take the characters out of their flying house, but c'mon. Obviously this isn't going to be the Pixar film that finally converts me to their alleged genius, but at least the first act is enjoyable. In fact, stop it thirty minutes in and it's an all right short.

Up in the Air Easily the best of the lot and, thanks to a mini-scandal about screen-credits that everyone has already forgotten, it went away empty handed (incredibly it lost its sure-thing charity win in Adapted Screenplay to Precious-- Never 4Get that they showed the scene with Precious stealing a bucket of chicken when it won, too!). It's a shame though, as this is a mature look at professionalism versus intimacy, codes of conduct, and ultimately loneliness. I think often of poor George Clooney's character, living out of a suitcase, every time I meet some young Frances Ha-ready hipster who proudly proclaims how little he owns.

My Vote Up in the Air


2012
Amour I'm hardly a Haneke acolyte but I could appreciate what he does here, even if the end result didn't seem particularly exceptional. The film does the small incremental moments of a loved one creeping towards death well and the central performances are strong. The falsely objective camera is suspect, as per usual with Haneke, and sometimes the attention to detail borders on exploitative, but overall I enjoyed this, if that's the right word for it.

Argo Inside baseball wins for the second year in a row. Further proof that the Academy loves a narrative external to the nominated film itself, this effective and entertaining political thriller only won thanks to Affleck's unceremonious snub in the Best Director category, but even considering the machinations that led to its win, it's hard to feel much resentment at the film. Nothing here's revolutionary, pun definitely intended, but I enjoyed the film's obvious audience-pleasing aspects and the stress of the "serious" story contrasted with John Goodman and Alan Arkin's amusingly over-the-top sitcom lines made the whole endeavor breeze by like nothing.

Beasts of the Southern Wild The sin isn't that the Academy thought this was a better film than Moonrise Kingdom, it's that they thought it was a better film than any other movie that didn't make it into this category. Already trashed and burned in its own dedicated thread.

Django Unchained I don't think I'm going to do write-ups like this ever again for the years moving forward, as I will no doubt have already offered my thoughts on all nominated films in their respective threads. I'll still weigh in on which film gets my vote, but future years will see the same issue I have now: I've already talked about this one in its respective thread and not enough time has passed in the interim for me to contribute anything new here.

Les Miserables Oh man, I had a peak at the dedicated thread and saw my initial hopes for this after hearing a lot of misleading info about its merits and, well, were we ever so young? This thing is a disaster, one of the worst-directed musicals I've ever seen-- even the much-lauded one-take of Anne Hathaway's big number is unimaginatively staged so that she's in close-up in one side of the screen and the rest is darkness. Note to makers of film musicals, one of the most alive and vivid expressions of art available: do not film a musical like you are making screencaps for our forum's avatars. Hathaway's the best thing here and she's gone soon. The sets looks expensive but who can be sure since we don't really see much of anything except shot-reverse shots of whoever is singing at the moment. And what we can see is absolute squalor and ugliness-- why even bother to make a musical if it's going to look and feel like actual shit?

Life of Pi Though I enjoyed the book, I wasn't particularly looking forward to this adaptation, but it didn't take long for me to completely buy into what Ang Lee's done here, which is take a seemingly unfilmable novel and not only deliver a great film but produce a final product that improves on the source material. Lee absolutely deserved the Best Director Oscar for his achievement here, which finally marries CGI with a sense of wonder. This is simply put the best use of CGI I've ever seen, and it is employed in the very fashion I keep bitching about: he uses it to create things that could never be and does so in way that retains some level of plausibility and imagination. Irrfan Khan, so brilliant in the third season of In Treatment (I had no idea he was so young, which makes his performance in the show even more impressive), provides the perfect level of distance and inflect needed to sustain the outlandish story via his droll narration, and due respect to the young man playing the physical embodiment of Pi for most of the film, Khan's who I walk away remembering.

Lincoln There's a good ninety minute movie in here about the actual battle in the House of Representatives to pass the 13th Amendment, but Steven Spielberg fills it on all sides with personal details of Lincoln's home strife, family matters, and all other matter of ephemera that countless other films have broached. Why not focus solely on the most fascinating aspect here? Clearly the film is getting its modern parallel digs in, and why not? I was enjoying its central passages so much that I was disheartened when the film kept running after the bill's passage and I realized the film was going to end in the assassination. I mean, why? Why not end it fifteen minutes earlier? Who cares about that in relation to what we've seen in this film? Because Daniel Day Lewis' Lincoln is so good that we have to do the high school play version of an adult film just to lend additional gravitas in a move that only signals the audience isn't respected enough to be engages solely in the House battle? Although, DDL is good (unrecognizable, honestly), as are the rest of the cast of scoundrels making up the politicians. I particularly enjoyed David Strathairn, who is given the film's best moment in response to being subjected to another of Lincoln's endless spew of aphorisms. Ultimately though this is just another historical docudrama, like countless others from cinema past, doomed to be shown in classrooms and aired on basic cable every couple of months, but essentially irrelevant in the long run.

Silver Linings Playbook Another film I've already discussed ad nauseum in its dedicated thread. Cliff Notes: Cute romance, good performances, charmingly old-fashioned for all its swears.

Zero Dark Thirty Like the Hurt Locker, everyone else seems to have gotten way more than a shrug out of this, but that's strictly where it falls for me. Jessica Chestain is good if unremarkable in the central performance, and the climactic real-time raid was oversold to levels it couldn't possibly deliver so I'm not surprised I was disappointed, but disappointed all the same.

My Vote Life of Pi


Image


Guess my gambit of only watching Best Picture nominees for the last month finally paid off because I'm finished-- and boy does it feel nice to be out of movie jail! Out of 506 nominees, one is lost and one only available via UCLA, so that leaves 504 nominees now seen by me. How neat to actually finish one of these projects. I'll continue to weigh in here when others attempt to follow suit and I'll also make sure to contribute thoughts on subsequent years' nominees and winners for as long as I post here (now that I've done it I'll have to keep up with it for the rest of my natural life-- it's kinda like the ending of A Handful of Dust). But otherwise, so long suckas!

Housekeeping for the second part of the project:

Top 5 Best Best Picture Winners
the Godfather (1972)
Chicago (2002)
the Artist (2011)
the Deer Hunter (1978)
No Country For Old Men (2007)

Top 5 Worst Best Picture Winners
Crash (2005)
Out of Africa (1985)
Rain Man (1988)
Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
the English Patient (1996)


Highest-ranking Year 1976 (4.6) (Highest overall score from any year from either side of the divide. "Fun" "fact": Only three out of 85 years ended up with an average rating of 4 or higher: 1976, 1994, and 2007)

Lowest-ranking Year 1977 (1.8) (Tied with 1958 for lowest overall score from both sides of the divide)


Top 10 Best Best Picture Nominees
the Last Picture Show (1971)
All the President's Men (1976)
Broadcast News (1987)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Nashville (1975)
Michael Clayton (2007)
JFK (1991)
American Graffiti (1973)
Traffic (2000)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

Top 10 Worst Best Picture Nominees
the Hours (2002)
Avatar (2009)
Beasts of the Southern Wild (2012)
Scent of a Woman (1992)
Julia (1977)
Ray (2004)
the Turning Point (1977)
Tootsie (1982)
127 Hours (2010)
Hello, Dolly! (1969)

The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 8:20 pm
by TMDaines
For quick reference, Domino, which film is lost and which is only available through UCLA.

Edit: The Parade is lost but there are references to two films viewable at UCLA in this thread.

Edit 2: Whoops that's The Patriot that is lost.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 8:37 pm
by domino harvey
The White Parade is only available as of this writing via UCLA. The same used to be true of East Lynne but it popped up thru back channels a couple months ago (albeit missing the last couple minutes)

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:01 pm
by knives
Well I feel like I'm reading bizzaro world with those French Connection II and A Serious Man responses though I suppose with the later it is such a culturally insular film in addition to the typical Coen stuff.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:15 pm
by zedz
domino harvey wrote:1971
A Clockwork Orange Rewatching it for the first time since college, I have to admit I like it far more than I remembered and it fares best yet of the Kubricks I've been revisiting/seeing for the first time lately. The greatest strengths here are in Kubrick's famous distancing techniques being perfectly matched to the tone of this weird behavior study and Malcolm McDowell's iconic performance. I rarely see McDowell singled out when people praise the film but he makes potentially unsayable lines from Burgess' novel sparkle and work and his physicality portrays the right amount of sexual threat and charm.
I think A Clockwork Orange has a lot of problems, but McDowell is definitely not one of them. I feel like he's the only actor in the film who really nails the tone that Kubrick's film requires (and I strongly suspect that it's his experience with Lindsay Anderson that is crucial here), and moreover that he's one of the few actors in any of Kubrick's 'mature' works who manages to operate successfully within the director's very constrained and artificial worldview. On the other hand, I find quite a few of the other performances in the film just laughably terrible.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:27 pm
by Mr Sausage
knives wrote:Well I feel like I'm reading bizzaro world with those French Connection II and A Serious Man responses though I suppose with the later it is such a culturally insular film in addition to the typical Coen stuff.
It wasn't the French Connection II comments that got me (I agree with him, tho' my feelings aren't so strong) so much as the comment that the The French Connection doesn't have many memorable scenes outside the car chase--I count four other major scenes off the top of my head, each one revolving around a memorable piece of dialogue (or in the case of the subway chase, a gesture). Also didn't quite understand why he felt the ending was lacking. It seems like the perfect way to end a film about a real-life case in which the lead criminal got away. Fitting, too, that our driven-to-the-point-monomania detective ends the film chasing and shooting at shadows.

I still think it's one of the strongest thrillers I've ever seen. It's taut, perfectly observed, and detail focused. With all the praise movies like Zodiac, All the President's Men, and Blow-Out get for their close attention to investigative details, The French Connection gets overlooked for how superbly it handles the same thing, and how exciting it makes normally dull tasks like following someone in a car all night. In fact I think I prefer it to all three of those movies (and that's saying something considering how strong the first two are).

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:33 pm
by knives
zedz wrote:
domino harvey wrote:1971
A Clockwork Orange Rewatching it for the first time since college, I have to admit I like it far more than I remembered and it fares best yet of the Kubricks I've been revisiting/seeing for the first time lately. The greatest strengths here are in Kubrick's famous distancing techniques being perfectly matched to the tone of this weird behavior study and Malcolm McDowell's iconic performance. I rarely see McDowell singled out when people praise the film but he makes potentially unsayable lines from Burgess' novel sparkle and work and his physicality portrays the right amount of sexual threat and charm.
I think A Clockwork Orange has a lot of problems, but McDowell is definitely not one of them. I feel like he's the only actor in the film who really nails the tone that Kubrick's film requires (and I strongly suspect that it's his experience with Lindsay Anderson that is crucial here), and moreover that he's one of the few actors in any of Kubrick's 'mature' works who manages to operate successfully within the director's very constrained and artificial worldview. On the other hand, I find quite a few of the other performances in the film just laughably terrible.
What do you mean by artificial? I find Kubrick to be one of the least artificial filmmakers out there, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding how it connects with worldview.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:36 pm
by Mr Sausage
Speaking of bizzaro world, how is Kubrick not artificial (let alone the least of such filmmakers)? It's hard to think of a filmmaker more formalist and more given to framing everything through a peculiar stylistic lense.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:42 pm
by knives
I don't think being formalist necessarily makes one artificial let alone in terms of a worldview. For example I was just talking with a friend the other day about the reality for Eyes Wide Shut and how honestly it portrays the way that secular living makes neurotic a lot of Jews and how that is probably (accidentally) reflective of Kubrick's own attempts to leave his culture behind. Also unless I'm mistaken wasn't much of A Clockwork Orange shot on real locations dressed up to look futuristic?

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:44 pm
by zedz
What Sausage said, but to clarify, I find everything in Kubrick's films, from the decor to the framing to the performances to be subservient to Kubrick's 'vision' to an extraordinary degree - for better or worse. Everything is fussily controlled to the nth degree, which is what makes the films so very distinctive (and, for me, generally airless and tiresome), and what the actors do in his films often has only the most tangential connection to recognizable human behaviour. Given the number of takes Kubrick reputedly demanded, you have to assume that this is the effect he was intending, and thus a (dubious?) triumph of technique rather than a failure of it.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:46 pm
by zedz
knives wrote:Also unless I'm mistaken wasn't much of A Clockwork Orange shot on real locations dressed up to look futuristic?
Just because some of those places exist doesn't make A Clockwork Orange Bicycle Thieves.

Re: The Alternate Oscars: Best Picture (1969-Present)

Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 9:50 pm
by knives
zedz wrote:
knives wrote:Also unless I'm mistaken wasn't much of A Clockwork Orange shot on real locations dressed up to look futuristic?
Just because some of those places exist doesn't make A Clockwork Orange Bicycle Thieves.
I'm not claiming he was aiming for realism in that sense, but rather in the sensory experience. This might not be reality in an objective way, but it certainly is in the way reality is experienced. I think Guy Maddin phrased this really well in his 97% true spiel, but I don't see fantasy or lies upon reality when I see a Kubrick film usually.