Johnny Simmons

I've not looked at enough films this year. That is so obvious...some just came out and others... I've just been really lazy. 

                                            

So far...this year I've seen only sixteen films...which is not very good. What's going to happen when good films start hitting me left and right as the Oscar season approaches? GAH. I sense a burnout...

God this is shameful. Maybe I can assess the year so far next week...if I see most of these of course. Anyhow, head over here and see what Nick's thought of the year so far. 

Once in a while a film comes around that’s so different that to a degree it reinvents film. Sometimes that reinvention is obvious and sometimes it’s less ostensible. In many ways Babe reinvented film. It was not obvious, and more of a slow burn – but it did. From Barnyard, to Charlotte’s Web, and so many more the talking farm has become a staple in many children’s film. And ostensibly Babe is a children’s film. Ah, but underneath the delightful animal machinations the story is one for all ages. A story of hope and acceptance – a tale of an unprejudiced heart.
                

Babe is in many ways tantamount to an animated film and as in many animated films the voice work by the principal actors is paramount. But more than the voice work; the screenplay for Babe is the heart and soul of the movie. There is just something incredibly heart-warming about Noonan's story. The allegorical implications of the story are perhaps not as far-reaching as Animal Farm; but this is not meant to be done in the vein of Orwell’s satire. At the root of it all, Babe is a story about fitting in.
                          

James Cromwell as The Farmer carries most of the human side of things and he’s effective. Chances are you’ve never seen him quite like this before. Mariam Margolyes voice work as Fly is probably my favourite in the movie – The Sheep Dog. Animals can’t speak – although so many films – animated and non-animated – don’t seem to get that. But if ever they spoke, you get the feeling that they would probably sound like they do in Babe. The voicework is not overdone or nauseating. It’s warm and curiously true.
                 

I actually did not expect to make it into my top 100 films; but as I was ranking the films over and over the name kept popping up. And this is not about which film is better. This is just an enjoyable film...and I like it. So there it is at #88. And I realised that for all its simplicity it's wonderful. There aren’t any huge plot turns, there aren’t any big battle scenes or no Oscar begging performance. But we don’t need all that. Just like you don’t need a garrulous review for this. As James Cromwell said, "That’ll do, Pig."
         
VOTE KATHARINE HEPBURN AWARDS

There is a reason that some characters are forgotten. They steal into a film and spend hardly anytime there, sometimes they are not even particularly important to the film plot wise...but they make an impression. Yes, the do. And that's how it was with

                     

I've never been a big fan of Monroe. She is gorgeous...but her acting talent has always been a bit of a head scratcher as far as I'm concerned. One thing she had, though, that cannot be undervalued is personality. Miss Caswell rolls into the film late. It's almost half way through and Eve is throwing that legendary party for Bill Sampson. As Margo says this is going to be a bumpy night...and of course it is. From the first line Monroe good. Birdie passes with a luxurious sable coat in hand, and Claudia says to herself..."Now there's something a girl could make sacrifices for." This essentially sums up her character. Materialistic. But this film is not exactly one on social commentary...so that's irrelevant. But it's the second line that gets me hooked. When Max, a film director, comes out and says "Did you sable or Gable?" She replies most nonchalantly, "Either one."

                          

A Man for All Seasons...if you’re into literature this name represents one of the best historical dramas written. If you’re a film fan this name holds a different meaning for you. You know this title because it robbed Mike Nichols Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? of the Oscar for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor. It’s always unfortunate when one work of art falls in esteem because it robbed another. Regardless of whether they were good or not to begin with Grace Kelly in Country Girl, Crash, Oliver, Ordinary People, The Greatest Show On Earth and so many casualties have become infamous not for having won Academy Awards but for robbing others of the Award. It’s a bitter pill to swallow. However, I think that of all the notorious underserved winners – in whatever category – A Man For All Seasons is one of the most unfairly maligned. I would have given the Oscar to A Man For All Seasons – for Best Picture at the very least. And it is my #70 on the list of favourites I’ve been compiling.

                                   

A Man For All Seasons tells the story of Thomas More a British nobleman who is a member of the Catholic Church. It is the time of Henry VIII and his legendary marriage to Katherine of Aragorn. When Henry was but a child he was betrothed and later married to his deceased brother’s wife. A woman many years his senior. The move was purely political. Whatever their relationship was like, Henry has long since become disgusted with the relationship and wants to remarry. This time for l’amour to the beautiful and young Anne Boleyn. Chances are you’ve probably already heard this story. The telling varies from portraying Anne is a woman in love to a conniving bitch [re The Tudors, The Other Boleyn Girl, Anne of the Thousand Days etc]. But more than likely you’ve never seen it this way. Because A Man For All Seasons is not about Henry; it is about Thomas More. Thomas is a devout Catholic and a man who Henry holds in high esteem. When Thomas More said he does not agree to the divorce Henry wishes to continue with Henry’s anger begins as a slight flame and grows into something wild and dangerous.

                                                     

At the helm of this film is Paul Scofield in a good performance as the eponymous Man for All Seasons. I’ll always wish that Richard Burton won the Oscar for Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?; but I will not deny that Scofield was a very worthy opponent. His Thomas More is not an annoyingly good character. It’s not just that Thomas More is a better man than his counterparts – he just believes in what he believes. And he cannot be swayed. At his side is wife, Alice [an Oscar nominated Wendy Hiller]. Hiller gives a good performance as his wife. I remember being annoyed when I was younger by her grating personality and having read the play I did not find Alice to be as unpleasant as Hiller portrayed. But as the film progresses she gets better. In that final scene with Scofield she is wonderful and thoroughly deserved her nomination. Susannah York plays his daughter Margaret. Her role to me seemed more paramount than Wendy and her performance is also impressive. Seeing that Oscar was so in love with this flick I am surprised she did not earn a nomination alongside her mother. And I don’t think I would have minded much.

                                            

But although the film is centred on More it is not solely about his family. It deals to a large extent with the English Political system and it is scattered with some very good performances. Reading the play I always found the character of Richard Rich to b excessively fascinating – and I found John Hurt’s characterisation to be spot on. The villainous Cromwell and More’s friend Norfolk played by Leo McKern and Nigel Davenport respectively also give good performances. Davenport’s role was a difficult one since we had to empathise with him while still staying on More’s side. And Orson Welles also lends his supporting talents. But of course the best Supporting Performance of the film was Robert Shaw as the petulant Henry VIII. He is probably the actor that I most identify with Henry VIII whenever I think about his tenure in England. He earned an Oscar nomination... but alas did not win...and they couldn’t even give it to the excellent George Segal either. What utter rot. A Man For All Seasons also features a cameo of sorts by Vanessa Redgrave [pictured above]. She reportedly refused payment for her blink-and-you’ll miss role as Anne Boleyn.

                                           

This is a good film. Many of you are probably fans of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? But don’t go in hating this film for winning. Go into it not only to entertain but perhaps to learn. Of course it’s not history as it was. But perhaps...it was dangerously close. And it’s a wonderful film...so it’s really a win/win situation.

                                    

By now if you’ve been following Oscar news you would have heard that there have been some new changes to the choosing of the best picture winner. The preferential system which is used for choosing the nominees is now being used for picking the actual winner too. Read more on what the system is about.

                        

I am very against this decision. I would not have liked them ranking the nominees when there were five to choose from. For argument’s sake though, it’s relatively simple for you to rank them from least favourite to most favourite. But if you get five more jeans ranking becomes more difficult because you’re working with twice the number which could take twice the time, perhaps more. The members of the Academy are not robots. They’re human. Of the list of ten nominees, there will probably be about three that they’re passionate about [give or take]. After ranking the first two or three, do you really think that they’re going to sit down and weigh the strengths of the remaining seven films? Take for example the year is 2004 and assume the top ten films in addition to Million Dollar Baby, The Aviator, Finding Neverland, Sideways, Ray are Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Hotel Rwanda, Vera Drake, Collateral, Birth…just hypothetically. A voter is passionate for the unusual fare so his top three goes – Eternal Sunshine, Birth, Sideways…he’s left wondering how to rank the remaining seven. Major problem. Hmmm, Scorsese is due let me rank him fourth. Tick. That Kate Winslet chick is hot. Let me vote for her flick. Tick. And so it continues. How many voters will sit down and say…let me measure the aesthetic strengths of The Aviator against Vera Drake…which has the stronger screenplay etc…? Not many. The Academy is demanding too much from their voters and the voters are not going to put any troublesome amount of time into this.

                  

Let me continue. I can’t be sure what the voting looked like when The Departed won the Oscar. But let’s say the distribution was like this if there were ten nominees.

The Departed – 19%, Little Miss Sunshine – 17%, Babel – 14%, Dreamgirls – 12%, Letters From Iwo Jima – 11%, Pan’s Labyrinth – 8%, Volver – 6%, Blood Diamond – 5%, Little Children – 5%, %, The Queen – 3%

Now let’s assume that everyone who voted for The Queen, Blood Diamond and Little Children has their second choices divided between Dreamgirls and Babel 2:1. Dreamgirls now has 21% votes and Babel now has 19%. The voting could go on thus and eventually Babel or Dreamgirls could become the winner because even though the most people want The Departed as their number one it’s not the second choice of many. It may seem like a long shot but it’s very possible. Now films in the same genre are going to get lucky. I like gory films so No Country For Old Men and There Will Be Blood are my top 2. Films like Atonement may have many number ones, but people liking other films won’t have it as their third or second choices. I’m not saying that this is how it went down. But it’s definitely worrying. And I don’t like it one bit.

                            

I really don’t think that this is a good idea. The most they should have done is let voters rank they’re top two and even that’s too much. Why mess with the entire history of the Academy. It’s supposed to be voters voting for their best picture…now it’s turning into the most popular.

       

I have said before that I like William Shakespeare...and I really do. The most popular Shakespeare adaptation is probably Olivier’s Hamlet, which is good but alas could not make it into my top 100. My favourite Shakespeare adaptation though is the swell reviewed Romeo & Juliet directed by Franco Zeffirelli. Released in 1968 this was one of the few Shakespeare films that are really easy to find. In fact I saw this film before my fascination with Shakespeare began.
                               

The story of Romeo and Juliet is so celebrated I think it would be an insult to give the details of the plot. So I will not. Instead let me examine why this is such a good film...or at least a film worthy of your time [in case you have not seen it before].
             

Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting play the main characters and their performances are close to perfection. Both were Golden Globe nominated winning the award for Most Promising New Comer. And to examine this film only they really seemed to have had promising. Unfortunately nothing they have done since then has lived up to that promise. But in this film they were outstanding. I can’t be sure that Romeo & Juliet was as pervasive during the sixties; but it must have been difficult being casted as these legendary characters. Olivia Hussey is the epitome of girlish innocence as Juliet. With her simple beauty and her wide eyed surprise she is the perfect Juliet. Her short journey into womanhood is believable and oh, so poignant. And her chemistry not only with her Romeo but particularly with her Nurse is especially impressive.
             

Leonard Whiting is no joke either. It’s really surprising that he did not become a star in the superficial Hollywood of the 60s. With their love for attractive young men [James Dean, Robert Redford, Warren Beatty] I suppose Whiting along with the underappreciated Richard Beymer were two too many. This doesn’t diminish his debut here though. His chemistry with Whiting really is something. Theatrically the role of Romeo has become something of a joke but Whiting is realistic, believable and most of all earnest in his acting. We don’t see a young man playing Romeo. We see Romeo. I think that both Whiting and Hussey were not undeserving of Oscar nominations. But they did not do it without help.
                    

The film is littered with notable supporting turns. At the top of the list for me is John McEnry as the scene stealing Mercutio. Mercutio has always been a look at me role, and perhaps that explains the ostensible impressiveness of his performance. But I hate to trivialise his work. He dies half way through the movies, but I can still say without uncertainty that I felt him to be the perfect Mercutio. Michael Crawford as the angry Tybalt is also good. You might probably recognise Crawford from Hello, Dolly! And Cabaret or if you’re older as the original Phantom from The Phantom of the Opera. Tybalt is a thankless role, but Crawford pulls it off with that English candour.

The adults are not to be ignored though. What I remember most about Natasha Perry as Lady Capulet was her startling resemblance to Olivia Hussey. Her Lady Capulet may have been a tad too overdone, but playing Shakespeare that’s always a possibility. Her husband played by Paul Hardwick is a wonderful Capulet. Capulet is a good role and it offers much to the actor and Hardwick does well. Not as good as could have been done I suppose, but good nevertheless. And the famous confrontation scene with Juliet works well with him. But oh, Pat Heywood as the Nurse attempts to steal all the scenes she is in. With a downright lewdness and frankness she is hilarious as the Nurse – the main source of comedy in this tragicomedy play. Her first meeting with Romeo plays for all the silliness, and we know that all does not end well but we cannot help being taken in by her nonsense. She plays well to Olivia Hussey and although towards the end [as the character becomes less verbose] she loses some of her sparkle, the performance still is a good one.
         

Maybe, this is not as good a film as I feel, and maybe my affection has more to do with sentimentality than anything else. But this is not a list of best films – there is no such list. It’s a list of those films that have made a large impact on me, the films that I relate with that, I remember that I treasure and Romeo & Juliet sits comfortably at #45.