In Contention

Tag: Saving Private Ryan

  • Define ‘upset’

    Let’s get this straight: an upset and an injustice are two very different things. When a nominee that isn’t widely expected to win beats one that is, that’s an upset. When a highly deserving underdog loses to a less deserving favourite, that’s an injustice. The latter arguably happens more frequently in Oscar history than the former, but that’s no reason to blur the line.

    I mention this in connection with a poll that Sasha Stone spotted yesterday, in which the following were named the biggest Oscar upsets of all time in the Best Picture category:

    1. “Shakespeare in Love” over “Saving Private Ryan” (1998)
    2. “Crash” over “Brokeback Mountain” (2005)
    3. “Dances With Wolves” over “GoodFellas” (1990)
    4. “Rocky” over “Taxi Driver” (1976)
    5. “How Green Was My Valley” over “Citizen Kane” (1941)

    Now I remember the 1990 awards clearly — I was 8 years old, and it was the first Oscar season that I followed keenly from beginning to end. And even I, at that tender age, knew that “Dances With Wolves” was a gimme, a slam-dunk, a no-brainer. However critically acclaimed Scorsese’s masterpiece was, it hadn’t a prayer against the film that swept the Guilds and the Globes — Kevin Costner enjoyed as great a stranglehold on the Oscar as Danny Boyle does today. “GoodFellas” winning would’ve been the upset, not the other way round.

    (more…)

  • Best of the 90’s

    John Travolta and Uma Thurman in Quentin Tarantino\'s Pulp FictionTime is the enemy of all films as it erodes what was once exciting and original. Truly great movies are able to withstand the test of time, but I wonder if enough time has passed to take a look back at the 1990s cinema and make some decisions.

    There was a major breakthrough in the decade with filmmaker Quentin Tarantino, who did not so much open the door for indies as he did kick it in and stomp on it with his “Pulp Fiction,” a gloriously acted, directed and written masterpiece about criminals in Los Angeles.  When Godard spoke of making films with a guy, a girl and a gun, was this what he had in mind?

    Though Tarantino has strugled to follow up his legendary 1994 effort with an equally powerful offering, there is little doubt he will, or at least could if he wanted to. (Though he keeps stopping and starting on his latest ambitious project.)  After all, he is still growing as a director.  And just look at Steven Spielberg, who for my money has grown artistically through the last 15 years more so than any other major filmmaker. It was as though “Schindler’s List” and the release of winning the Oscar set him free.

    Anyway, for the record and argument, here are my ten best films of the 1990s:

    1. “Pulp Fiction”
    2. “Schindler’s List”
    3. “Goodfellas”
    4. “Unforgiven”
    5. “Saving Private Ryan”
    6. “The Sweet Hereafter”
    7. “Magnolia”
    8. “L.A. Confidential”
    9. “The Shawshank Redemption”
    10. “The Silence of the Lambs”

    You?

  • Spielberg and blockbusters

    Can he do it? After becoming (in his own eyes) a serious filmmaker with “Schindler’s List,” “Amistad,” “Saving Private Ryan,” “A.I.” and “Munich,” is Steven Spielberg able to re-create the magic he almost always brought to his pure entertainment blockbusters?

    It takes a look at his journey as an artist to even attempt a reasoned understanding of such a question.

    On one hand, I argue that he was always a brilliant director, “Jaws,” “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” and “E.T.” all great examples of his artistry, yet he himself was never satisfied by the reaction to those films by the Academy. It is well documented that Spielberg coveted acceptance in the film community, seeing the Oscar for Best Director as the ultimate acceptance from Hollywood. Snubbed for “Jaws” in 1975, he behaved like a petulant child as live cameras caught it all on film, invited in to see his reaction when he was nominated…but — he wasn’t.

    (more…)

  • REVIEW: “Flags of Our Fathers” (***)

    Paramount Pictures\' Flags of Our FathersClint Eastwood is largely considered one of the most uneven directors working today.  For every probing piece of thematic greatness (“Unforgiven,” “Mystic River”) there are three or four considerable missteps, from “The Gauntlet” and “Heartbreak Ridge” to “Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil” and “Blood Work.”

    Such inconsistency is the price a hard-working filmmaker pays, for anyone willing to crank out a new project every other year for three decades is bound to miss the bull’s-eye frequently.

    At the same time, amidst these lesser efforts, Eastwood has always shown a process of honing his artistry, remaining a singular talent and every once in a while experiencing the serendipity of matching that talent with exceptional material.  Indeed, more often than not, a failing Clint Eastwood film is doomed on the page before principle photography even begins.

    “Flags of Our Fathers” is certainly a singular figment of the war film oeuvre, fit with promising themes rather unrepresented in the genre’s history that speak eloquently to today’s environment of deception of the masses for the gain of the establishment.

    But it is also an exercise ultimately hampered by an unfocused and erratic narrative, one that constantly seems to be searching for itself and feels hastily lifted from the pages of James Bradley’s best selling book of the same name by William Broyles, Jr. and last year’s Oscar-winning scribe Paul Haggis.

    Bradley’s book was a personal endeavor for the author.  The son of John Bradley, one of the six infamous Iwo Jima flag-raisers immortalized by Associated Press photographer Joe Rosenthal in March of 1945, James Bradley crafted a human account of the lives of unassuming heroes captured in time.  Only three of them survived the war to see the image’s impact on the western world, and within the pages of “Flags of Our Fathers,” their stories are told with painstaking clarity and at times sluggish accuracy.

    The task in adapting the book as a film was to amplify the central theme of manipulation and marketing for the greater good.  Broyles and Haggis succeed in doing this to a point, but as the yarn unfolds, the depth of potential seems to thin out in the mix.

    The three survivors in the photo were John “Doc” Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), a medic who certainly saw his share of carnage on Iwo Jima; Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford), a man portrayed as intent on becoming a “hero”; and Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), a Pima Native American paradoxically proud to serve a country that had relegated his people to the confines of reservations.

    Upon their return to the United States, the flag-raisers find themselves ensnared in a publicity tour that represents the core of what Haggis is trying to get across.  Behind the scenes, the aim is for Rosenthal’s lasting image to spearhead a wave of hope and patriotism that will inspire citizens to purchase bonds as the country suffers financial asphyxiation four years into the war.

    (from left) Adam Beach, Ryan Phillippe and Jesse Bradford in Flags of Our FathersThe ubiquity of the photo puts Gagnon in the appreciated place he had sought to be, Hayes in the hesitant position he feels he doesn’t deserve, and Bradley as an awkward observer of it all, strangely passive as a character, given the book’s origins.

    This repetitive sense of exhaustive handling is intercut with the infamous battle that claimed the lives of over 27,000 human beings – three quarters of them Japanese.  More congressional medals of honor were awarded for the Battle of Iwo Jima than any other battle in American history.

    A large chunk of this military excursion is presented in the first act – a good ten or fifteen minutes of solid chaos.  Had Haggis chosen to tell the story in a more linear fashion, keeping the battle at the top and using its memory as a haunting element throughout the rest of the film, the pieces might have come together more organically.

    But the stink of manipulation and even amateurism emanates from the decision to continuously go back to Iwo Jima when it feels thematically relevant.

    Eastwood and his technical crew, not the least of which being cinematographer Tom Stern and film editor Joel Cox, do a marvelous job of conveying an unnerving and multi-faceted battle sequence that will draw comparisons to Steven Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan.”

    Eastwood is working with much more than land infantry here, however, mixing in air battalions, battleship artillery and the symbiosis of it all as it pertains to the taking of Mount Suribachi on the east side of the island.  Exceptional visual effects mix seamlessly with Stern’s washed out photography for a truly gripping and visceral experience.

    However, where Spielberg successfully utilized the Battle of Normandy to visually tell his story, Eastwood seems to get lost in the elements, sacrificing thematics for admittedly surprising capabilities in the trenches.

    All of this might have made for a much more tolerable, even above average war film had the third act not dived so gratuitously into the binding structure of the rest of the film.  Multiple perspectives and narrations carry the tale here and there through fleeting scenes depicting James Bradley (portrayed by Tom McCarthy) interviewing subjects and preparing his book.

    It was laid out from the start, and a return ought to have been expected, but regardless, once the final act commences, the screenwriters make the unwise decision to concentrate on this aspect of the story for purposes much more sentimental than thematic.  And each unrelenting cue of a typically repetitive Eastwood score amplifies this perception of the final leg of the film.

    The performances throughout represent a true ensemble, but the focal points are surely Phillippe, Beach and Bradford.  Phillippe handles an under-written leading role as well as can be expected (that’s really all that can be said), while Bradford puts forth a stock, self-serving and rather uncomplicated character that hedges its bets in an obvious attempt by the screenwriter to steer clear of disrespect.

    Ryan Phillippe in Flags of Our FathersElsewhere, John Slattery offers a great supporting turn as the point man on this public relations whirlwind.  Barry Pepper, in the role of flag-raiser Mike Strank, comfortably stifles the urge to take a tough-as-nails character to the same places he has taken numerous similar characters numerous times before.

    Neal McDonough and Robert Patrick fill out the higher military ranks accordingly, while Jamie Bell, Joseph Cross, Benjamin Walker and a thankfully muted Paul Walker (as mistaken flag-raiser Hank Hansen) seem to blend together in the surrounding scenery.

    The real find of the film, however, is Adam Beach, already a 16 year veteran in the business and on the cusp of a defining moment in his career.  Portraying an alcoholic Native American in Ira Hayes (a character that attempts to avoid cliché when it can), Beach’s role automatically exists as the most complicated of the lot.

    There are times when the viewer catches a whiff of over-reaching in his performance, but more often than not, the 33-year-old actor lands the right emotional notes in key scenes that will evoke the most heart-felt reaction from audiences.  Even amidst a continuously tepid reaction to the goings-on, this viewer felt the threat of a tear when Hayes visibly breaks down and hugs the mother of one of his fallen comrades with all the meaning in the world.

    As war films go, “Flags of Our Fathers” had the opportunity to speak to greater truths of the actual machine of war than any other film of its kind.  The John Ford “print the legend” quality of the story is definitely apparent, and as mentioned at the top, these notions speak volumes to the modern environment of vast manipulation, deceit and even celebrity.  But they seem to be fighting through the dense foliage of spectacle at times, and at other times, the elaborate design of unnecessary artistry.

    Much of this is ultimately forgivable, however, if somewhat hesitantly so.

    Eastwood is as surprising as he is predictable in that he never seems to fully collapse under the burden of something new or unfamiliar.  He has found himself adept at conveying epic stories through the intimate brushstrokes of character in the past, the truest examples being his early westerns “High Plains Drifter” and especially “The Outlaw Josey Wales.”

    “Flags of Our Fathers” feels like his third or fourth war film endeavor much more than it does his first.  It was a valiant effort and a unique experience, but it ultimately isn’t enough to stretch beyond definitive flaws in the screenplay.

    During the production of “Flags of Our Fathers,” Eastwood reportedly felt as if he wasn’t conveying the full story of the Battle of Iwo Jima.  With this in mind, he set about preparing “Letters from Iwo Jima” (formerly “Red Sun, Black Sand”).  Told from the Japanese perspective and releasing February 9, 2007 from Warner Bros. Pictures, “Letters” may or may not find itself more in tune with its own thematic structure than “Flags of Our Fathers.”

    Regardless, as a duet, the films will inevitably find themselves unique in the pantheon of anti-war cinema.  It’s nice to see a seasoned filmmaker being this ambitious, and no matter how you slice it, these two films are an ambitious enterprise to say the least.

  • In it together

    Today is my birthday. I’m 24 years old.

    I’ve been following the Oscar race with some notable level of attention for 8 years. It is by no means a lengthy tenure, as there are others in the game who have been observing this outlandish span of time much longer than that. Even still, in these recent years – the height of the race’s popularity amongst the film-going community – I’ve noticed a number of intriguing things as a witness to its modern evolution.

    My first season was the 1997 season. The big films in play were James Cameron’s Titanic, Curtis Hanson’s L.A. Confidential and Gus Van Sant’s Good Will Hunting. It would be a rather poignant introductory year into the process for me.

    I knew my favorite films of the year were As Good As It Gets (from director James L. Brooks) and L.A. Confidential. The former struck the right chord at a time in my life where I was truly head-over-hills in love, while the latter was part of a brief progression of cinema – along with Michael Mann’s Heat and Bryan Singer’s The Usual Suspects – that was greatly sparking my interest and leaning me toward a profession chosen in the filmmaking arena.

    (more…)