1967 - Bonnie and Clyde

Another show is over. The final performance of The 39 Steps at the Bristol Valley Theater came and went today, and I am currently packing up and getting ready to head back to New York City tomorrow. And for the first time this year, I do not have any immediate plans for any upcoming performing ventures. With an improv show in Las Vegas, an off-off-Broadway show in New York, a short film in Delaware and a play in Naples, it's been a busy year so far. Let's hope the next project is just around the corner...

Next up in the review of 1967's Best Picture nominees is...

Bonnie and Clyde
Director:
Arthur Penn
Screenplay:
David Newman & Robert Benton
Starring:
Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, Michael J. Pollard, Gene Hackman, Estelle Parsons, Denver Pyle, Dub Taylor, Evans Evans, Gene Wilder
Academy Awards:
10 nominations
2 wins, including Best Supporting Actress (Parsons)

It's the Great Depression and young Clyde Barrow (Beatty) is fresh out of prison for armed robbery. While attempting to steal a car, he is interrupted by the pretty Bonnie Parker (Dunaway). The two hit it off right away and, before you know it, they're planning bank robberies. At a gas station in the middle of nowhere, they pick up oddball C.W. Moss (Pollard), who agrees to join them on their criminal escapades. Soon, the gang grows in number again with Clyde's older brother Buck (Hackman) and his reluctant wife Blanche (Parsons). As their robberies become more violent, Bonnie and Clyde begin to attract the attention of law enforcement as well as the national media, who turn them into infamous superstars.

Bonnie and Clyde doesn't waste any time up front. The beginning moves at a swift pace with our two heroes (or, more accurately, anti-heroes) meeting in the first scene and running away together almost immediately. Even their first recruit, C.W. Moss, doesn't seem to require much time to think things through. He steals from his boss and hops into Bonnie and Clyde's car after knowing them for less than a few minutes. With such a fast-paced set-up, there is little time to familiarise ourselves with the situation but, since the couple's life subsequent to their meeting is very much the whirlwind, the speedy first act is actually quite appropriate, not to mention exciting.

What makes the story particularly interesting is its central relationship. In fact, it would be reasonable to describe the film as a story about a unique relationship, rather than a story about Depression-era bank robbers. Sure, they are bank robbers and this certainly plays a role in their relationship, but the film is clever to focus on how Bonnie and Clyde interact and grow. It is a fascinating affair - Clyde suffers from some kind of sexual dysfunction and Bonnie is bothered by the resultant lack of intimacy. In fact, with the gang always around, the two rarely find themselves alone, so it is more than merely sexual intimacy that they are forgoing.

Then there is the issue of celebrity. The newspapers write sensational stories about them, attributing far more robberies to their name than they actually committed. The hype reaches such heights that even their surviving victims are excited to be swamped by photographers and journalists listening to their tales. It seems this craving for a good story at the expense of the truth is not just a modern predicament.

Bonnie and Clyde is one of several films to share the record for the most acting nominations among its cast. Five actors received nods, the first such acknowledgement for each of them. The picture's two stars, Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway (pictured), both up-and-comers at the time, work well together, delivering a convincing portrait of the infamous couple. Michael J. Pollard snagged his only Oscar nomination in the Supporting Actor category for his suitably quirky portrayal of C.W. Moss. In the same category, Gene Hackman - who barely looked any different then than he does now - was recognised for his fine work as Buck Barrow. The only winner of the five was Estelle Parsons, who nabbed the Supporting Actress award for one of the most annoying characters ever to appear on screen. Blanche's constant screeching and complaining are played with delectable perfection by Parsons. And then there's Gene Wilder, appearing in his film debut. Wilder's piteous persona and unique delivery are superbly applied to his role as the undertaker that Bonnie and Clyde kidnap for a brief time.

----------------------------------------------
Support Matt vs. the Academy and buy:
Bonnie and Clyde on DVD
Bonnie and Clyde on Blu-ray
Bonnie and Clyde on Instant Video
----------------------------------------------

1967 - Guess Who's Coming To Dinner

The 39 Steps has opened and is as much fun as it is exhausting. My lovely wife Kat came to visit on the weekend to see the show and take in Naples' sights, which consist mainly of quaint places to eat. With a couple of days off before we head into our final week of shows - yes, it's a very short run - some of the cast and crew took to the local vineyards for some wine tasting yesterday. Let me just say that I'm glad we didn't have a show yesterday...

While Kat was here, we watched the first of the nominees from 1967's Best Picture race...

Guess Who's Coming To Dinner
Director:
Stanley Kramer
Screenplay:
William Rose
Starring:
Spencer Tracy, Sidney Poitier, Katharine Hepburn, Katharine Houghton, Cecil Kellaway, Beah Richards, Roy E. Glenn
Academy Awards:
10 nominations
2 wins, for Best Actress (Hepburn) and Best Original Screenplay

With an undoubtedly topical subject matter for 1967, Guess Who's Coming To Dinner takes place in the home of the Draytons, Matt (Tracy) and Christina (Hepburn), over the course of one principle-testing evening. Their sweet young daughter, Joey (Houghton), is excited to be bringing home the man she fell in love with while on a recent trip to Hawaii. The only thing is: he's black.

While Joey is oblivious to any potential problems, her new fiancé, John (Poitier), is a little more circumspect, aware that his new in-laws may be shocked by the interracial affair. He respectfully explains to Matt and Christina that, unless they wholeheartedly approve of his marrying their daughter, he will walk away, adding that he will need an answer before he flies to Europe after dinner. Christina is for the idea, but, despite his mostly liberal attitude, Matt has a few reservations. As if the time pressures weren't enough, Matt is also forced into the role of host when Joey spontaneously and naively invites John's parents (Richards & Glenn) over, despite John's desire to break the news to them himself.

Guess Who's Coming to Dinner is a very endearing film with very endearing characters. While I'm sure interracial marriage is still taboo in many areas, the issue is certainly not as shocking as it was over 40 years ago. Back then, I imagine the film may not have seemed so endearing, or at least, the endearing tone would have been offset somewhat by the story's tackling of the tough social issues of the day. Modern audiences, however, may even describe the film as quaint. Having said all that, it is still abundantly clear how serious the issue is to the characters within the film and the whole subject is dealt with delicately and earnestly.

Featuring such an abundance of dialogue, one would be forgiven for assuming the picture is an adaptation of a stage play. Not to mention that the action takes place predominantly in one location over the course of one evening. However, William Rose wrote the script directly for the screen, winning the Academy's Best Original Screenplay award in the process. His script is at times farcical, at times sentimental, but never too much of either. And while there is obviously a sincere message, Rose cleverly manages to maintain a lighthearted attitude, mostly through the creation of such lovable characters.

Indeed, the characters' lovableness must also be attributed to a cast who deliver some delightful performances, particularly by frequent co-stars Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn (pictured). As the doddering old father, Tracy is affable, even when he's harsh. This marked his final screen performance and he was deservedly Oscar-nominated for it. Hepburn picked up her second Best Actress Oscar for her sweet and moving portrayal of the respectful mother and voice of reason. Surprisingly left off the nomination list was Sidney Poitier (who also wasn't cited for his other significant role in the same year from In the Heat of the Night - perhaps these two performances split the vote). Nonetheless, he is charming and engaging as the impossibly honest fiancé. As the happy-go-lucky daughter, Katharine Houghton is a little cheesy, but I suppose her character is intended to be naive and cheerful. Nominated in the supporting categories were Cecil Kellaway, delivering an entertaining portrayal of the Draytons' clergyman friend and Beah Richards, turning in a strong and touching performance as John's mother.

----------------------------------------------
Support Matt vs. the Academy and buy:
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner on DVD
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner on Instant Video
----------------------------------------------

Best Picture of 1982

I've come across some eclectic shortlists over the course of this project, but none more so than 1982's bunch of nominees. Usually, the larger the difference between each film, the more difficult it becomes to compare them, and while that sentiment remains true here, it was, nonetheless, relatively easy to choose my favourite.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1982 are:

• E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
• Gandhi
• Missing
• Tootsie
• The Verdict

A science-fiction family film, a historical biopic, a political suspense drama, a legal character study and a comedy classic. A diverse group, no question. Selecting a favourite should have been complicated, yet I deliberated only briefly.

Missing was eliminated early on. Though an involving story, its overly sincere attitude gives it a conspiratorial feel. Harder to dismiss is Tootsie. Funny and poignant, it succeeds on many levels, only slightly hindered by some convenient plot points, particularly the pat conclusion.

Thus, we are left with three extremely worthy films. The least well-known of the trio, The Verdict is thoroughly engaging, containing little with which to find fault. Reluctantly, I remove it from the running for barely justifiable reasons. The Academy's choice, Gandhi, is epic yet intimate, a fascinating character study with a deservedly lauded lead performance. But my pick is the evocative and stunningly beautiful E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial. A classic loved by young and old alike, E.T. is exceptional in both its story and its technique. Cinema at its finest.

Best Picture of 1982
Academy's choice: Gandhi	Matt's choice: E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial

Your choice:

You may choose your favourite, too, by voting in the poll above. Next up, we examine a year of many classics from the 1960s.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 1967 are:

• Bonnie and Clyde
• Doctor Dolittle
• The Graduate
• Guess Who's Coming to Dinner
• In the Heat of the Night

As I approach final rehearsals for The 39 Steps, there will undoubtedly be another short hiatus before the next round of reviewing begins. Stay tuned...

1982 - Gandhi

Yet again, I am writing to you from somewhere other than New York City. (Perhaps if I updated this blog more often, this wouldn't happen as frequently.) I am currently in the very sleepy town of Naples in upstate New York, rehearsing The Thirty-Nine Steps for Bristol Valley Theater. A parody of the classic Hitchcock film, the play consists of dozens and dozens of characters but only four actors - one man to play the lead, one woman to play three female characters and two other actors (referred to in the script as Clowns) who play everyone else. I have the fitness-inducing pleasure of playing one of the madcap clowns.

On a break from rehearsals, I found the time to watch the last of 1982's nominees for Best Picture...

Gandhi
Director:
Richard Attenborough
Screenplay:
John Briley
Starring:
Ben Kingsley, Candice Bergen, Edward Fox, John Gielgud, Trevor Howard, John Mills, Martin Sheen, Ian Charleson, Athol Fugard, Gunther Maria Halmer, Saeed Jaffrey, Geraldine James, Alyque Padamsee, Amrish Puri, Roshan Seth, Rohini Hattangadi
Academy Awards:
11 nominations
8 wins, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor (Kingsley)

Spanning more than five decades in the life of Mohandas K. Gandhi (Kingsley), the critically acclaimed biopic certainly covers a lot of ground. In South Africa at the end of the nineteenth century, the London-trained attorney-at-law experiences first-hand the discrimination rife in the British Empire. As an Indian, he was not allowed to travel first-class or even walk on the pavement. Rather than wallow in disillusionment, Gandhi leads a non-violent campaign to protest the injustices, eventually winning some concessions from the British government. Back at home in India, he begins the arduous task of gaining India's independence from Britain. Over the years, he endures several imprisonments, witnesses horrific incidents of oppression and initiates one or two hunger strikes, yet Gandhi remains steadfast in his conviction that violence is never the answer.

Despite a running time of just over three hours, Gandhi is surprisingly concise. The narrative is consistently clear and easy to follow, giving a comfortable accessibility to our protagonist's growth. As with most underdog stories, there is plenty of powerfully emotional content and our empathy for Gandhi's plight is quickly realised through several scenes depicting his or his people's oppression. The massacre scene is particularly evocative and almost difficult to watch.

One potential pitfall of presenting a story about such a revered historical figure is the temptation to depict the subject without flaws and foibles, making him seem somehow superhuman. This picture is certainly not ashamed of glorifying its subject but, thankfully, it also allows Gandhi a few moments of hotheadedness. When he loses his temper with his wife, he becomes more of a regular guy with which we can all identify, rather than just the constantly serene nothing-ever-rattles-me saint of the rest of the film. These revealing moments are perhaps too few and too brief, but they make for a fascinating study nonetheless. Mind you, from another perspective, his moral tenacity could easily be seen as another flaw. Gandhi is so dogmatic in his pacifist beliefs to the point that he almost kills himself by refusing to eat. In any other human being, such stubborn behaviour would be considered stupidity. Again, these issues only help to create a more well-rounded character on screen, far more interesting than a cut-and-dry do-gooder.

Ben Kingsley (pictured) carries the film with a powerhouse performance that earned him the Best Actor Oscar. Playing one man over the course of fifty years is never easy and Kingsley is just as believable as the 70-something Gandhi as he is as the 20-something Gandhi. He is supported by an eclectic array of talented actors, including plenty of esteemed British greats, who pop in for a scene or two - Trevor Howard, John Mills, Edward Fox, and my favourite, John Gielgud as the peevish Viceroy of India. Ian Charleson, appearing in his second consecutive Best Picture winner after 1981's Chariots of Fire, is amiably subtle as the Christian Reverend that Gandhi befriends. Not English, but also impressive are Martin Sheen, Candice Bergen and particularly Roshan Seth, expertly portraying the love and frustration that goes along with being Gandhi's close friend and political colleague. To satisfy my penchant for picking out the yet-to-be-famous actors in relatively minor roles, the film offers several instances of such - Nigel Hawthorne appears briefly; Harry Potter fans will recognise Richard Griffiths; although not immediately discernible, Daniel Day-Lewis' trademark intensity as a South African thug gives him away; and everyone's favourite mailman from Cheers, John Ratzenberger, shows up as a military driver but his voice is dubbed (by Martin Sheen, reportedly), ironic since Ratzenberger is now also very well known for his prolific voice work, mostly with Pixar.

1982 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial

Well, I'm back from a week in Delaware, where I was shooting Fridays, a short film that centres on an 11-year-old girl named Jenny, who, once a week, visits her terminally ill best friend in hospital. I play Jenny's concerned and protective father, David, who is somewhat unsure how to help his daughter deal with such a sobering predicament. It was quite a rewarding, if a little exhausting, shoot, and I will certainly keep you all abreast of the film's progress on the festival circuit.

Back in New York, our desktop computer has been rather uncooperative of late, shutting itself down at seemingly random moments. The obnoxious whirring noise that used to fill the room each time the computer was in operation has now entirely subsided. Thus, it seems relatively clear that we have a lazy fan unwilling to fulfil its cooling duties, thereby allowing the system to overheat and pack it in.

Miraculously, though, the computer survived long enough for me to watch the entirety of the next Best Picture contender from 1982...

E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
Director:
Steven Spielberg
Screenplay:
Melissa Mathison
Starring:
Dee Wallace, Henry Thomas, Peter Coyote, Robert MacNaughton, Drew Barrymore
Academy Awards:
9 nominations
4 wins, including Best Original Score

After his spaceship makes an emergency take-off before he has boarded, a lonely and frightened alien is stranded in northern California. Taking shelter in a nearby backyard shed, he is soon discovered by a young boy named Elliott (Thomas), who secretly hides him in his bedroom. Elliott introduces his new friend to his older brother Michael (MacNaughton) and his younger sister Gertie (Barrymore), who begin to find ways to communicate with E.T., as they come to call him, while keeping him hidden from their mother (Wallace). As Elliott and E.T. become psychically attuned to each other's feelings, Elliott realises that E.T. pines for his own home and helps him build a communication device that will signal his people.

This is how you make a movie. The epitome of modern Hollywood, E.T. is simply captivating on almost every level and I struggle to explain why (which is horribly inconvenient since that is precisely for what this blog is intended). Despite being almost entirely wordless, the mesmerising opening sequence is crystal clear and immediately moving. It is as great an example of the cinematic style of storytelling as you are likely to find. Smartly written, beautifully shot, intricately edited.

Although I endeavour to view the original theatrical release of each nominee for the purpose of fairness, Netflix delivered the 20th anniversary edition of E.T., which includes a slightly longer cut with additional scenes and visual effects enhancements. These modern additions make for an interesting experience. On the one hand, seeing E.T. as a CGI character is a little unsettling, aware as we are that such technology was not in existence in 1982. On the other hand, it allows for a much more expressive E.T., particularly when viewed alongside the comparatively limited facial animatronics of the original. As it stands, E.T. is an immensely accessible character. One can only imagine how much more lovable he might have been were the film made today. That said, there is something mysteriously charming and perhaps nostalgic about the now seemingly primitive puppetry. These minor distractions, however, do little to disrupt the story and it all simply confirms my notion that I should always watch the original theatrical cut during this project, making such discussions moot. So, feel free to ignore this entire paragraph.

Spielberg is quite honestly at his masterful best here. In collaboration with cinematographer Allen Daviau, each shot is exquisitely composed, crafting a moody and evocative atmosphere. Toss in the delicate editing by Carol Littleton and the magical score by John Williams and the result is a masterclass in the emotionally manipulative effects of movie-making that even the best film schools would struggle to teach. Granted, there is a glossy Hollywood feeling to the picture, but it is undoubtedly intended to be a fantasy film. In that context, the pure movie magic is overwhelmingly appropriate. The important thing, however, is that it is always rooted in reality. The circumstances may be fantastical, but the characters' reactions are deeply human.

As is his wont, Spielberg assembled yet another naturally gifted cast, including many children. Carrying the film with one of cinema's most impressive child performances is Henry Thomas, finding the perfect mix of childishness and maturity. Playing the big brother, Robert MacNaughton likewise delivers a nuanced performance, mature beyond his years, while Drew Barrymore, as the young innocent sister, is impossibly cute. As the only adult face we see for the vast majority of the movie, Dee Wallace is amiable and touching. For the keen-eyed viewers, C. Thomas Howell can be seen in his big screen debut as one of Michael's friends, and also in her film debut, that's former Baywatch babe Erika Eleniak as the young girl that Elliott romances.