Oscar Nomination Predictions 2020

We're nearing the home stretch of this extended awards season, so it's finally time for the Oscar nominations. Ahead of Monday's announcement, I've cobbled together my predictions of who will hear their name called out. And when I say "cobbled", I mean "cobbled". I haven't had the chance to see many of the contenders so far, so a lot of these predictions feel like stabs in the dark. Not to mention, BAFTA overhauled their voting procedures, which probably means they'll be less of a predictor than they usually are, making the prediction process that much more difficult. I've ended up relying quite heavily on the guilds for my picks, to the point that, in some cases, I've literally just matched the guild's choices precisely. We'll see how that pans out.

Despite my lack of confidence this year, for posterity's sake, here are my predictions for the 93rd Academy Award nominations.

1935 - Captain Blood

I've managed to squeak in one more review before the end of the year, which is somewhat surprising since we're well and truly in the midst of the school holidays here in Australia. It's also usually about the time of year that awards season would be heating up, but with the delay of the Oscars ceremony by a couple of months, there's a strange feeling of limbo. Still, lots of Oscar bait movies have already been released with more to come, so I'll try to cover some of that in the coming weeks.

For now, here's the next Best Picture contender from 1935...

Captain Blood
Director:
Michael Curtiz
Screenplay:
Casey Robinson
(based on the novel by Rafael Sabatini)
Starring:
Errol Flynn, Olivia de Havilland, Lionel Atwill, Basil Rathbone, Ross Alexander, Guy Kibbee, Henry Stephenson
Academy Awards:
2 nominations
0 wins

17th-century physician Peter Blood (Flynn) is arrested for treating an enemy of the crown, bundled up with other rebels, and shipped to the Caribbean colonies to become a slave. In Jamaica, a colonel's niece, Arabella Bishop (de Havilland), purchases Blood and assists in getting him the coveted role of doctor to the governor. Blood is understandably restless, though, and soon organises an escape with his fellow captives, where they plan to sail the seas as a pirate crew.

As a classic swashbuckling adventure, Captain Blood certainly doesn't disappoint. There's a lot of adventure with plenty of swashes being buckled, including an excitingly tense sword fight on a rocky beach and a spectacularly epic pirate ship battle. Granted, you have to wait a while for most of this excitement to begin since the first half of the picture is mostly straight drama, but the anticipation holds our attention well in preparation for the exhilarating second half.

Carrying the film is Aussie star Errol Flynn in his star-making role as the titular character. He's quite the steely-eyed charmer, which ironically ends up causing some disbelief at the thought of him becoming a pirate. Frankly, he comes across as too pleasant to all of a sudden embrace stealing and pillaging as a way of life, let alone become known as the "Terror of the Caribbean." In all fairness, though, there are later moments where Flynn displays appropriate ferocity, and he sells that well, but it's not a smooth transition getting there and ultimately his friendly demeanour returns (or perhaps it never really left). In any case, his on-screen persona obviously struck a chord with audiences as this was the first of many swashbuckling roles for Flynn, including arguably his most famous role in The Adventures of Robin Hood (to be reviewed on this blog at some point).

Also making a star turn was ingenue (at the time) Olivia de Havilland. This wasn't quite de Havilland's film debut - that came earlier in the same year with fellow Best Picture nominee A Midsummer Night's Dream - but it was the beginning of her on-screen pairing with Flynn. The duo (pictured) shared the screen seven more times in as many years, most notably with the aforementioned Robin Hood. Despite being a newcomer to cinema and having to portray such an underwritten stereotypical damsel, de Havilland holds her own in Captain Blood, launching a lengthy and auspicious career, in which she eventually won two Best Actress Oscars.

Of the large supporting cast, all are excellent, with standout performances from Basil Rathbone as the rival French pirate captain and Henry Stephenson as the diplomatic Lord Willoughby. Officially, the film only received two Oscar nominations - for Best Picture and Best Sound Recording - but Academy rules at the time allowed for write-in candidates and, since they also announced runners-up, we're able to see how popular Captain Blood was among voters. Along with its two official nods, the film scored second place for its director Michael Curtiz, as well as third place for its screenplay and score (and a rousing score it is). As for Best Picture, it wound up garnering yet another third place.

1935 - David Copperfield

2020 is almost over and, boy, has it been a doozy. Australia is handling the pandemic considerably well at this moment in time, though I realise that's not the case in a lot of other places around the world, so it really gives new meaning to the phrase "the lucky country". It's all the more poignant considering the fact that up until just a few months prior to the outbreak, I was a resident of California, a region that sadly does not seem to be faring as well. But with vaccines beginning to be rolled out in a few countries, let's hope that 2021 will allow us to return to some semblance of normal.

In the meantime, I've checked out another nominee from the 1935 Best Picture contest...


David Copperfield
Director:
George Cukor
Screenplay:
Hugh Walpole, Howard Estabrook, Lenore J. Coffee
(based on the novel by Charles Dickens)
Starring:
Frank Lawton, Freddie Bartholomew, W.C. Fields, Lionel Barrymore, Madge Evans, Maureen O'Sullivan, Edna May Oliver, Lewis Stone, Elizabeth Allan, Roland Young, Basil Rathbone 
Academy Awards:
3 nominations
0 wins

Born after his father's death, young David Copperfield (Bartholomew) lives with his flighty mother (Allan) until she decides to get remarried to the less-than-friendly Mr. Murdstone (Rathbone). Soon, David's mother passes away, too, so Murdstone sends the newly orphaned boy away to London, but his adventures don't stop there. He travels from place to place, meeting various characters and, as an adult (Lawton), continues his exploits, experiencing love, loss and laughter.

Perhaps shamefully, I've never read Dickens' book so was mostly unfamiliar with the story. Ironically, I still don't feel all that clear on the story even after watching this adaptation. I mean, it's not that it's hard to follow at all, but the plot moves so quickly that it feels like we're just getting highlights. David moves from one period in his life to another, meeting new people and then saying goodbye to them just as quickly. I know, I know, this has become a common critique of mine about novel adaptations, particularly in early Hollywood, where it seems screenwriters were afraid to leave anything out when adapting a long piece of literature, resulting in relationships and scenarios not given the time they need for growth in order to feel genuine. With that in mind, it seems there has been no shortage of film and TV adaptations of varying lengths of Dickens' classic (including a mini-series with a pre-Harry Potter Daniel Radcliffe as the young David). I would think, however, in these days of peak television, this story would make a fine limited series, allowing an entire episode to explore each plot point, instead of the fifteen minutes or so that this version affords. But I digress...

There is no doubt this is melodrama. Not just the performances, but a lot of the craft feels overly theatrical, too. For instance, after walking through a fierce storm, young David's clothes are suddenly and strategically ripped in a very aesthetic fashion. Shortly after that sequence, in place of smelling salts, David is offered two nondescript bottles, each with a large novelty label: Salad Dressing and, somewhat inexplicably, Anchovy Sauce.

It's not all hopeless, though. In fact, many of the short snippets of story are indeed entertaining, a testament to George Cukor's direction. Though, I suppose if I'm going to credit the director for the captivating segments, I must also hold him at least partially accountable for the broad caricatures that are most of the performances. Frank Lawton as the adult David is eternally happy and kind in a stereotypical way, which I suppose helps create a feel-good film, but his character just comes off as uninteresting. On the other end of the interesting spectrum are two actors worth mentioning: Roland Young (pictured on the right, with Lawton and W.C. Fields) is just the right amount of conniving as Uriah Heep, and Lennox Pawle is a breath of fresh comedy as the not-quite-all-there Mr. Dick. Pawle's performance is delightfully affable in its absurdity with an uncanny resemblance to both the appearance and slapstick style of Chris Farley, only slightly less erratic. Ultimately, the picture received only two other nominations beside its Best Picture nod - one for Editing and another in the now-defunct Assistant Director category. But on Oscar night, it finished empty-handed.

1935 - Mutiny on the Bounty

With so much going on in the world right now, this silly little movie blog seems somewhat insignificant (even more insignificant than it did before, if that's possible), but maybe it'll be a welcome distraction for somebody. And with all the big film releases getting delayed again and again, next year's Oscars may be a little light on eligible content if things don't pick up soon, so maybe reading about Oscar history will be all that's left. In any case, with the next Academy Awards ceremony shifted back a couple of months, I'll see if I can catch up a bit by getting a few more of these reviews done before then.

So, here are my thoughts on the eventual Best Picture winner from 1935...

Mutiny on the Bounty
Director:
Frank Lloyd
Screenplay:
Talbot Jennings, Jules Furthman, Carey Wilson

(based on the novel by Charles Nordhoff and James Norman Hall)
Starring:
Charles Laughton, Clark Gable, Franchot Tone, Herbert Mundin, Eddie Quillan, Dudley Digges, Donald Crisp, Movita, Mamo
Academy Awards:
8 nominations
1 win, for Best Picture

The HMS Bounty leaves 18th century England's shores on a two-year mission to Tahiti. Serving as the ship's captain is the tyrannical William Bligh (Laughton), famed for issuing inhumane and often unjust punishments to his crew. His lieutenant, the kind Fletcher Christian (Gable), finds himself at odds with Bligh on several occasions, leading to an eventual ... well, take another look at the film's title.

For its era, Mutiny on the Bounty contains some epic production values. While there are still many obvious studio sets with an ocean image merely projected onto the background, there are just as many shots of actual ships on the actual ocean. Similarly, while much of the action was shot along the Californian coastline, the production also utilised Tahiti itself for some scenes.

Historically speaking, it seems the film hits all the major plot points in a relatively accurate fashion, though from my admittedly brief research, it's unclear whether Captain Bligh was truly as horrible as he is portrayed here. Likewise, the real Fletcher Christian may not have been as charming and compassionate as Clark Gable. And while it's true that Christian married a native Tahitian woman, it seems unlikely the courtship was the love-at-first-sight romance presented in this film. This was the height of British colonialism, after all. Still, being a Hollywood movie, there had to be a love interest, so there was no way the studio would have left that part out, but considering the bulk of the movie consists of a bunch of men confined together at sea for months on end, there was limited opportunity for a leading lady. As such, the relationship between Christian and Maimiti is glossed over quite considerably.

Comprising mostly British characters, it's not surprising the film's cast includes a decent number of British actors, led by Charles Laughton, who nails the pompous, heartless megalomaniac. Clark Gable (pictured with Laughton) and Franchot Tone, on the other hand, don't even attempt British accents, though at least they both speak with a theatrically eloquent American sound. And if you look very closely at the ship's crew, you might catch two unexpected faces. Future star David Niven appears as an uncredited extra, as does James Cagney, who was already well-known at the time, but apparently sweet talked his way into the background one day when he unintentionally stumbled across the set.

Mutiny on the Bounty is one of only three films (along with The Broadway Melody and Grand Hotel) to boast Best Picture as its sole Oscar win. It also holds the record for the most Best Actor nominations for a single film with Laughton, Gable and Tone all competing in the same category due to the fact that the Supporting Actor category didn't exist yet. Indeed, it's entirely possible the supporting awards were introduced (only one year later) as a result of this film's domination of the leading category.

1935 - Top Hat

I'm ba-aack!

First, let me gloat about my Oscar predictions from this year. I correctly picked 21 of the 24 winners, the best result I've ever achieved in the more than two decades I've been making predictions. I only missed Sound Editing and the two big ones, Director and Picture. Perhaps the most miraculous part, though, is that I managed to ace all the short film categories!

Now, after the longest period of inactivity (not counting Oscar predictions) in this blog's history, I've returned with a new review. And a lot has happened since my last post almost two years ago. The biggest of those happenings is that I said goodbye to Los Angeles late last year and moved the family back to Sydney. Though, as a dual Australian-US citizen, I'll still travel back to LA a couple of times a year for my career, so it's not a permanent goodbye.

In fact, I was there a couple of weeks ago right before everything got serious in the world. Within a few days, the entertainment industry all but shut down, so I cut my intended trip short and returned to Australia, just in time it seems. A 14-day self-isolation imposed on all returning international travellers had already come into effect by the time I arrived, so with not much else to do, it was the perfect opportunity to watch the next film for this blog. I don't expect it will continue like that, though, because now the kids are staying home from school, meaning the days are full for me once more.

Before we get to the review, there's one piece of exciting news that I've been saving for some time. I had discovered this a while back, but wanted to wait for this film's review to bring it up. Through a genealogy site, I found out that I'm (distantly) related to none other than Frederick Austerlitz, better known as Fred Astaire! We're 11th cousins, to be precise. Our common Czech ancestry dates back to the 17th century, where we apparently share great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents.

So at long last, let's pick back up where we left off with yet another musical from the Best Picture race of 1935...


Top Hat
Director:
Mark Sandrich
Screenplay:
Allan Scott, Dwight Taylor
Starring:
Fred Astaire, Ginger Rogers, Edward Everett Horton, Erik Rhodes, Eric Blore, Helen Broderick
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
0 wins

American dancer Jerry Travers (Astaire) arrives in London in preparation for producer Horace Hardwick's (Horton) next big show. At his hotel, Jerry loses himself in a tap dance, oblivious to how noisy it is for society girl Dale Tremont (Rogers), who is trying to sleep in the room directly below. The two meet cute and Jerry begins his romantic pursuit of Dale, hindered by the fact that Dale thinks he's the married Horace.

Top Hat is a wonderful example of the big budget musical of the 1930s. Snappy tunes from the incomparable Irving Berlin - including a bunch of time-tested classics like "Top Hat, White Tie and Tails" and "Cheek to Cheek" - are complemented by some snappy tap dancing. In fact, as one would expect from a Fred Astaire flick, there's an abundance of tap numbers, but they avoid a sense of repetition thanks to some highly innovative choreography. Each dance feels distinctive with several moments eliciting an audible "wow" from me. Not to mention that it's the greatest dance pair in movie history that are performing the routines so, of course, it's immensely visually pleasing.

Now, it wouldn't be a big budget musical without big budget sets, and the production design on display here is nothing short of extravagant. Art director Van Nest Polglase's outdoor Venice set (pictured) is particularly stunning, even though it may sacrifice realism for the sort of polished bigger-is-better ostentation that makes Las Vegas hotels such a magnificent sight. Indeed, it wouldn't surprise me if the architects of The Venetian used this film as inspiration.

Perhaps, though, the picture's weakest point is the paper-thin storyline. While the dialogue is witty and entertaining, the plot is about as contrived as you can get. It pins itself entirely on the farcical case of mistaken identity that subsists literally for the entire film. That makes for a lot of scenes in which characters speak in terms that are just vague enough to maintain the misunderstanding between them.

Despite the flimsy plot, the witty words are buoyed by a greatly comic supporting cast, including the always affably innocent Edward Everett Horton, whose double takes are sublime. And unless you're looking out for it, you'll almost certainly miss (I did!) a young Lucille Ball as a flower shop clerk.

Oscar Winner Predictions 2019

My nomination predictions a few weeks ago turned out to be some of my best ever, particularly in the major categories. I suspect a similar pattern will follow regarding my winner predictions since the main races are shaping up to be quite predictable. The acting categories, in particular, all seem like foregone conclusions. And while I wouldn't be too surprised if Parasite takes one or both of Picture and Director, I'm putting my (metaphorical) money on 1917 taking the top prizes.

The craft and technical categories, on the other hand, are a different kettle of fish altogether. Almost all of them (save for International Feature and Makeup) have at least two nominees that could reasonably be named the winner. It's going to be an interesting Oscar night, that's for sure.

To take a look at my official picks, just click here.

Oscar Nomination Predictions 2019

Despite letting this blog gather dust (not forever, I promise), I'm back briefly to share my annual predictions for the Oscar nominations, due to be announced in a little over 24 hours. It seemed a tad easier to predict certain categories this year than it has been in recent memory, though I guess that remains to be seen. I've generally played it safe, picking fairly traditional candidates, though that's resulted in a final tally that has four different films each receiving 10 nominations, which seems a bit unlikely. So, in most categories, I suspect that at least one of those traditional selections will be replaced by a less expected film that could be earning its only nomination.

If you'd like to take a look at my picks, you can find them here.

Oscar Winner Predictions 2018

Well, my Oscar nomination predictions turned out to be fairly average, especially considering how well I did with the nominations last year. Maybe I can save face with some decent winner predictions, though I'm not sure that's going to happen either. The trend of the Oscar winners becoming harder and harder to predict continues. It feels like there are even fewer sure things this year than there were last year, and last year there were hardly any.

So, without further ado, here are my predictions for who's going to take home Oscars on Sunday night. Happy Oscars weekend!

Oscar Nomination Predictions 2018

Just popping back in to deliver my Oscar nomination predictions ahead of Tuesday morning's announcement. It feels like this gets more and more difficult every year. Granted, last year was my best ever, but I probably just got lucky. I'm certainly not expecting to achieve anywhere near that level of success this year. So many races seem wide open. But I've made my choices so I'll stand by them and, if necessary, remove the egg from my face on Tuesday. If you're interested, you can take a look at my predictions here.

1935 - Broadway Melody of 1936

From the chill of Sydney's winter back to the oppressive heat of another Los Angeles summer, I've returned to my adopted home without blogging about the last film I watched before leaving L.A. in the first place. The three weeks in Australia was a nice holiday, but now it's time to get back to business.

Next up, we take a look at another musical entry into 1935's Best Picture contest...

Broadway Melody of 1936
Director:
Roy Del Ruth
Screenplay:
Jack McGowan, Sid Silvers, Moss Hart, Harry W. Conn
Starring:
Jack Benny, Eleanor Powell, Robert Taylor, Una Merkel, Sid Silvers, Buddy Ebsen, June Knight, Vilma Ebsen
Academy Awards:
3 nominations
1 win, for Best Dance Direction

After his boss orders him to make his column more sensational, Broadway gossip columnist Bert Keeler (Benny) stumbles upon a potentially sleazy relationship between producer Bob Gordon (Taylor) and wealthy widow Lillian Brent (Knight). She is investing in his show on the condition that, if Gordon can't find a star within two weeks, she'll take the role. Enter Irene Foster (Powell), Gordon's estranged high-school sweetheart, herself a budding stage actress with her own desire to headline Gordon's show.

From that plot, you'd be forgiven for thinking this is just another run-of-the-mill musical comedy from old Hollywood. They certainly churned those out in those days, but if this is run-of-the-mill, then it's a pretty entertaining mill. I never considered myself a big fan of the extravagant dance musical but something really tickled my fancy with this one. With its exciting showbiz story and its truly toe-tapping musical numbers, this is escapism at its purest.

In the lead role, Jack Benny, already a radio star at the time, is drily hilarious and can already be seen utilizing his trademark exasperated expression with one hand gently perched on his lower jaw. Also enjoyable is Una Merkel's sly and humorous turn as the sassy secretary. Perhaps the standout, though, is Buddy Ebsen, who is immensely charming and quirky and, if you're only familiar with him as Jed Clampett, you'll be surprised at what an accomplished song-and-dance man he is. Plus, that's his real-life sister Vilma playing his on-screen sister. The two of them (pictured with Eleanor Powell) perform an absolutely mind-blowing tap dance routine.

In fact, all the dancing talent is spectacular, particularly that one guy in the opening number who literally jumps over all the chorus girls, lined up in a row. It's a confusingly random feat, but impressive nonetheless. And that's just one example of the unique choreography on display. It's no wonder the film's only Oscar came for Best Dance Direction (a now defunct category). It also nabbed a nomination for Best Writing (Original Story), though, in my opinion, the script's greatest feature is its witty dialogue. And, of course, there was the Best Picture nod, which, it could be argued, makes it the first sequel to ever be nominated for the top prize, despite the fact that the story and characters are entirely unrelated to 1928/29's Best Picture winner, The Broadway Melody.

1935 - Naughty Marietta

Greetings from wintry Sydney, Australia. I'm back in my home town for a few weeks visiting family and friends, so I may not get much of a chance to watch more of the current crop of nominees, but I had already watched two more of them before I left L.A., so I hope to at least find a little time to blog about them while I'm here.

And indeed, here are my thoughts on one of those films, another Best Picture nominee from 1935...

Naughty Marietta
Director:
Robert Z. Leonard, W.S. Van Dyke
Screenplay:
Frances Goodrich, Albert Hackett, John Lee Mahin
(based on the operetta by Victor Herbert [music] and Rida Johnson Young [book & lyrics])
Starring:
Jeanette MacDonald, Nelson Eddy, Frank Morgan, Elsa Lanchester, Douglas Dumbrille, Joseph Cawthorne, Cecilia Parker, Walter Kingsford, Greta Meyer, Akim Tamiroff
Academy Awards:
2 nominations
1 win, for Best Sound

In order to escape an arranged marriage, a French princess (MacDonald) adopts the identity of a lowly servant named Marietta and sails to New Orleans with dozens of other girls who are hoping to marry the colonists there. However, Marietta has no intention of marrying anyone. Before they arrive in New Orleans, the ship is overtaken by pirates and their plans look dashed until mercenaries come to the rescue. The leader of the mercenaries, Captain Warrington (Eddy), takes a liking to Marietta, though he, too, is stubbornly against marriage.

Of all the different genres of film, musicals arguably contain the least naturalistic conceit. Even fantasy films don't feature people randomly breaking into song (unless they're fantasy musicals, I guess). Not that I'm criticising, mind you. I love a good musical. It's just that, if you're going to ask the audience to suspend disbelief about the spontaneous singing, you might want to make the lyrics at least somewhat relevant to the action. Maybe I'm exaggerating since most of the songs do indeed make sense, but there were still a few that seemed to bear little relation to the story. Of course, it didn't help that unfamiliar characters would often join in the musical numbers for only one or two verses (and sometimes even start the song), even though we hadn't been introduced to them yet nor would we ever see them again. Just some random guy in a crowd belting passionately about something or other. Ironically, the songs are probably the least entertaining part of this whole affair but that may just be a modern viewer's perspective of a very old-fashioned style.

Despite all that and a somewhat formulaic plot, the picture is still very watchable. The visual gags, in particular, may be subtle and sparse, but they often had me laughing out loud. In opposition to the sometimes odd lyrics, the spoken dialogue is sharp and entertaining. Not to mention the old-timey slang. Who knew that "hollow in his pork basket" meant he was hungry?

Frank Morgan is the standout among a very capable cast. His amiable bumbling makes for a fantastically comedic performance. The chemistry between the two leads, Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy (pictured), works very well, and they both have superb classical singing voices, if you like that sort of thing. As for its Oscars record, Naughty Marietta only received one other nomination besides its Best Picture nod, but it took home that prize, which was for Best Sound Recording.

1935 - Alice Adams

Last week, I had the pleasure of attending an Academy event which, for this Oscars freak, was a giddy experience, despite it being a fairly low-key affair, open to the public. In any case, I'm grateful to be living in a city that affords me the opportunity to attend such things.

As you can see from the program (pictured to the right), this was a George Stevens Lecture, the Academy's long-running series of screenings/lectures celebrating the cinematic arts (and, if I'm not mistaken, I believe the point is that it's always a George Stevens film). While waiting for the event to begin, the audience was treated to some archival footage of interviews with legendary director George Stevens and producer Pandro S. Berman, discussing some behind-the-scenes tidbits about the movie we were about to see. Then, after a brief introduction by Academy President John Bailey, we heard from the director's own son, George Stevens Jr., also a filmmaker and an important figure in the film industry himself (he founded the AFI), who gave us a general overview of his father's life and career, as well as some more stories about the evening's film. He then handed the floor to the main lecturer of the evening, writer and director Robin Swicord, a member of the Academy's Board of Governors, representing the writers branch. (Swicord was Oscar-nominated for her adaptation of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which will be covered on this blog at some point in the future.)

Swicord's speech offered an in-depth look at the themes that Stevens was exploring in his film and how relevant they remain to this day. It was a genuinely fascinating talk, full of humour and insight, despite some spoilers. Though, it's hard to complain about spoilers of a film that was released 83 years ago. Finally, Swicord introduced the film itself and we all sat back to watch one of the Best Picture contenders from 1935...

Alice Adams
Director:
George Stevens
Screenplay:
Dorothy Yost, Mortimer Offner, Jane Murfin
(based on the novel by Booth Tarkington)
Starring:
Katharine Hepburn, Fred MacMurray, Fred Stone, Evelyn Venable, Frank Albertson, Ann Shoemaker, Charles Grapewin, Hattie McDaniel
Academy Awards:
2 nominations
0 wins

The Adams family (not the creepy, kooky one) are a lower middle class family who have hit upon rough times. Mr. Adams (Stone) is lucky to still be paid for a factory job he's been unable to perform in years, due to illness. His daughter Alice (Hepburn) desperately wants to be upper class, often forced to fake it as she attends fancy society soirees. But she struggles to keep up the facade when she falls for wealthy Arthur Russell (MacMurray), who seems to remain interested in her even after becoming aware of her compromised social status.

Alice Adams is an engaging, if slightly superficial, tale of class differences in Depression-era America. Despite the desperation subtly seeping from every scene, there's a surprising amount of humour. It's a mix that works wonderfully well, making for a cinematic experience that is both moving and enjoyable. Perhaps my only complaint is the abrupt ending. While that's clearly not unusual for early Hollywood, here it seems particularly unconvincing. The implausibly hasty resolution between Mr. Adams and his boss is perhaps bad enough, but then our two protagonists suddenly set aside their differences with only a few words and a sweeping kiss, followed by The End. Interestingly, the book on which this film is based did not end the same way and instead saw Alice and Arthur go their separate ways. Hepburn and Stevens pushed hard to retain the book's more realistic ending, including a final scene showing Alice heading off to business school, but in the end, producer Pandro S. Berman got his way, making sure the lovers united for a traditional, and box-office friendly, happy ending.

That's a relatively minor quibble, though, because the film is indeed captivating, in great part due to Katharine Hepburn's tour-de-force performance. She's charmingly natural in a role that paradoxically requires a near constant tone of insincerity. I must admit, though, that the pretension was a bit grating at times, almost jeopardising our desire to see her succeed, but I suppose it only added to the character's flawed desperation. Also noteworthy is a pre-Gone With the Wind Hattie McDaniel in a drily comic turn as an incompetent maid, delivering the film's funniest performance. But it was Hepburn that claimed the film's only acting nomination. In fact, it was the film's only nomination in any other category aside from Best Picture.

Best Picture of 1946

It's always a little difficult writing a verdict when I've left so long in between the first and last film viewings of a review year because I barely remember the first film any more. Thankfully, though, this is a blog, so I can just read my posted thoughts on each film to refresh my memory. Funny how that works.

The nominees for Best Picture of 1946 are:

• The Best Years of Our Lives
• Henry V
• It's a Wonderful Life
• The Razor's Edge
• The Yearling

This shortlist is heavy on classics and, with a diverse range of subject matter, no two are particularly alike, either. From a Shakespeare adaptation to a coming-of-age drama to the ultimate feelgood Christmas flick, it's quite a mixed bag.

The Yearling was probably my least favourite, though certainly not unworthy of its recognition as a Best Picture nominee. The Razor's Edge, too, is fine but the melodrama prevents it from being at the top of my list. Third to go is Henry V. I thoroughly enjoyed the cleverness of Olivier's adaptation but there's sometimes an unfortunate language barrier to Shakespearean works that makes it difficult to remain constantly absorbed.

That leaves two and it's a close call. The Best Years of Our Lives was the Academy's pick and I enjoyed it immensely - a nice mix of drama and comedy. But ultimately, I'm siding with the picture that has justifiably become a mainstay of Christmas season. Therefore, my favourite nominee from the Best Picture race of 1946 is the utterly charming It's a Wonderful Life. 

Best Picture of 1946
Academy's choice: The Best Years of Our Lives	Matt's choice: It's a Wonderful Life

Your choice:

I'm interested to find out what your favourite was, too. Cast your vote above. As I mentioned a few blog posts ago, the trend of me starting a new year of review due to a local screening continues. Last week, I caught an event hosted by the Academy itself, which I'll discuss in my next post. Due to said screening, we'll now be shifting to a rare 12-nominee year and discussing the films of 1935.

And the nominees for Best Picture of 1935 are:

• Alice Adams
• Broadway Melody of 1936
• Captain Blood
• David Copperfield
• The Informer
• Les Misérables
• The Lives of a Bengal Lancer
• A Midsummer Night's Dream
• Mutiny on the Bounty
• Naughty Marietta
• Ruggles of Red Gap
• Top Hat

Another mixed bag. Maybe even mixier. Stay tuned...

1946 - Henry V

Well, I've got a verdict post to write, as well as the first post of the next year of review, so let's move this right along.

Our final film in the race for 1944's Best Picture is...

Henry V
Director:
Laurence Olivier
Screenplay:
Laurence Olivier, Dallas Bower, Alan Dent
(based on the play by William Shakespeare)
Starring:
Laurence Olivier, Renée Asherson, Robert Newton, Leslie Banks, Felix Aylmer, Esmond Knight, Leo Genn
Academy Awards:
4 nominations
0 wins, plus 1 Honorary Award

Young King Henry V of England (Olivier) believes that France is rightfully part of his domain, and after being teased by the French, he begins a military campaign to claim their throne. His troops successfully take Harfleur, but at Agincourt, they are vastly outnumbered. Victory will be hard won here, testing Henry's skills as a strategist, a leader, and even an orator.

Henry V begins with the clever conceit that we are actually watching a filmed version of the play being performed in Shakespeare's time. There's a rowdy audience; the actors bow after each scene; we even see what goes on backstage on occasion. The on-stage narrator (or the Chorus, as Shakespeare named him) often apologises for the inadequacy of a stage production in being able to truly represent the grandness required of the story, asking us instead to use our imaginations to see the sweeping fields of France or the extravagant court of the English King.

And here's where Olivier gets really clever. About half an hour into the film, gone are the small stage sets, along with the theatrical entrances and exits, and we suddenly find ourselves watching the same characters on location instead. No longer do we need to imagine the scenery because we can actually see it in all its Technicolor splendour. In addition, the Chorus now addresses the camera and the soliloquys are presented in voice over as if they are true internal monologues. Shakespeare knew his medium didn't entirely have sufficient means to tell this story and, in a truly masterful stroke, Olivier appropriately adapted it to a medium that did.

At the end of the film, we return to Shakespeare's stage to hear the audience applaud as the actors take their bows. This perhaps suggests an additional metaphor at play. By bookending the film with scenes from a theatrical production, Olivier is maybe offering his take on the theatre's ability to transport its audience. All the scenes in between those bookends represent how we can truly get lost in our imagination as we watch the players on stage.

And there are indeed some spectacular sequences, in particular the Battle of Agincourt. The action is dramatically staged on wide open fields with seemingly hundreds of medieval soldiers in a breathtaking melee of swords and arrows. Perhaps the only detraction from this powerful sequence is the somewhat fake-looking matte paintings in the background.

The film boasts a stellar cast of experienced Shakespearean actors, led by one of the theatre world's greatest knights, Laurence Olivier (pictured). Olivier garnered himself a Best Actor nomination from the Academy as well as one for producing a Best Picture contender. He didn't win either of those (nor did the film win its other two nominations), but the Academy bestowed a Special Award on him anyway for his "outstanding achievement as actor, producer and director in bringing Henry V to the screen".

1946 - The Yearling

This is beginning to be a bit of a pattern. I neglect the blog for several months and then I notice there's a local screening of a Best Picture nominee, so I book myself a ticket, but because the screening is of a film in a different year of review than the one I'm currently working on, I'm forced to watch a number of films in quick succession in order to complete the current year of review before going to the screening. So, here we are again.

With two films remaining in 1946's Best Picture race, here's a look at...

The Yearling
Director:
Clarence Brown
Screenplay:
Paul Osborn
(based on the novel by Marjorie Kinnan Rawling)
Starring:
Gregory Peck, Jane Wyman, Claude Jarman Jr., Chill Wills, Henry Travers, Forrest Tucker
Academy Awards:
7 nominations
2 wins

In the latter part of the 19th century, 11-year-old Jody (Jarman) lives with his parents, Penny (Peck) & Ora (Wyman), on their farm in rural Florida. As the family struggles to make ends meet, Jody longs for any kind of pet to play with. Ora, who shows little love for her son as a coping mechanism for the three other children she lost, is against the idea, but she's overruled by Penny when Jody brings home an orphaned fawn (whose mother's death Penny happens to be responsible for). The boy and the young deer grow close, but Jody struggles to keep the wild animal under control.

The first thing you notice about The Yearling is its striking Technicolor cinematography. Maybe it's because it still seems like a novelty to see colour films from the 1940s (not that they were all that rare) instead of the usual muted black-and-white tones, or maybe it's just the fact that green foliage and babbling brooks feature very prominently throughout the picture, giving it an almost nature documentary feel, but whatever the reason, it's genuinely beautiful. Indeed, the Academy must have agreed because the only two Oscars the film won (out of seven total nominations) were for Best Color Cinematography and Best Color Art Direction.

Perhaps another sign of the times is how a film with such a depressing ending was considered a "family" film. To be fair, the first two hours of the film are indeed mostly family fare, as well as quite obviously a coming-of-age story, but that finale is squarely on the darker end of the coming-of-age spectrum.

As expected for this period, most of the acting is rather superficial, especially the kids, and even more especially Claude Jarman Jr (pictured). That said, it's probably not his fault that he was directed to literally leap through the woods on several occasions and he essentially has to carry the film after all, so I suppose he does a decent enough job all things considered. The Academy certainly thought it was a noteworthy performance since they gave him the Juvenile Award for "outstanding child actor of 1946". Technically, the film itself wasn't cited so it's not officially counted as an 8th nomination, which is a little odd considering it was the only film Jarman was in that year. As Jarman's parents, Jane Wyman and Gregory Peck have some more natural moments. Peck, in particular, proves how gifted a naturalistic actor he is, much more subtle than most of his contemporaries.

And then there are the animal actors. I'm sure several different deer shared the title role and they're all adorable. They also seem to follow directions surprisingly well, which is either a testament to the trainers or the editors, probably both. An early scene also features a pretty vicious (and spectacular) fight between a bear and two dogs that made me wonder how ethical the filmmakers were, but the now familiar "no animals were harmed" disclaimer is indeed included in the end credits and, after some cursory research, it seems that American Humane began monitoring animal use in films in the early 1940s, so I guess it checks out.

Oscar Winner Predictions 2017

I was hoping to have watched a couple more 1946 movies before making this post so that I could have spent a bit more time discussing this year's Oscar race, but we'll have to make do with a quick 11th hour post instead.

I know I said it last year, but this year really has been the toughest Oscar race to predict in about as long as I can remember. Despite the fact that Best Director and the four acting categories seem like foregone conclusions, almost every other category is a toss-up. For so many categories, there are two main contenders (sometimes three) that are almost impossible to separate, including Best Picture. At the risk of repeating myself from last year, I'm really not confident of my selections here at all. We'll know in less than 24 hours whether my coin tosses paid off.

So, for those of you interested, here are my predictions for the 2017 Academy Awards. Enjoy!

Oscar Nomination Predictions 2017

With the Screen Actors Guild Awards last night (which, incidentally, Kat and I were very fortunate to attend - more on that in an upcoming post), the acting races now have very clear frontrunners. And tomorrow morning, we'll find out who is in contention as the Oscar nominations are announced. Here are my predictions on which films will see themselves shortlisted. Some are near certainties, but overall, this was a slightly tougher year to predict. We'll find out soon enough how well I did.