Well, I have the night off, and what do I do? I watch some instant Netflix, that's what. As far as the Best Picture winners I have yet to see, two have been sitting in my instant queue forever, so it was about time I watched one of them, and tonight, How Green Was My Valley won out.
A brief bio before I dive straight in. How Green Was My Valley was directed by John Ford (director of The Grapes of Wrath) and stars Roddy McDowall as the young Huw (pronounced Hugh - I know, it's about Welsh people, what can you do) Morgan. The movie is based on the book by Richard Llewellyn and tells the story of a Welsh village, specifically the town leaders, the Morgans, adapting to the changes of the coal mine. The movie won Academy Awards for not only Best Picture, but Best Director, Best Supporting Actor for Donald Crisp (a fantastic performance in the role of Mr. Morgan), best cinematography (black and white), and best art-direction interior decoration (black and white). Not too shabby for any film.
As the awards suggest, the movie was gorgeous. Its depiction of a rural village nestled in the heart of a valley led to some stunning wide shots. The coal mine, which constantly belches smoke and ash is right next to many of the houses, and the juxtaposition of these idyllic, stone homes next to this enormous coal mine was visually striking to say the least.
How Green Was My Valley obviously hooks onto the nostalgia everyone seems to have for a simpler time, when men were real men and women were real women. However, this story takes this nostalgia in an interesting direction. Although the movie is narrated by an older Huw looking back on his simpler childhood, he seems to recognize that things were changing even then, the world was and is modernizing and the simplicity of a country lifestyle cannot live on in the face of increasing industrialization. Ok, so he doesn't say that explicitly, but even the guy's idyllic childhood sees some absolutely heart-wrenching tragedies (he's nearly paralyzed, his family splits up because of unemployment, his sister's reputation is falsely destroyed, his father dies in a coal shaft, etc.).
All those tragedies being said, it was hard to really latch on to one of them as the pivotal moment in the plot. Actually, it is kind of difficult to even lay a finger on what the plot really was - the movie does such a good job of following this village through the passage of time that it tends to forget that the story suffers because of it.
Overall, I was impressed with this movie. How Green Was My Valley was a gorgeous movie experience complete with great acting, directing, and an intriguing commentary on industrialization. It even had a woman (Anghard played by Maureen O'Hara) take some action - granted it didn't turn out so great in the end, but at least she got to try! Ok, enough of my internal feminist critic coming out to play. This movie gets a 4 out of 5 for me. Definitely worth watching, but the large and wobbly plot can make it hard to connect with.
Right now I've got Cavalcade sitting on my desk (still) and my lovely, lovely library found me a VHS copy of Cimarron! That should give me something to do during Thanksgiving break. Well, that's 75 down and only six to go. Happy watching!
Monday, November 23, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Wings
Well, thanks to an inter-library loan, I finally got my hands on a copy of Wings, the very first Best Picture winner ever. I'm not going to lie, I thought I was going to have to buy a cheap copy of it on Amazon. Many thanks to the library here at school for helping me find it. However, it did come in VHS form, and my lowly house does not contain a working VCR. As if I wasn't dorky enough, I had to go to the library once again, check out a media study room, and watch the entire 2 hour and 10 minute silent film by myself. I guess for a silent film venue, I went to the right spot. While this was moderately sucky, I did feel a certain amount of satisfaction after it was over.
Anyway, I'm no silent film connoisseur, but I thought it was decent. The movie tells the story of two men who, although they are both in love with the same woman, go off to World War I and become fighter pilots together, ending up as BFFs. The story itself is pretty basic. Our naive main character doesn't realize the love he already has in his next-door neighbor, the glamour of the other woman is too alluring, etc., etc. The reason the movie was as exciting as it was is its use of actual footage of fighter plane dogfights. From what I've read, the U.S. War Department fully supported the making of this film, which glamorized WWI with the longest, most tedious fight scenes I've ever witnessed. I mean, really, the extras they had for this were just atrocious; they looked more like zombies than soldiers scurrying across a battlefild. Ultimately, this movie probably won Best Picture because of its for-the-time dazzling visual effects more than its acting and so on.
Even with that in mind, though, this doesn't necessarily detract from the movie. I really did feel for Jack, David, and Mary (Jack's girl-next-door). Ok, so David kind of freaked me out a bit; there's just something about his horrifying gaze that rarely changed in expression that filled me with terror. He really looked like he was going to kill something all the time. And he also kind of French-kissed his mother, which I was also not okay with.
Ok, so my modern sensibilities kind of got to me on this movie. Frankly, Wings has not aged terribly well. The plot is trite and sexist (Mary ends up being sent home from the Women's Corp in order to save Jack's good name), and I had a really hard time getting over myself as a viewer to appreciate this movie. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. I know the visual effects were great for their time, and they were. This movie-watching experience was more of an historical event than anything else. I feel like that's the most important thing to take from this movie anyway. You certainly won't remember the dialogue.
Well, there's Wings for you. I'm working on inter-library loaning Cavalcade, and I've got Cimarron sitting on my desk right now. I just counted, and that's 74 down and only seven more to go. Happy watching!
Anyway, I'm no silent film connoisseur, but I thought it was decent. The movie tells the story of two men who, although they are both in love with the same woman, go off to World War I and become fighter pilots together, ending up as BFFs. The story itself is pretty basic. Our naive main character doesn't realize the love he already has in his next-door neighbor, the glamour of the other woman is too alluring, etc., etc. The reason the movie was as exciting as it was is its use of actual footage of fighter plane dogfights. From what I've read, the U.S. War Department fully supported the making of this film, which glamorized WWI with the longest, most tedious fight scenes I've ever witnessed. I mean, really, the extras they had for this were just atrocious; they looked more like zombies than soldiers scurrying across a battlefild. Ultimately, this movie probably won Best Picture because of its for-the-time dazzling visual effects more than its acting and so on.
Even with that in mind, though, this doesn't necessarily detract from the movie. I really did feel for Jack, David, and Mary (Jack's girl-next-door). Ok, so David kind of freaked me out a bit; there's just something about his horrifying gaze that rarely changed in expression that filled me with terror. He really looked like he was going to kill something all the time. And he also kind of French-kissed his mother, which I was also not okay with.
Ok, so my modern sensibilities kind of got to me on this movie. Frankly, Wings has not aged terribly well. The plot is trite and sexist (Mary ends up being sent home from the Women's Corp in order to save Jack's good name), and I had a really hard time getting over myself as a viewer to appreciate this movie. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. I know the visual effects were great for their time, and they were. This movie-watching experience was more of an historical event than anything else. I feel like that's the most important thing to take from this movie anyway. You certainly won't remember the dialogue.
Well, there's Wings for you. I'm working on inter-library loaning Cavalcade, and I've got Cimarron sitting on my desk right now. I just counted, and that's 74 down and only seven more to go. Happy watching!
Friday, November 13, 2009
Mutiny on the Bounty
So, as you can probably tell, it took me a really, really, really long time to watch another Best Picture winner. My apologies for that. However, I'm back and ready to watch some more movies.
Today, I got "Mutiny on the Bounty," the 1935 Best Picture winner, from Netflix. Allow me to take a moment to sing Netflix's praises. I just have the one-movie-at-a-time deal with unlimited instant watches, and it is cheap and fantastic! I took a break from movies for a while to watch some "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," and I'm still watching t.v. instantly on the site. Amazing. Get an account now.
Anyway, back to the movie! Got it in the mail today, and I had over an hour and a half in between classes. Who needs to shower/do homework when there's a movie begging to be watched? When I popped the movie into my ancient DVD player, I was surprised that the title screen looked so familiar. As it turns out, I've rented this disk from Netflix before, but failed to get around to watching it. One really does need to be in the right mood in order to enjoy some classic movies.
Set in the 1880s, Clark Gable stars as the lead mutineer who can no longer tolerate the tyrannical rule of Captain Bligh, played well by Charles Laughton, on the HMS Bounty. The movie is directed by Frank Lloyd (also director of Cavalcade, one of the remaining movies on my list) in lovely black and white. The movie is based on a book which is based on the real events of the Bounty's mutiny. The screenplay, which took three people to write, was just one thing nominated from this movie for an Oscar that year. Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, and Franchot Tone (who plays the honorable, unjustly accused Byam) were all nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role, while Frank Lloyd was nominated for directing. The editing and score were also nominated. However, the movie only won for Best Picture. "The Informer" was a big movie that year, not "Mutiny on the Bounty." Sorry, I don't have any good info on "The Informer;" I haven't seen it yet! But no worries, it's on my list.
One interesting thing is that 1935 was the last year before categories in the Oscars opened up to supporting actors and actresses. I don't know this for sure, but it may be safe to bet that had there been a supporting actor category, at least Tone may have had a chance of taking Oscar home, instead of further splitting the best actor vote.
At any rate, the movie was pretty good - I give it a 3 out of 5. The acting and directing were magnificent. While one can tell the parts actually filmed on sea versus those on a set, the effects were also pretty damn good considering the time period. As for actual content, the story is fascinating, and it sets up the idea that ever since this unfair captain suffered a just mutiny, the British Navy became a place where the enlisted men and officers worked as equals, a lovely sentiment for 1935 America. I did find Laughton's character of Bligh very interesting, but I wish he would have been developed more - why was he so cruel and merciless? He was a self-made man, one might think that would make him more forgiving. One of the most entertaining parts of the movie, though, is Clark Gable in general. Though nearly every character in the damn movie is as British as bad teeth and double-deckers, Gable doesn't even attempt a British accent. Not even a try. However, he pulls it off magnificently, with charm only that man seems to possess.
Ah well, one more seafaring, Best Picture winner behind me. Next on my queue is "Cimarron," the 1931 winner. However, since Netflix does not have "Wings" (the first Oscar winner) available, I'm trying to inter-library loan it. Sorry, I'm just not going to commit to buying it from ebay when I have a chance of getting it for free. Well, 73 down. Only seven more to go! Happy movie-watching!
Today, I got "Mutiny on the Bounty," the 1935 Best Picture winner, from Netflix. Allow me to take a moment to sing Netflix's praises. I just have the one-movie-at-a-time deal with unlimited instant watches, and it is cheap and fantastic! I took a break from movies for a while to watch some "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," and I'm still watching t.v. instantly on the site. Amazing. Get an account now.
Anyway, back to the movie! Got it in the mail today, and I had over an hour and a half in between classes. Who needs to shower/do homework when there's a movie begging to be watched? When I popped the movie into my ancient DVD player, I was surprised that the title screen looked so familiar. As it turns out, I've rented this disk from Netflix before, but failed to get around to watching it. One really does need to be in the right mood in order to enjoy some classic movies.
Set in the 1880s, Clark Gable stars as the lead mutineer who can no longer tolerate the tyrannical rule of Captain Bligh, played well by Charles Laughton, on the HMS Bounty. The movie is directed by Frank Lloyd (also director of Cavalcade, one of the remaining movies on my list) in lovely black and white. The movie is based on a book which is based on the real events of the Bounty's mutiny. The screenplay, which took three people to write, was just one thing nominated from this movie for an Oscar that year. Clark Gable, Charles Laughton, and Franchot Tone (who plays the honorable, unjustly accused Byam) were all nominated for Best Actor in a Leading Role, while Frank Lloyd was nominated for directing. The editing and score were also nominated. However, the movie only won for Best Picture. "The Informer" was a big movie that year, not "Mutiny on the Bounty." Sorry, I don't have any good info on "The Informer;" I haven't seen it yet! But no worries, it's on my list.
One interesting thing is that 1935 was the last year before categories in the Oscars opened up to supporting actors and actresses. I don't know this for sure, but it may be safe to bet that had there been a supporting actor category, at least Tone may have had a chance of taking Oscar home, instead of further splitting the best actor vote.
At any rate, the movie was pretty good - I give it a 3 out of 5. The acting and directing were magnificent. While one can tell the parts actually filmed on sea versus those on a set, the effects were also pretty damn good considering the time period. As for actual content, the story is fascinating, and it sets up the idea that ever since this unfair captain suffered a just mutiny, the British Navy became a place where the enlisted men and officers worked as equals, a lovely sentiment for 1935 America. I did find Laughton's character of Bligh very interesting, but I wish he would have been developed more - why was he so cruel and merciless? He was a self-made man, one might think that would make him more forgiving. One of the most entertaining parts of the movie, though, is Clark Gable in general. Though nearly every character in the damn movie is as British as bad teeth and double-deckers, Gable doesn't even attempt a British accent. Not even a try. However, he pulls it off magnificently, with charm only that man seems to possess.
Ah well, one more seafaring, Best Picture winner behind me. Next on my queue is "Cimarron," the 1931 winner. However, since Netflix does not have "Wings" (the first Oscar winner) available, I'm trying to inter-library loan it. Sorry, I'm just not going to commit to buying it from ebay when I have a chance of getting it for free. Well, 73 down. Only seven more to go! Happy movie-watching!
Monday, August 17, 2009
The Mission
Hey all you blog readers,
I'm Jill, and I have a pretty simple mission at hand. All I want to do is watch all of the Best Picture winners for the Oscars. Oh, and Best Director, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor and Supporting Actress. Okay, so this is kind of a hefty goal, but I believe in my movie watching abilities. I have actually been working on this goal for the past couple of years - I even have this dorky, green binder in which I keep a handwritten list of all the winners I've seen, and have yet to see.
Why am I doing this? Well, I'm not quite sure. I suppose I want to watch movies that have garnered critical acclaim for themselves throughout cinematic history. However, just picking Oscar winners doesn't mean that I'm picking the best movies ever, so there must be something else, some other appeal. Growing up in the middle of nowhere, I remember watching the Oscars as a little kid and being struck by the gowns and glamour, but mostly, I remember thinking to myself that I had never even heard of these movies. Surprisingly enough, rural Iowa is not a place to which many studios send their Oscar bait. For me, this big televised event was my first introduction to good cinema. To put it simply, I fell in love with The Oscars. And here I am on this quest.
Currently, I only have nine Best Picture winners left to see. They are: "How Green Was My Valley," "The Great Ziegfeld," "Mutiny on the Bounty,""It Happened One Night," "Cavalcade," "Cimarron," "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Wings." Some of these are going to be tricky to find, but I'm going to do it.
My plan for this blog is to talk about the movies I will be watching along my way to conquering this monstrous Oscar list. I'm not watching them in any particular order - I just use Netflix when the mood strikes and try to watch the movies by the cheapest means possible. Hopefully you'll read along with me, and maybe watch a couple of the movies, too. Thanks for reading.
I'm Jill, and I have a pretty simple mission at hand. All I want to do is watch all of the Best Picture winners for the Oscars. Oh, and Best Director, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor and Supporting Actress. Okay, so this is kind of a hefty goal, but I believe in my movie watching abilities. I have actually been working on this goal for the past couple of years - I even have this dorky, green binder in which I keep a handwritten list of all the winners I've seen, and have yet to see.
Why am I doing this? Well, I'm not quite sure. I suppose I want to watch movies that have garnered critical acclaim for themselves throughout cinematic history. However, just picking Oscar winners doesn't mean that I'm picking the best movies ever, so there must be something else, some other appeal. Growing up in the middle of nowhere, I remember watching the Oscars as a little kid and being struck by the gowns and glamour, but mostly, I remember thinking to myself that I had never even heard of these movies. Surprisingly enough, rural Iowa is not a place to which many studios send their Oscar bait. For me, this big televised event was my first introduction to good cinema. To put it simply, I fell in love with The Oscars. And here I am on this quest.
Currently, I only have nine Best Picture winners left to see. They are: "How Green Was My Valley," "The Great Ziegfeld," "Mutiny on the Bounty,""It Happened One Night," "Cavalcade," "Cimarron," "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Wings." Some of these are going to be tricky to find, but I'm going to do it.
My plan for this blog is to talk about the movies I will be watching along my way to conquering this monstrous Oscar list. I'm not watching them in any particular order - I just use Netflix when the mood strikes and try to watch the movies by the cheapest means possible. Hopefully you'll read along with me, and maybe watch a couple of the movies, too. Thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
