Pages

Powered by Blogger.
Showing posts with label 1966. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1966. Show all posts

Oscar Oddity #4: Best Picture & Actor 1966

Wednesday, October 17, 2012


In the 84 ceremonies of the Academy Awards, there have been five Best Picture nominees in 68 ceremonies. The Best Picture and Best Actor categories during these years have only matched once: in 1966.

Best Picture Nominees:

Alfie
A Man for All Seasons (winner)
The Russians Are Coming The Russians Are Coming
The Sand Pebbles
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Best Actor Nominees:

Alan Arkin, The Russians Are Coming The Russians Are Coming
Richard Burton, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
Michael Caine, Alfie
Steve McQueen, The Sand Pebbles
Paul Scofield, A Man for All Seasons (winner)

Note: The 1964 Best Actor lineup matched the Best Picture one, but not vice versa. This is because of Becket's two Best Actor nominations for Richard Burton and Peter O'Toole. Their fellow nominees were Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady (the winner), Anthony Quinn in Zorba the Greek, and Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove. However, Mary Poppins (the fifth Best Picture nominee) was not nominated in the Best Actor category.

088. Gamera vs. Barugon

Monday, March 12, 2012

088. (11 Mar) Gamera vs. Barugon (1966, Shigeo Tanaka) 4



Not enough Gamera, dammit.

A Man for All Seasons

Sunday, March 4, 2012

A Man For All Seasons, 1966
Directed by Fred Zinneman
Nominated for 8 Oscars, Won 6
Up Against: Alfie, The Russians are coming! The Russians Are Coming!, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, The Sand Pebbles

This movie tells the story of Thomas More, a Chancellor to King Henry VIII. Thomas was a moral man, and stood up firmly, for what he believed in. And in this case, he disagrees with Henry wanting to divorce his current wife so he may wed Anne Boleyn. And this movie tells of how he stood up against it all, and in the end, paid for it with his head.

While I found the first hour or so to be a little slow, the second half was a lot more interesting. The first half told of how Thomas More rose to become a Chancellor, and how the King kept trying to gain his approval for the divorce and new marriage, whereas the second half was about how King Henry deems himself Supreme Head of the Church so he can warrant his own divorce rather than waiting for the Pope's approval, how More resigns rather than accepts this, as he see's it as an abomination to what God wants for his people. A new oath is instated about the marriage, and must be signed or you are guilty of high treason, which More eventually is.

As mentioned, it took a little bit to get interesting (for me), so the storytelling was a little choppy. However, the acting was good. Paul Scotfield, who played Thomas More, won Best Actor for this role, and rightly so. He was calm and clear, but very powerful and authoritative. John Hurt was great as Richard Rich (who was apparently an unknown at the time, and this helped launch his career. Crazy to think he plays Ollivander in Harry Potter, he was such a little dweeby character), and just all the supporting cast was great. As I understand, it was a pretty all-star cast.

The costume design, additionally, was great. They were colourful and you could very much tell the difference between the rich, who were overly decked out, and the more middle-class.

The story itself is an interesting one. More is an amazing man, who stood up for what he believed in all his life, and even died for it. He was a Man of God, and really lived it, and made sure others knew it too. It's truly an inspiring story. The movie really showed his strength and conviction and the screenplay, as well as More's character itself were really well written.

Overall, it wasn't my favourite BP, nor was it near my least favourite, and it hit around the middle of the 25 I've already seen. (I'm keeping a list of best to worst, which I'll post when I've watched all 84 winners... though it could be 85 by the time I'm done..). But a good movie, a strong message and story, with solid acting.

7/10

035. Mister Buddwing

Sunday, January 29, 2012

035. (29 Jan) Mister Buddwing (1966, Delbert Mann) 37



Sort of mesmerizingly dopey, Mister Buddwing is laden with flashbacks as an amnesiac slowly recalls his life. James Garner has an almost impossible time making an amnesiac's confusion relatable. Handsome though he may be, his limitations further emphasize how nonsensical the script is. The film's title, for instance, comes from Garner wandering around the streets of Manhattan where he sees a beer truck and airplane in the sky; he pieces that together to name himself "Buddwing."

The drawn-out, silly plot is made bearable by a strong supporting cast. Angela Lansbury, Katharine Ross, Suzanne Pleshette, and Jean Simmons all take turns helping Garner. Each upstages him. Nichelle Nichols makes an impression in a bit part.

The Art Direction nomination is only for a handful of interiors, none of them especially intricate. It's mostly the inside of apartments and a couple restaurants. The Costume Design nomination is hilarious. Helen Rose is credited with the nod, but is listed in the credits as only designing Jean Simmons' gowns. That means she was cited for two shiny dresses.

436. "Manos:" The Hands of Fate

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

436. (16 Oct) "Manos:" The Hands of Fate (1966, Harold P. Warren) 1

416. Agent for H.A.R.M.

Thursday, September 15, 2011

416. (15 Sep) Agent for H.A.R.M. (1966, Gerd Oswald) 5

415. Red Zone Cuba

Thursday, September 8, 2011

415. (07 Sep) Red Zone Cuba (1966, Coleman Francis) 6

414. The Wild World of Batwoman

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

414. (07 Sep) The Wild World of Batwoman (1966, Jerry Warren) 9

Come Drink with Me (Da Zui Xia) 1966 **

Monday, April 18, 2011

ComeDrinkWithMe 1966-56-b

The protagonist of Come Drink With Me (1966) is a petite Chinese woman named Golden Swallow (Cheng Pei-pei…yes, the same lady from Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon). Based on this description, you might assume this is one of those Chinese teahouse stories where the main character is either a peasant or a princess who finds herself caught in a love triangle. You would be wrong, but at least you were right about their being a teahouse.  No, Golden Swallow is a sword-wielding badass who likes to lure her adversaries into a false sense of security by sipping tea before she uses her two daggers to slice them up. 

comedrink-tableDirector King Hu truly revolutionized the martial arts film genre with this 1966 classic.  The overall production standards and fight sequence designs were a great leap forward for Hong Kong cinema.  Concentrating on the areas of color and movement, King Hu creates a martial arts film full of grace and style. His lead actress’s ballet training no doubt helped with the overall gracefulness of her character’s deft movements. Watching her precise and fluid movements in the fight sequences is something to behold.  It is strange to say, but watching her engage in these acts of violence one is reminded of a beautifully choreographed Chinese opera. And she does all this wearing long gowns and come_drink_with_me_movie_image__3_large hats, which I suppose makes her seem even more skilled, as no doubt it was not easy to maneuver in such costumes. King Hu deliberately chose Cheng Pei-pei for Golden Swallow because of her ballet background. An admirer of Peking Opera, King Hu constructed his fight sequences based on the principles of dance.

In addition, King Hu benefits from his other star, Yueh Hua, who plays Drunken Cat, a drunken beggar who assists Golden Swallow in her quest to free her brother, a come-drink-with-me-03local government official, from a group of bandits. We first meet Drunken Cat when Golden Swallow meets with the bandits at a teahouse to negotiate the release of her brother. Things escalate when she refuses to trade the bandits’ leader for her brother—enter Drunken Cat as her secret weapon. More than ten years before Jackie Chan played a drunken master, it was Hua Yueh who brought this martial arts technique to the big screen. It is rumored that he consumed two bottles of wine before filming his fight sequences. It is quite comical to listen to him sing songs from famous Peking Opera’s to help Golden Swallow. 

Though they have completely different personalities, Drunken Cat and Golden Swallow work well together.  He serves as a wise advisor and capable accomplice. She’s a hothead who often acts before she thinks. It is through one of Drunken Cat’s opera songs that Golden Come Drink With Me (1966 Hong Kong) aka Da zui xia aka Big Drunk Hero<br />Directed by King HU<br />Shown center: CHENG Pei-pei (as Golden Swallow)Swallow finds the bandits’ hideout—a spectacularly designed Buddhist temple. The realistic-looking temple was entirely constructed on the Shaw Brothers’ lot. When Golden Swallow is injured there by a poisoned dart, it is Drunken Cat who nurses her back to health and helps her plan her assault on the temple.  Of course, Drunken Cat has his own debt to settle with his brother (Chan Hung Lit), who is both a criminal and an abbot at the temple.  As such, there is eventually a  showdown between the two brothers…and Golden Swallow has her own showdown with the bandits—but in an interesting twist she has a mini-army of female warriors who help her defeat them. 

Come Drink With Me might not be the best martial arts film of all time, but it certainly is one of the most important. King Hu truly changed the Wuxi genre by ComeDrinkWithMe 1966-14-bcreating fight sequences that could be viewed as both artistic and powerful. A sequel, Golden Swallow, followed two years later, but it was not as good as the original and there is no Drunken Cat.  However, King Hu would score another hit in 1971, with his best film A Touch of Zen.

 

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1966

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Középre igazítás
About the field: Well, I expected more from this year and yet I wasn't disappointed. I liked all of the performances and all of the movies (except for Morgan, which was...). My #1 was such an easy win both here and in real life. It's one of those cases when the actress wins for the career-best, right movie. #2 and #5 was also quite easy, however I had some hard time deciding who should be #3. I'm glad that it turned out this way, which I really did not expect. I was quite certain that my #3 becomes #2 before I wrote my review. However, anything can happen, seasons change. Let's see the ranking:


After all, I just feel that I don't have much to say about Vanessa Redgrave in this movie. She's great as usual (and that's going to be rewarded), but the movie is working against her as if she was on a boat during a hurricane.


In the end I can say that Ida Kaminska gave an excellent performance, which might be a bit uneven achievement and borderline supporting, but you instantly like the character, care about her and she just breaks your heart in the end. It's a great performance in a movie for the ages.


In the end, I can say that I loved Anouk Aimée in this one very much, but sometimes I felt that her performance lacked something and wasn't constantly strong. It's an extremely simple, beautiful, clean and loveable work to which the viewer can easily connect.


I must say that I was impressed by Lynn Redgrave's performance as the innocent Georgy, who has many layers and a real depth, though sometimes the performance was not constantly strong. Great and effective work, which even moved me, but I guess I wanted a bit more.


The writing flies away, but Taylor's performance stays with me forever, locked up firmly in my mind. An actress, who was able to show another, unknown and much more interesting side of hers, now really got me. I'm under its effect and I can't be sober. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.


So I can proudly announce
that my winner is...
Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
Easy win, Ms. Taylor


The ranking of the already reviewed years:
  1. 1974
  2. 1989
  3. 1959
  4. 1939
  5. 2009
  6. 1963
  7. 1966
  8. 1990
  9. 1978
  10. 1954
  11. 1948
  12. 2002
  13. 1940
  14. 1998
About the next year: it was so complicated to choose the next year, but after all I picked a brilliant one I really look forward to reviewing. Unfortunately I cannot do posts until next Friday, but after that there's going to be a lot of time. Let's see the clues:
  • Dancing queen...
  • To Miss with Love (?)
  • Don't lose your head! (Sorry)
So what do you think? Any thoughts, request, anything on your mind?
P.S.: Please comment on Ida's profile. :)

Ida Kaminska in The Shop on the Main Street

Ida Kaminska received her only Oscar nomination for playing Rozalie Lautmannová, an old Jewish shopkeeper during the Holocaust in Ján Kádár's movie, The Shop on the Main Street. It's quite amazing that a Ukranian-born stage actress in a Czechoslovakian movie received an Oscar nomination and this is why I love 1966. There was not one, but two foreign-language performances nominated, two English and only one American. Of course, Taylor was winning, but it's a nice achievement of Kaminska anyhow.

The Shop on the Main Street is most definitely the best movie about the Holocaust (along with The Pianist). It really shows the reactions and feelings of everyone and it's free of the sentimentality of Schindler's List (which is terrific too, of course). The Best Foreign Language Film Oscar was more than deserved, it's quite probably one of my favorite winners of the category. Jozef Króner gives a great and very natural performance as Tono, who's the real lead of the movie. It's mostly about him and his feelings.

Therefore, Ida Kaminska is borderline supporting. It's one of those cases, where it's just not obvious where she belongs. The definition of a leading role is (no matter what) that the character should be crucial to the storyline and without that character, the movie would not be the same. Well, that's the role of Rozalie Lautmannová. The screentime is working against her unfortunately, she just doesn't have the opportunity to shine as much as she could have. She's too substantial to be supporting, but not enough for leading.

However, this doesn't mean that she gives a weak performance. Oh no. Kaminska, who was a veteran stage actress, really nailed the character of Mrs. Lautmann, who's nearly deaf and blind, old and dumb. Kaminska showed the dementia of this woman so thrillingly that it's almost heartbreaking just to look at her. The emptiness of her smile just makes you sad and shows the terrible state of this person. However, she can only stick to her memories, traditions and religion. She lives in a word which has disappeared, but which is very alive to her. She has considerable pride, she cares about what people are saying about her. She always furious when Tono wants to open the shop on Saturday. She says "what are they going to think about me?".

It's also a very important factor that Kaminska gets to work with some terrific material. The role of Mrs. Lautmann is an excellent one for any elderly actress. She immediately wins the sympathy of the viewer as Mrs. Lautmann is a very likeable character. Or that might be only pity, but personally, I liked Mrs. Lautmann.

Her chemistry with Jozef Króner is just excellent. They work extremely well together, with Kaminska as the mother and Króner as the son of this relationship. Mrs. Lautmann likes Tono, gives him food, cares about him, but she's not afraid of yelling when he's clumsy or stupid. It's a very interesting relationship as I would not call it a friendship, it's something very weird, but as I said, very interesting.

Kaminska has some really terrific and memorable moments like the one where the truth becomes clear to her and starts praying. It's simply terrific, but I felt that the overall effectiveness of this performance was a bit uneven. When she's great, she's extremely great, but when she does not have much to do, she's not very special. I wouldn't say though that she's weak for a moment. She's only a bit uneven.

In the end I can say that Ida Kaminska gave an excellent performance, which might be a bit uneven achievement and borderline supporting, but you instantly like the character, care about her and she just breaks your heart in the end. It's a great performance in a movie for the ages. Good job.
This seems fair, I think.
What do you think? No official predictions now as the final conclusion comes very soon.

Vanessa Redgrave in Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Vanessa Redgrave received her first Oscar nomination for playing Leonie Delt in Morgan. Wow, I have absolutely no idea how much chance Redgrave had of winning the Oscar. I think she was the fourth eventually as I think Elizabeth Taylor ruled the competition with Lynn Redgrave and Anouk Aimée as runners-up for the prize. That being said, after 1966 (the) Redgrave(s) became world-famous and gave us many great performances.

Morgan is such a weird movie and I have so many ambivalent feelings about it. Sometimes it's simply intolerable to watch and so weird, that it's really unnecessary. However, there were times when I enjoyed it to a degree and that's mostly due to the fact that I am a huge Carry On! fan and was extremely pleased to see Bernard Bresslaw, who actually gave the most entertaining performance. Karel Reisz is an interesting and great director, but this was quite a mixed bag. I am really fond of free cinema, but this movie was not my cup of tea.

Vanessa Redgrave is an extremely strange case here. She's quite probably the most original and uniquely brilliant actress of the silver screen (along with Tilda Swinton probably) and I really mean this. She has such a beautiful presence and face, it has such a radiant quality in it. It's not a co-incidence that Katharine Hepburn really admired her. If you see Vanessa Redgrave, you just CANNOT take your eyes off her. Even with the smallest, most minimal role she's able to create something memorable (see Atonement as a proof).

However, in this movie she's really not my cup of tea. Actually, she has that previously mentioned radiant quality, but her role as Leonie is just rotten. That's it, it's such a stupid material that she just cannot be very impressive. In addition, the movie mostly concentrates on the character of Morgan and Leonie is co-lead at best. The screentimes is working against Vanessa and unfortunately, she just can't do very much about it. When she's not there, she's not there and I have a feeling that something is missing. It's too bad.

The character of Leonie is so hard to understand as she really doesn't make any sense. I just did not know where to put her, I wasn't even sure if I should take her seriously. Plus I never really found out if she still had some feelings for Morgan. It's so confusing overall and no matter how much I tried, I really did not understand her. I wanted to know so much about her, but there wasn't anything. I think the writer must have thought, Morgan is the main character, why the hell should I write a whole story for Leonie? And that's it. Redgrave is just not able to build a palace with crap. That's it.

Miraculously, after a while, I was captivated simply by the beauty and immense presence of Vanessa Redgrave. I just fell in love with her after a while. I fell in love with Vanessa and not Leonie. I just felt that, yes, I waited for this, this is that very anticipated feeling. Slowly, but firmly, Vanessa just impressed me with her talent. Unfortunately, that feeling was not constant as she almost disappears in the end, it just got lost somewhere. It was a great feeling though when it lasted.

After all, I just feel that I don't have much to say about Vanessa Redgrave in this movie. She's great as usual (and that's going to be rewarded), but the movie is working against her as if she was on a boat during a hurricane. It is worth watching however to see Vanessa's immense beauty and enormous talent. The rating seems to be higher than expected, but actually the effort is a 5.
More of a 3.7, but I give it a 4 after all.

What do you think? It's time to give your last predictions!

Anouk Aimée in A Man and a Woman

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Anouk Aimée received her only Oscar nomination to date for playing Anne Gauthier, a repressed young widow in the French classic, A Man and a Woman. I don't know what to think about her chances of winning: on the one hand, she won the Golden Globe, which was pretty much a miracle, considering the fact that the Globes reward exclusively stars, but on the other hand, Elizabeth Taylor was the one to beat. I think Aimée might have been third in the voting, but I imagine that Taylor got about 75% of the votes at least.

A Man and a Woman is quite simply a great movie: yes, simply, as the main principle of this movie is simplicity. Everything is so nice, ordinary and therefore, simply loveable. The screenplay win was, in my opinion, richly deserved. The situations, the dialogues, the characters' thoughts are so damn realistic: it's not a heavy drama with huge scenes, outbursts and breakdowns, it's just a quiet tale of some natural emotions. I think the Foreign Language Picture award was also deserved.

The performances are just like the movie: quiet, simply, subtle and emotional. The chemistry between the two leads is just excellent: you can feel that they love each other, care about each other and want to be happy with each other, but it's as if there was a huge wall of grief between them. It's especially Anne who suffers from the loss of her husband. As she says in the end: he IS dead, but not for me. Knowing these emotions, Anouk Aimée was able to create a beautiful performance.

When we first see Anne, she's nothing special, she's just a smiling mum having fun with her daughter, telling tales and she seems to be perfectly happy. This is the surface, but Aimée showed the soul of this character with such ease, that it's almost invisible. Yes, Aimée is extremely subtle, but I always felt that there was real foce inside.

Again, when she meets Jean-Louis, nothing special happens: they are in the car talking in a very standard, polite way with a bit embarassment. These little nervous ticks are so exciting and show so much of them: we actually get to know a lot about them even at the beginning of the whole story. The movie itself is rather interesting too and it really helps the performances: everything becomes so natural, that you have actually NO doubt that this could happen in real life.

I always felt that Aimée understood her character quite well, she knew what there was inside her head and was familiar with the insecurities, sadness and guilt of this woman. Anne cannot let her late husband go even though she loves Jean-Louis and wants something more from him. Anne just doesn't have the courage to begin that relationship since she would think it's adultery.

As I said, this is a very natural performance, which has such a beauty that might come from the real beauty of Anouk Aimée. Let's face it: only looking at her is enough, as she charms you instantly becauseof her beauty. If you like a character instantly, it's much easier to connect to her emotionally and it's no problem with Anne: you root for her from the beginning, but in a very odd way. You just wish all the best for her.

However, this immense subtlety also makes her performance a bit undercooked and weak sometimes, especially when the movie focuses on Jean-Louis. When it's mostly about Anne, it doesn't bother you, but she should have been had a bit more impact on me, so that I do not lose connection to her. This is in the middle of the movie, and thankfully, in the end she really gains a lot of strength.

The scene where they are making love (and it's the best expression for it, it's not just having sex, there is so much true love there) focuses on the face Aimée and it's just terrific: there is a strange mix of joy and guilt in it, sometimes she feels great, but sometimes her eyes looks teary. Anouk Aimée perfectly handled and combined all the emotions, which really have an effect on the viewer. It's even better when she's on the train, sitting and thinking. That's probably the most memorable scene of Anouk and quite probably the whole movie too. It's just breathtaking.

In the end, I can say that I loved Anouk Aimée in this one very much, but sometimes I felt that her performance lacked something and wasn't constantly strong. It's an extremely simple, beautiful, clean and loveable work to which the viewer can easily connect. Not a huge achievement, but a great one anyhow.
A firm four.

What do you think? Any thoughts, observations? Tell me!

Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Friday, December 3, 2010

Elizabeth Taylor received her fifth (and to date last) Best Actress nomination and second Oscar for playing Martha, a vulgar, alcoholic mess in Mike Nichols' first movie, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? This win was probably the easiest one ever: Liz was the only nominee, who was actually a star, she had a huge performance, which was also very unusual and also she starred in a brilliant movie. So it wasn't any competition there, I don't really understand why she skipped the show (they say she boycotted the even because Burton was not going to win).

Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is quite simply a triumph. Everything about it is just groundbreaking, unusual, exciting, fresh and everything. It's quite simply perfection. That's why I am so horribly shocked that it lost Best Picture and Director to a great, but usual movie. I guess this movie was considered offensive by the older members, and therefore they went with the reliable choice. The acting is, again, a triumph: Richard Burton was robbed of the Oscar for his extremely moving performance, so was George Segal, who's terrific as the big-faced guy, and Sandy Dennis gives a brilliant supporting performance, richly deserving of the award.

However, just like in the case of Vivien Leigh in Gone With the Wind (maybe not that much), this is the Elizabeth Taylor Show. There are performances, which could be considered the best of the performer, but there are works which define them as artists. This is such a work by Ms. Taylor. I'll admit without any hesitation that sometimes I can't bear the acting style of Liz. Her loud, over-the-top voice can kill me (Suddenly, Last Summer), her big tears can annoy me to hell. BUT, when she rocks it's an earthquake. If I said that Lynn Redgrave was not a hurricane, than Taylor is Category 9000 hurricane and destroys countries in this movie. It's a showcase of so many complicated emotions, which are so damn difficult to handle.

Martha is one of the most unlikeable characters. I go further: she's just a disgusting, nasty, alcoholic mess, who's just a total waste. Much like Mo'Nique in Precious (she even makes Mo'Nique pale in comparision with her, check out the two breakdown scenes and compare), she doesn't have much to do and therefore tortures the only person on whom they could rely. But in Martha, very deep inside, there's so many love to express and this really makes this character heartbreaking. Taylor shows the hopelessness of Martha, but also the hope inside her. I'm contradicting myself, but so does this performance, which never makes sense and by this it's as natural as it can get.

When we first see her, she's drunk, she's swearing like a sailor, she's disgusting, vulgar and ugly. I don't see how a beautiful, 34-year-old actress at her prime was able to be so ugly. It took tons of courage from Ms. Taylor. Yes, she made the decision to jump into the edge, but with this self-sacrifice she created something for the ages. Something, which is more than Elizabeth Taylor, the superstar, the queen of Hollywood. It's no wonder that the great roles avoided her after this: there was nowhere to go from here. Taylor reached the star and one cannot go further, that's it. Not only is this work her best, but it was revolutionary for acting too. After this, beautiful actresses were not afraid to become fat, ugly and ordinary.

Incredibly the things I most dislike about Taylor's acting make this performance really work. With exaggerating her mannerisms, it just becomes so interesting despite the fact that it's crazily over-the-top. It's quite simply breathtaking to witness this harrowing experience as you get to see the everything, the point (which Nick doesn't see), the soul of this character. Is she mentally ill or is she simply bitter? I think it's the mix of the two, or the illness is the result of her bitterness and disappointments. Martha wanted something more than anything and than it's taken away from her. It's one of the most heartbreaking moments ever.

Also, I am not halfway done with analyzing her performance: this review would be so incomplete without mentioning the crazily intense chemistry between her and Richard Burton. Their fight-and-make-up relationship in real life affected this work of theirs, but in the most positive way possible. George and Martha are addicted to each other, they don't have anyone else. They fight all the time, which is mostly the result of the intense love and hate between them. Her scene in the kitchen (I mean her huge monologue) is simply heartbreaking and explains all the feelings. The emotional force in it is so captivating, that after all this weight on you becomes so heavy, that you actually break down along with the characters. Taylor (with the other actors) makes you a part of their crazy, sick games and you just can't get out. There are breaks for them, but not for you. From the first second, Taylor grabs you by your guts and never lets you go, not for a single moment. And incredibly there's also a fair amount of humor and irony in Taylor towards this character: after all Martha is just a person who seeks happiness like any of us, and it's not only her fault that she is a total failure.

After all, I don't want to let this performance go. I just so want to write and write and write for hours, but you have to wrap it up. The writing flies away, but Taylor's performance stays with me forever, locked up firmly in my mind. An actress, who was able to show another, unknown and much more interesting side of hers, now really got me. I'm under its effect and I can't be sober. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.
This is again one of those cases, where I don't need a rating.

What do you think?

Lynn Redgrave in Georgy Girl

Lynn Redgrave received her first Oscar nomination for playing Georgina Parkin, an innocent young girl in Georgy Girl. Lynn Redgrave's performance in this movie was a real hit and everybody seemed to love her, she became famous, got a Golden Globe, some critics' awards, therefore I think that she was actually the runner-up to Elizabeth Taylor in that strictly one-horse race. Redgrave has her fanbase, but she unfortunately never matched her sister's popularity.

Georgy Girl is quite probably one of the weirdest movies I have ever seen. I think it doesn't make much sense, but it's not bad and actually, quite entertaining. I think it could have won that Best Song Oscar, because that theme is quite catchy. The actors give proper performances: Charlotte Rampling is beautiful, sexy, wild and selfish, she's very memorable. Alan Bates is a bit annoying sometimes, but he's quite good too. James Mason's nomination is however so weird and so is his performance: I mean was it supposed to be serious or funny? I guess his intention was funny, but he wasn't. Well, that might be just my taste.

People seem to be enchanted by Lynn Redgrave, but there are some, who criticise the performance. I want to do both as I really liked her, but there were some things, I did not like that much. First of all, I must say that Georgy itself is the perfect role for any actress. People always love the innocent, unusual young girls, who become hearbroken at some point of the movie. These characters win your simpathy instantly as you feel strong emotions for them. You hate the ones who harm her (very much) and love her immensely. Georgy is really such a character.

I just cannot deny my affection for Britain, London, Brits, and British movies of the sixties. They were the best: the so-called kitchen sink realism is so close to my heart, but this movie is not a typical one. Mostly it's not that realistic (sometimes not at all), but there are some hearbreaking stories inside. Just like Georgy's: she was always told what to do and how, she was in fact a kept woman, but no one really says that. Georgy however has considerable pride and she just wants to be on her own, taking care of people who need it. She has an immense heart, which is sometimes used by some weak people.

If I really think about it, Georgy is a fantastically unselfish and terribly giving person with some flaws of course. Yes, she's just fascinating and I may even say that I respect her. This becomes obvious in the scene where she asks for prams and cots for her "services", which actually do not happen. She lies and cheats (just a bit), but for all the good reasons. She has hope that eventually her selfish roommate becomes a great mum, but we know from the beginning: Georgy is a mother already. She just understands children, as if they shared a common language. It's very odd, but also extremely impressive.

However, Georgy has her needs and desires, like having a man and a love life, but eventually, she's the one, who's ashamed and that really broke my heart. Redgrave so amazingly showed the emotions and feelings of this character: she did not pick the showy ways, but she made the right decisions I think. Lynn's acting has some depth, which have to be discovered by the viewer after watching the film. When I finished Georgy Girl, I wasn't amazed, but as I think about her, I realize how great she is actually.

I only have one argument against her: the strength of her performance is a bit uneven, and sometimes it loses some effect which it might have had on me. I know that this doesn't seem to be a big problem when you read this, but it bothered me a bit while watching. This probably also caused her loss at Oscar night. She's not a hurricane, she's just wind, but not subtle either.

However, I must say that I was impressed by Lynn Redgrave's performance as the innocent Georgy, who has many layers and a real depth, though sometimes the performance was not constantly strong. Great and effective work, which even moved me, but I guess I wanted a bit more. Nice job which has grown on me, and it displays Lynn Redgrave's much missed talent extremely well.
A 4,5 after all.
What do you think? I'm sick, damn. Please send me positive energy so that I can recover until tomorrow, to fulfill some of my duties.

The Next Year

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

After closing a poll, the conclusion was obvious: you wanted me to do 1966, so let's just go ahead with it. It's a very popular and yet not frequently talked about race. Everyone praises Taylor, but all the nominees have their fans. But let's just start:

1966

So the nominees were:
  • Anouk Aimée in A Man and a Woman
  • Ida Kaminska in The Shop on the Main Street
  • Lynn Redgrave in Georgy Girl
  • Vanessa Redgrave in Morgan
  • Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
So what do you think? What are your predictions (the contest is naturally on)? Who's your pick? What's your ranking?
P.S. I am not sure how frequent the posts will be but I'll do my best.
 

Blogger news

Blogroll

Most Reading