Best Pictures #77: 2021 (94th) Academy Awards Best Picture Nominee: West Side Story (2021)

 by A.J.

Best Pictures #77: 2021 (94th) Academy Awards Best Picture Nominee

West Side Story (2021)

“Life can be bright in America/If you can fight in America/Life is all right in America/If you're all white in America.”

Nearly every remake is unnecessary. The first exceptions that come to mind are John Huston’s The Maltese Falcon, John Carpenter’s The Thing, and Martin Scorsese’s The Departed. Each of these remakes found an approach that made the source material more effective on film, or expanded or modernized the story, or approached it from a different angle. Steven Spielberg’s West Side Story, nominated for a total of 7 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Director, makes slight changes here and there to the original and none of them help in any way. The 1957 Broadway musical and 1961 movie version updated the story of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet to the present day (at the time), moved the setting to a then blue collar, multiracial neighborhood in Manhattan, and injected the story with a youthful, lively energy by making it a musical and casting young people as the leads (the first film version of Romeo and Juliet to cast young people in the title roles wouldn't happen until 1968). It may feel dated or classic now, but it also feels very of its moment.

This version keeps the story in late 1950’s Manhattan with the only real update being smoothing over the more uncomfortable racial aspects of the original. Actual Latin actors play the Latin characters and are given more screen time and background. The Upper West Side is shown in the process of being demolished to make way for Lincoln Center (the opening scene of the original movie was filmed where my alma mater, Fordham University Lincoln Center, now stands). The white gang, the Jets, and the Puerto Rican gang, the Sharks, are both the victims of gentrification, but this isn’t really explored beyond signs for demolition and new construction and a protest against evictions in the background.  

One night, Maria (Rachel Zegler) sees Tony (Ansel Elgort) across the dance floor and they meet behind behind the bleachers where he happens to be, seemingly lurking. They kiss and their fates are sealed. Unfortunately Zegler and Elgort don’t have much chemistry which is not good for a Romeo and Juliet adaptation. Scenes with Tony and Maria, even the balcony number, aren’t very compelling and that is when my focus began to wander. The less time between when the lovers meet and when they are married, symbolically or actually, the better. Otherwise, they might go on a boring date to the Cloisters museum and you would wonder why Maria wants to even be around this incredibly dull young man. Ansel Elgort is stiff as a board (I totally unintentionally spelled that “bored'' the first time) in nearly every scene. His lack of charm and charisma nearly sink the whole film, but everything else works well enough to keep the movie afloat. It helps that the real stars of the movie are the songs and dancing. 

Rachel Zegler gives a good performance as Maria but is overshadowed by the more interesting characters: Bernardo (David Alvarez), her brother and leader of the Sharks, and her best friend, Anita (Ariana DeBose, in a standout, Oscar nominated performance). Tony’s hotheaded friend, Riff , is not a very complex character but he is an exciting one thanks to a great performance by Mike Faist. Rita Moreno, who won an Oscar for playing Anita in the original, is cast as the owner of the store where Tony works. Her presence is always welcome (whether she was in the original version of something or not) and she can’t help but be good, but the film seems to rely on her to lend it credibility.  

The cinematography by Janusz Kaminski is dazzling and uses lens flair and faux spotlights with great frequency but also to great effect. The production design and costumes are also great and eye catching, as you might expect. All have received Oscar nominations. The “rumble” scene in a salt warehouse is an exciting scene from start to finish that makes great use of all three elements. 

It took me a while to catch on that the order of songs had been changed and also who sings them. In the original, Riff and the Jets sing “Gee, Officer Krupke”, a song mocking the policeman always harassing them, directly to Officer Krupke, which is a pretty daring and defiant thing to do to a cop. Here, the Jets, sans Riff, sing it while waiting around in lock up after Officer Krupke has left. Tony is given more songs to sing which is a mistake. After the "rumble" scene there are only two songs, both of which are downbeat, and the movie really loses steam. These changes feel arbitrary and detrimental to the songs’ effectiveness and the flow of the story. It turns out that the creators of the original West Side Story thought out which order would make the songs most effective and found the best way. 

Is this version of West Side Story bad? No. Is it good? I suppose. I guess changing the order of the songs was one of the only ways this version could distinguish itself from the original. The sensibilities about race and gender and the acting styles have changed, but nothing else is really different. This is still the same story from 1957 that spoke to that era. A version of the story from Bernardo or Anita’s perspective or more directly dealing with gentrification or modern racial dynamics would mean the story would change. New songs would be required. If the plot or time period or setting were significantly changed then it wouldn’t be West Side Story. Spielberg and company set out to do West Side Story and that’s what they did.

P.S.

There is another movie musical from 2021 based on a Broadway show about a Hispanic/Latin neighborhood in Manhattan undergoing changes like gentrification with charming, lively characters dealing with these changes while also trying to live their idea of the American dream...and none of the characters are even in a gang or wield a knife. It is In the Heights, relatable and moving no matter your background or location, and it is the best movie of 2021. 

Nominees: Steven Spielberg, Kristie Macosko Krieger, producers

Director: Steven Speilberg

Screenplay: Tony Kushner; based on the stage play, book by Arthur Laurents

Cast: Ansel Elgort, Rachel Zegler, Ariana DeBose, Rita Moreno

Release Date: December 10, 2021

Production Companies: Amblin Entertainment, TSG Entertainment

Distributor: 20th Century Studios

Total Nominations: 7, including Best Picture

Other Nominations: Supporting Actress-Ariana DeBose; Director-Steven Spielberg; Cinematography-Janusz Kaminski; Costume Design-Paul Tazewell; Production Design-Adam Stockhausen (production design), Rena DeAngelo (set decoration); Sound-Tod A. Maitland, Gary Rydstrom, Brian Chumney, Andy Nelson, Shawn Murphy

Long Shot (2019) review

by A.J.

Long Shot (2019) 

The summer movie season is a time of big budget special effects heavy superhero movies, action movies, sequels, remakes, and reboots, but, also, a high-profile comedy or two. This summer’s high-profile comedy is the very R-rated Long Shot starring Charlize Theron and Seth Rogen. This unlikely romantic comedy is as solidly entertaining and smart as it is funny and raunchy. Movies for grownups don’t get made too often these days, so when one comes along and it is as good and funny as this it is a treat. Charlize Theron plays Charlotte Field, the popular and successful Secretary of State for idiot President Chambers (Bob Odenkirk), who won the election because he used to play the president on TV. The President tells her that he’s not seeking reelection so he can pursue a film career and he plans to endorse her for president once she gets a global environmental agreement off the ground.

After being informed by a PR firm that people find her lacking a sense of humor, Charlotte hires a crusading journalist, Fred Flarsky, played by Seth Rogen, who recently quit his job because his news outlet was bought up by an unscrupulous conservative media conglomerate to punch up the humor in her speeches. Fred and Charlotte actually grew up in the same neighborhood and she was his babysitter who he very much had a crush on. They reconnect at a fundraiser featuring Boyz II Men where Rogen takes the first of a few slapstick tumbles. Schlubby Fred is jetted of to Stockholm, the first of many global destinations, bringing nothing with him but a garish windbreaker, awkward tapered cargo pants, and some illegal narcotics. He’s a fish out of water to say the least.

Long Shot's screenplay is written by Dan Sterling and Liz Hannah and directed by Jonathan Levine. Seth Rogen is only credited as a producer, but any movie featuring Rogen, whether he wrote it or not, sets up certain comedic expectations. To be specific, an irreverent, raunchy, juvenile, foul mouthed, stoner sense of humor. That certainly describes Long Shot’s comedic sensibility, but its comedy is mostly verbal, though there is one gross out sight gag that the climax of the film hinges on (so be forewarned about that). All of the humor, even the gross out gag, is firmly rooted in the characters, so no joke or gag feels artificially tacked on for shock value

As Charlotte and Fred spend more and more time together so he can get to know her better to add more of her personality into her speeches, they begin an unlikely and entirely believable romance. "Long Shot" refers to Charlotte as a presidential candidate, but it also refers to Fred as a romantic partner for the beautiful high-profile politician. Rogen and Theron are an unlikely pair but they have great chemistry. Rogen delivers his signature clever slacker character and comedic style, but Theron is far and away the star of this picture. She’s done heavy drama, dark comedy, broad comedy, action, and now clever, raunchy comedy, and she’s done them all extremely well. Hopefully Long Shot doesn’t get lost in the shuffle of big budget summer blockbuster spectacles because it is definitely worth seeking out. This foul mouthed, big hearted romantic comedy is bound to delight.

Best Pictures #26: 1929-30 (3rd) Academy Awards Outstanding Production Nominee, The Divorcee (1930)

by A.J.

Best Pictures #26: 1929-30 (3^rd) Academy Awards Outstanding Production Nominee

The Divorcee (1930)

The Divorcee’s nomination for Outstanding Production shows that the Academy’s interest in controversial but popular films existed since its early years. This film is based novel The Ex-Wife by Ursula Parrott, which was also popular and controversial when it was released. The controversy of the novel and film stems from its subject matter: marital infidelity and divorce. MGM was hesitant to be associated with the racy novel, so the title of the film adaptation was changed to The Divorcee, a classier way to say “ex-wife” I suppose. This would not be a racy or controversial film today, but it remains quite entertaining. The Divorcee has interesting characters, good performances, and a good sense of humor and drama. The Divorcee was released on DVD in the TCM Archives Forbidden Hollywood Collection Volume 2, but this set has since gone out of print making tracking down a copy slightly difficult and expensive (it currently sells on Amazon.com for $130). However, it airs occasionally on TCM, and I very much recommend watching it should it be on the schedule.  

MGM may have acted like they did not want to court controversy, but is seems as though they didn’t put great effort into making The Divorcee any less controversial. The Divorcee may be tame and even conservative by 21^st century standards, but modern viewers should keep in mind that this was a time when the subject of divorce, let alone female sexuality, made for impolite and improper conversation. This movie pushed boundaries, addressed the double standards of male vs. female infidelity, and, most of all, it had a good, well-developed, strong, and interesting female character as the lead.

I had been looking forward to watching The Divorcee since I haven’t seen many Pre-Code movies. Pre-Code Hollywood refers to the brief time period after the advent of sound films until the strict enforcement of the Hays Code in 1934. At this time films were not protected under the First Amendment because of a Supreme Court ruling in 1915, which declared films were purely commercial and not art. That unfortunate and idiotic decision would be overturned in 1952. The Hays, or Production Code, was actually created in 1930, but it was not enforced until the summer of 1934 when every film was required to have a Production Code seal of approval before it could be released. The Production Code severely regulated and limited a film’s content and subject matter. Before then movies were free to contain violence, risqué subject matter (like infidelity and divorce), and, most notable of all, highly suggestive innuendo.

The coveted title role of The Divorcee went to Norma Shearer, but it did not come easy to her even though she was married to MGM production chief Irving Thalberg. He originally wanted to cast Joan Crawford. At that time, Shearer was known for playing “lady-like” characters, so Thalberg thought she lacked the sensuality the role would require. To prove her husband wrong, Shearer had a series of photos taken of her posing provocatively in a revealing dress. Her plan worked. Thalberg cast her and she won Best Actress at the next Oscars. Shearer’s nomination, however, was for The Divorcee and her performance in another film, Their Own Desire (1929). When she was announced as the winner, only The Divorcee was specified and the reason for this remains unknown even to Academy historians.

The film begins with a group of friends having a getaway party at a country house. Jerry (Norma Shearer) announces her engagement to Ted, played by Chester Morris, much to the poorly hidden disappointment of her other suitors, Paul (Conrad Nagel) and Don (Robert Montgomery). Paul gets very drunk but still drives a car full of people, including Jerry’s sister, Dorothy, down a winding road. The car crashes and Dorothy is disfigured. As Jerry marries Ted in a pretty ceremony in a church, Paul marries Dorothy out of pity in a hospital room. After three happy years, Jerry discovers that Ted has been unfaithful and responds by having an affair of her own, with Don. Jerry and Ted divorce, and then Jerry decides to live it up.

I was worried that The Divorcee would be tonally uneven with the first half being light and romantic and the second half being mostly dramatic, such as with The Crowd (1928) and The Love Parade (1929). Like those films, it does begin as a light romance, then becomes a drama but never becomes too heavy to be entertaining. Though the second half of the film is where all of the drama and tension lies, it is not devoid of comedy. The Divorcee has a good sense of humor and delivers laughs at a steady, consistent pace. In a scene late in the movie, Don runs into Ted in New York. Ted is a mess from the divorce. The scene grows tense as Ted describes to Don what he’d do if he ever found the man with whom Jerry had her affair. It’s an awkwardly funny and tense scene that is capped with a good visual punchline from Montgomery.

The tagline for The Divorcee asked the scandalous question: If the world permits the husband to philander, why not the wife? When Jerry and Ted become engaged they agree that their marriage will be a partnership and they would be equals. The film takes subtle steps to suggest that Jerry is the equal of her male counterparts. In the novel, the main character’s name is Patricia, but— according to the DVD commentary by film historians Jeffrey Vance and Tony Maietta— was changed to Jerry for the film to represent gender equality. Vance and Maietta cite other elements like Jerry wearing masculine clothing (trousers) in the opening scene and her turning down Don with a polite handshake as aspects showing that Jerry would treat people and situations the way a man would, not the way society dictated a woman of the time would. I concur with their assertions. When Jerry confesses her infidelity to Ted, which she feels very guilty about, she begs him to remember what he told her about his own affair: it didn’t mean anything. As Jerry confronts Ted with this role reversal, the movie confronts the audience with the double standard towards female infidelity. Ted does not take it well. Jerry’s indiscretion is done in part as an act of revenge, but also an act of equality.

I can see why Shearer want to play the part of Jerry; it’s an interesting, well-developed, and challenging role for any actress to play. The great thing about Jerry is that even while “living it up” she is never indecent or immoral. The film’s climax is a test for her character: she runs into Paul who tells her that he still is and always has been in love with her and is ready to leave his wife, her sister, for her.

The Divorcee has everything I’d hoped to see in a scandalous Pre-Code movie. The parties the characters attend throughout the movie are big, glamourous, and ornate with balloons and streamers, and lots of alcohol, even though the movie was made during Prohibition. The parties are what you think of when you imagine parties of that era. It is interesting to see how films of the Pre-Code era managed to be risqué without being crude or crass. The Divorcee, like all Pre-Code films, implies more than it shows which ends up making certain scenes more provocative and effective. The movie shows us Jerry sitting close to Don in a taxi with a devious look on her face. The next thing we see is a shot of a window and curtains closing.

The Divorcee has a fair share of visually interesting moments beginning with a shot of everyone at the country house standing in the doorway watching Jerry and Ted. The scene of a drunken Paul driving a speeding car down a winding road is already tense enough, but the POV shots of the road speeding toward the screen intensifies the danger and suspense. Perhaps the most memorable sequence is a brief montage of Jerry meeting men after her divorce. She is dressed glamorously and her hair is done up gorgeously. The film shows us each man’s hand holding her hand. She accepts jewelry from one of the gentlemen saying, “I’ve heard of platonic love but I didn’t know there was such a as thing as platonic jewelry.” The movie leaves it up to the audience to decide what happens before or after each shot.

I found The Divorcee quite entertaining as both an attempt at social commentary and as a romance film. By addressing the real and stressful moments that often do rear their ugly head on a happy couple, The Divorcee becomes a film of substance and emotion. While its ultimate conclusion seems old fashioned or “traditional” by today’s standards, it also ends with a happy couple, which fits the tone of the movie. It’s clear to any modern viewer that the film treats divorce as something that is detrimental to everyone and seems more forgiving of male infidelity, however, The Divorce as a whole should not be disregarded because of these dated aspects. I hope that modern viewers won’t dismiss it as a quaint but unsuccessful attempt at a feminist movie. It is a glimpse at what a particular era thought of marriage, infidelity, and sexuality. It is also enjoyable to see a strong female character as the lead in a film from the 1930’s—something that remains unfortunately infrequent in films of today.

Nominee: MGM

Producer: Robert Z. Leonard

Director: Robert Z. Leonard

Screenplay: continuity and dialogue by John Meehan, Treatment by Zelda Sears and Nick Grinde, based on the novel Ex-Wife by Ursula Parrott

Cast: Norma Shearer, Robert Montgomery, Chester Morris, Conrad Nagel

Release Date: April 30^th, 1930

Total Nominations: 4, including Outstanding Production

Win: Actress-Norma Shearer

Other Nominations: Director-Robert Z. Leonard, Writing-John Meehan

Best Pictures #24: 1929-30 (3rd) Academy Awards Outstanding Production Nominee, The Love Parade (1929)

by A.J.

Best Pictures #24: 1929-30 (3^rd) Academy Awards Outstanding Production Nominee

The Love Parade(1929)

Director Ernst Lubitsch’s final silent film, The Patriot (a Best Picture nominee the previous year), is a lost film unfortunately, but, thankfully, his first talkie and musical has been preserved and is available on home video as part of the Eclipse series released by the Criterion Collection. It also airs occasionally on TCM. The Love Parade received the most nominations of any film at the 3^rd Academy Awards with a total of six, including nominations for Maurice Chevalier and Ernst Lubitsch, but it did not win in any category. This film is allegedly the first movie musical to incorporate songs and performances into the narrative, as opposed to a backstage musical, such as The Broadway Melody, in which the characters are singers and dancers.

Lubitsch, who had directed many silent films, takes to talking pictures quite well right out of the gate. There is nothing clunky or awkward with the composition and staging of shots or overall style that suggests someone working through a learning curve. Of course The Love Parade has several strong elements working together in addition to Lubitsch’s skill behind the camera. Based on the play The Prince Consort, the script is loaded with lively dialogue, a sharp sense of humor that does not shy away from innuendo, and likeable characters. Maurice Chevalier plays Count Alfred, who is recalled from Paris to his homeland of Slyvania after (several) scandals involving married women.

Lubitsh transitions from silent filmmaking to working with sound and dialogue smoothly. He does not over indulge in dialogue and music and still uses silent visuals to great effect. When a servant in the Queen’s palace asks why Alfred has a French accent, Alfred says that he went to see a doctor about a cold but was greeted by the doctor’s wife. The movie cuts to an exterior shot of the palace and through a window we see Alfred whisper the rest of the story to the servant. When the movie cuts back inside Alfred says that the cold was gone, but he had that terrible accent. I had never seen a movie starring Maurice Chevalier before and he is as charming and lively and French as I’d imagined.

Jeanette MacDonald, in her screen debut, plays Queen Louise who in addition to having the responsibilities of a governing queen is also under pressure from her ministers and advisors to marry. The trouble with finding her a suitor is that he would be only Price Consort and have no power or responsibility in governing. She meets Count Alfred to reprimand him for his scandals, but they both quickly charm each other and flirt through song.

Aside from a dolly shot or two, I must confess that I was so caught up with the characters and story that I hardly noticed the camerawork, or lack thereof. Lubitsch fills the screen with entertainment, so even static shots are hardly dull. The songs are pleasing and catchy. The palace sets and costumes are opulent and impressive. There are memorable scenes both with and without music. From his balcony at the beginning of the film, Chevalier sings his goodbye to Paris and the women on nearby balconies. His valet, Jacques, played by Lupino Lane, joins in and sings goodbye to Parisian maids. Then Chevalier’s dog sings, by barking, to the female dogs of Paris. We see none of Alfred and Louise’s first date. Instead we see the Queen’s advisors, her ladies in waiting, and Jacques and the Queen’s maid spying on the date and reporting to each other like a game of telephone. The Queen’s maid, Lulu, played by Lillian Roth, and Jacques have some good songs together too.

The Love Parade is almost overwhelmingly enjoyable, up to a point. There are two distinct halves to this movie. The first half is very funny, jaunty, and romantic. The second half, after Alfred and Louise are married, deals with their marital problems. There is still humor and entertainment value in this half of the film but at a diminished level. Queen Louise and Alfred seem to misunderstand and mistreat each other immediately after they are married and solely for the sake of dramatic conflict. Their main conflict is that Alfred does not have the traditional role of a man in their marriage or in the monarchy. Queen Louise runs the country and palace. Traditional gender roles in marriage and government being the central conflict of a musical from 1929 is interesting, however, as you might imagine, these issues are addressed but not challenged. The two tonally different halves of The Love Parade make for an uneven but overall enjoyable musical. There is still a lot to enjoyed in The Love Parade and it is a good step forward for the nascent musical genre.

Nominee: Paramount Famous Lasky

Producer: Ernst Lubitsch

Director: Ernst Lubitsch

Screenplay: Ernest Vadja and Guy Bolton, from the play The Prince Consort by Leon Xanrof and Jules Chancel

Cast: Maurice Chevalier, Jeanette MacDonald, Lillian Roth

Release Date: November 19^th, 1929

Total Nominations: 6, including Outstanding Production

Win(s): N/A

Other Nominations: Actor-Maurice Chevalier, Director-Ernst Lubitsch, Cinematography-Victor Milner, Art Direction-Hans Dreier, Sound Recording-Franklin Hansen

Best Pictures #11: 2015 (88th) Academy Awards Best Picture Nominee, Brooklyn (2015)

by A.J.

2015 (88^th) Academy Awards Best Picture Nominee

Brooklyn (2015)

Brooklyn is not just set in New York and Ireland of the early 1950s, it is set in versions of those places that only exist in nostalgic memories or what your imagination conjures up when looking at an old photograph. The landscape of Ireland and the cityscape of Brooklyn are rich in bold colors and pretty clothes (which get brighter in America), but there is much more to Brooklyn than appearances.

Saoirse Ronan plays Eilis (pronounced like “A-lish”), a young woman who moves to America, specifically to Brooklyn, from a small village in Ireland. The move is set into motion by Eilis’s older sister, Rose, because the opportunities for a young person, especially a woman, in their village are rather narrow. Rose wants Eilis to have experiences that she never had; a step that their small-minded mother would never have taken. On the ocean voyage to New York Eilis gets seasick and in Brooklyn she gets homesick, but slowly she finds comfort in her new life. She lives in a boarding house run by a stern, but funny landlady (Julie Walters) who believes that giddiness is the eighth deadly sin. A friendly priest (Jim Broadbent) helps her find a job at a department store and enroll in night classes for bookkeeping. Easing her homesickness most of all is Tony (Emory Cohen), a sweet Italian-American plumber who attends the Irish dance at the parish hall because he really likes Irish girls.

There is not a drop of cynicism in Brooklyn. It has no villain and takes no dark turns. The conflict in Brooklyn comes when Eilis and Tony’s romance is interrupted because she must return to Ireland after a death in the family. Once back in the familiar surroundings of her homeland, her dreary town seems warmer. She sees a quiet Irish beach like she never had before. She’s offered a job as a bookkeeper, and, more significantly, finds a kind, handsome suitor in Jim, played by Domhnall Gleeson.

Eilis’s defining moment comes when she is presented with something far more important than the choice between two different men. She has to choose between two different lives and where she feels home is for her. There is no correct, obvious decision here as there often is when a movie gives a woman a choice between two different men or places to live. Both Jim and Tony are good, decent men that would be good, decent husbands. In Jim there is everything positive about a familiar life in Ireland. In Tony there is a new, different, and warm life in Brooklyn. Eilis’s arc is believable because it is understated. There is no grand scene of an epiphany. The inner workings of her mind and heart are shown rather than stated in Saoirse Ronan’s wonderful performance. Ronan’s performance is not showy, but she makes us feel more by doing less. We aren’t aware of how much she’s grown and matured until suddenly, but quietly we notice the change.

Brooklyn is an immigrant’s story, a love story, and most of all, a young woman’s coming of age story. The phrase “this is a movie you can see with your parents or grandparents” was thrown around a lot when it was first released, and it is true. Brooklyn is as inoffensive as it is romantic, but I hope being a well-made romance and coming of age story won’t keep anyone away from watching this movie. You won’t find many dark corners in this movie. It is a light drama, but drama doesn’t have to be heavy and dark for it to affect and move a viewer. Brooklyn is a wonderful, sweet, romantic movie in which everything is done well -- from the screenplay by Nick Hornby and direction by John Crowley, to the performances, production and costume design – and the result is far from saccharine.

Nominees: Finola Dwyer and Amanda Posey, Producers

Director: John Crowley

Screenplay: Nick Hornby, based on the novel by Colm Tòibìn

Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Emory Cohen, Domhnall Gleeson

Production Companies: BFI, BBC Films, Wildgaze Films

Distributor: Fox Searchlight Pictures, TSG Entertainment

Release Date: November 6, 2015

Total Nominations: 3, including Best Picture

Other Nominations: Actress-Saoirse Ronan, Adapted Screenplay-Nick Hornby