I love writing scripts, and for the most part I have enjoyed my time working in Hollywood, but damn the place can be narcissistic which is why either The Artist or Hugo is probably going to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards.

In an earlier post I've outlined the deep script problems in Hugo, and why I think it ultimately failed.  Now I'll take on the other love letter to the movies -- The Artist.

From the opening titles it's a perfect recreation of the films of the silent era.  The star has the look of a Douglas Fairbanks, John Goodman is perfect as the studio head.  They play games with the genre -- like the big sign backstage as our star's latest movie is playing "Please be Silent behind the Screen", but at the end it just felt like a one note joke that would have been better served if it had been a short rather than almost two hours long.

Two performances stood out.  The wonderful Bérénice Bejo as the young actress Peppy Miller and the adorable dog.  Early on I said to myself, "why, this is Singin' in the Rain.

The story was very predictable which might have been in keeping for films of that era, but had me wishing they would just get to the inevitable end much more quickly than they did.

Basically I spent the entire evening flashing back to Singin' in the Rain, and wishing I was home watching that instead.  Not until we got to the final dance number between George and Peppy did this The Artist really pop for me.

Bottom line -- I liked this movie, but I didn't love it, and I don't think it deserves the Oscar.  On the other hand many of the nominees don't stand out.  War Horse (reviewed earlier on this blog) is not a very good movie.  I liked Money Ball a lot but its pace is certainly languid.  I still have to see The Descendants.  Hugo was lovely but flawed.  This is one year when I probably won't have seen all the nominated films -- I'm certainly not going to see Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.  Sadly none of them really stand out for me.  Not one of them made me feel passionate.

Comment (1)

I stayed up too late again last night and watched The King's Speech.  I love this movie and I will get hooked by it every time.  Happened again this morning as I was preparing breakfast.  Partly it's the performances.  Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush are simply remarkable in a what is, in many senses, a buddy movie.  The music is pitch perfect in terms of eliciting mood, but something else jumped out at me on this viewing.

In scripts we have A stories, and we also have B stories and sometimes a C runner that tends to be lighter, almost comedic.  The A story is very big in The King's Speech, but there is a B story that echoes back themes to the A story which is what a good secondary story or runner should do.  It can't be too obvious, too on the nose or it will make an audience giggle or be irritated, but it should be there.

They did it perfectly in this movie.  There's the scene where Lionel Logue goes to audition for an amateur theater group who are going to be performing Richard III.  To my American ears he sounds lovely, but there is one hesitation where he briefly stumbles over the next word, and he's cut off.  He is mocked for his Australian accent, that Richard III wasn't king of the colonies, and he leaves, rejected and disheartened -- silenced.

Later in the film there is a scene where Bertie confronts his brother over Wallis Simpson, his brother mocks his stammer and Bertie's reduced to wordless impotence.

In both cases, the king and a the speech therapist wish/need to speak  and in both cases they are blocked, stopped and mocked. 

You can also create linkage by comparing and contrasting.  The relationship of the fathers to their children is an example of that.  In the beginning there is closeness, then Bertie becomes king and his girls are curtseying to him.  Because Firth is a wonderful actor you see the agony in his face.

This isn't on the topic of themes, but of using images to indicate a changing relationship rather than using words.  In the first scene where Bertie and Lionel meet, Rush's chair is placed well back from the Duke.  He even says he has been instructed not to get too close.

But later, when Bertie comes to talk after the death of his father and as the constitutional crises is increasing over the American divorcee they are sitting closer and closer together.  There's no comment about it.  It just happens, but the emotional note is hit and the audience responds event though they might not know exactly what is affecting them.

This is why I love film so much.  This would require a lot of words in a book.  Here two pictures and we get it.

Comment (0)