Here I am, continuing my quest to bring you classic films reviewed. I bring you two movies that are not only classics, but also Oscar winners. Both deal with race relations in very different, yet fascinating ways. I'll be back with some more Black History Month (or African-American Heritage Month -- whichever you prefer) appropriate titles as well as a look at some current films and some random movies as well. On tap: Monster's Ball, the Academy Award Nominated documentary Born Into Brothels, Inside Deep Throat and more. Check back often.
Driving Miss Daisy
Review by Jon Waterman
****
When Daisy Werthan crashes her car while backing out of the driveway, her son begins to worry. She’s getting up in age and perhaps it’s not the best idea in the world that she drives anymore. So, being that he’s one of the premiere businessmen in town, Boolie can afford to hire her a chauffeur. And that’s just what he does. Enter Hoke. He’s an honest, hard-working man, who’s actually getting on in age himself. But he can still see well enough and is in desperate need of a job. That’s all well and good, but Miss Daisy doesn’t really want a driver. Will Hoke ever get a chance to actually earn his money?
This is a surprisingly interesting story. Alfred Uhry wrote the screenplay based on his own play. What’s unusual about the whole thing is that there’s very little conflict. You have two strong willed people butting heads, three when the son gets involved, but after the first half hour or so, that all really calms down. And even though race is an issue in the film (Hoke is black and Miss Daisy is white), it seems like it’s related to the period in which the story is set than the character’s motivations. It’s not that Daisy doesn’t want Hoke driving her because he’s black; it’s that she doesn’t want anyone driving her period. Thus she becomes the ultimate backseat driver. If anything, the story shows that the entire country didn’t have the same segregating mindset. That doesn’t mean that Daisy doesn’t act stupidly sometimes or say things or assume things. However, those flaws are confronted and dealt with in a logical, understanding manner than really helps build the believable relationships within the film.
That’s not to say that the script doesn’t have its flaws. It borders on over-sentimentality. The son isn’t really fleshed out as much as he probably should be and his wife doesn’t even need to be in the picture. The shortcomings are overcome by the acting. Morgan Freeman (Hoke) plays the role of the patronizing hired hand so well, because you can’t always tell if he’s being sincere or if he’s secretly mocking. Sometimes you can’t help but snicker yourself. Jessica Tandy (Miss Daisy) is also fantastic. Her faux strength never falters, even after being defeated time and time again. It’s great watching her scramble while still pretending to be in control of the situation. Tandy provides some incredible reaction shots. Dan Aykroyd proves he can handle a more serious role (as well as an accent) while playing Boolie.
If you add to all this Hans Zimmer’s score, then you really have something. The recurring theme is bouncy and infectious, yet multi-purpose. Toned down in a more somber form, it can still carry the emotional weight of the scene. However, it’s primarily used to add that little comical punch that comes in at just the right time to provide a bigger smile. The film will leave you smiling with its unorthodox storytelling and its ripe, likeable characters. This is something the whole family could watch and enjoy.
++++++++
In the Heat of the Night
Review by Jon Waterman
****
When the man who planned to build a giant factory turns up murdered in the streets, the police of Sparta, Mississippi are up in arms. They bring in Virgil Tibbs, who was in the small southern town visiting his mother, assuming he committed the crime simply because he’s black. Police Chief Bill Gillespie discovers that Tibbs is a homicide detective up in Philadelphia. Now the two are stuck together, because Mr. Tibbs is assigned to help solve this murder case that the locals are so quick to close.
The key to the film lies in the relationship between the two top cops. Everything follows their line of progression. As their relationship moves from Tibbs and Gillespie to Virgil and Bill, so do the atmosphere and the cinematography. Surprisingly, as the two become more accustomed to one another, the tension within the film increases. For one, the murder puzzle gets more complex and closer to fruition. Also, the overtly racist town gets more and more anxious for this hot shot black detective to git – and if’n he don’, well, then they’s about to fix that thar problem theyselves. Tibbs has no real intention on leaving until the job gets done, however, because his pride is on the line.
Screenwriter Stirling Silliphant (who also worked on the television series “Perry Mason”) adapts John Ball’s novel brilliantly. Not only is the murder mystery interesting, it’d probably be good enough to stand the movie up on its own without the help of the intense characterization. There are plenty of unforeseen events and turns to keep you guessing until the end if you wanted. However, you may be too distracted by the inner workings of the characters. This screenplay is very sharp and couldn’t be executed better. It shows a side of bigotry not often seen: that intolerance does not always equal ignorance. The film is a battle of two egos. Neither lead is completely good, or inherently bad. The culture clash that they experience forces them to revaluate their thinking and sparks a lot of heated exchanges. This is all punctuated by the outstanding acting by Sidney Poitier (Tibbs) and Rod Steiger (Gillespie). Poitier at times seems pretty uncomfortable on screen, which I’d like to attribute to as part of his role rather than an acting misstep. Either way, he doesn’t quite own the part the way Steiger does. Rod shows incredible range and depth full of emotions that get turned on like a light switch. It all just flows out in one of the most incredibly natural performances I’ve seen.
The cinematography by Haskell Wexler (“Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”) is nothing short of genius. Immediately in the film, you can see the sharp contrast (read conflict) conveyed in the visuals with harsh rim lights providing the brightest spots on the screen. As the movie progresses, this distinguishable difference between light and dark lessens and we get a more neutral and natural look. The looks and the feels of the scenes vary widely, depending on what’s being depicted. The frantic chase scene with handheld running camerawork smoothly cuts together with the lingering scenes at the station. This is also a credit to editor Hal Ashby who’s impeccable pacing proves that a deathly slow sequence can be not only watchable, but also fascinating.
There are a couple of musical missteps in the form of inappropriate cues and out of place songs, but otherwise the film is near perfect. Director Norman Jewison has assembled a poignant, thought-provoking piece of art that warrants not only watching but analyzing and studying.
Driving Miss Daisy
Review by Jon Waterman
****
When Daisy Werthan crashes her car while backing out of the driveway, her son begins to worry. She’s getting up in age and perhaps it’s not the best idea in the world that she drives anymore. So, being that he’s one of the premiere businessmen in town, Boolie can afford to hire her a chauffeur. And that’s just what he does. Enter Hoke. He’s an honest, hard-working man, who’s actually getting on in age himself. But he can still see well enough and is in desperate need of a job. That’s all well and good, but Miss Daisy doesn’t really want a driver. Will Hoke ever get a chance to actually earn his money?
This is a surprisingly interesting story. Alfred Uhry wrote the screenplay based on his own play. What’s unusual about the whole thing is that there’s very little conflict. You have two strong willed people butting heads, three when the son gets involved, but after the first half hour or so, that all really calms down. And even though race is an issue in the film (Hoke is black and Miss Daisy is white), it seems like it’s related to the period in which the story is set than the character’s motivations. It’s not that Daisy doesn’t want Hoke driving her because he’s black; it’s that she doesn’t want anyone driving her period. Thus she becomes the ultimate backseat driver. If anything, the story shows that the entire country didn’t have the same segregating mindset. That doesn’t mean that Daisy doesn’t act stupidly sometimes or say things or assume things. However, those flaws are confronted and dealt with in a logical, understanding manner than really helps build the believable relationships within the film.
That’s not to say that the script doesn’t have its flaws. It borders on over-sentimentality. The son isn’t really fleshed out as much as he probably should be and his wife doesn’t even need to be in the picture. The shortcomings are overcome by the acting. Morgan Freeman (Hoke) plays the role of the patronizing hired hand so well, because you can’t always tell if he’s being sincere or if he’s secretly mocking. Sometimes you can’t help but snicker yourself. Jessica Tandy (Miss Daisy) is also fantastic. Her faux strength never falters, even after being defeated time and time again. It’s great watching her scramble while still pretending to be in control of the situation. Tandy provides some incredible reaction shots. Dan Aykroyd proves he can handle a more serious role (as well as an accent) while playing Boolie.
If you add to all this Hans Zimmer’s score, then you really have something. The recurring theme is bouncy and infectious, yet multi-purpose. Toned down in a more somber form, it can still carry the emotional weight of the scene. However, it’s primarily used to add that little comical punch that comes in at just the right time to provide a bigger smile. The film will leave you smiling with its unorthodox storytelling and its ripe, likeable characters. This is something the whole family could watch and enjoy.
++++++++
In the Heat of the Night
Review by Jon Waterman
****
When the man who planned to build a giant factory turns up murdered in the streets, the police of Sparta, Mississippi are up in arms. They bring in Virgil Tibbs, who was in the small southern town visiting his mother, assuming he committed the crime simply because he’s black. Police Chief Bill Gillespie discovers that Tibbs is a homicide detective up in Philadelphia. Now the two are stuck together, because Mr. Tibbs is assigned to help solve this murder case that the locals are so quick to close.
The key to the film lies in the relationship between the two top cops. Everything follows their line of progression. As their relationship moves from Tibbs and Gillespie to Virgil and Bill, so do the atmosphere and the cinematography. Surprisingly, as the two become more accustomed to one another, the tension within the film increases. For one, the murder puzzle gets more complex and closer to fruition. Also, the overtly racist town gets more and more anxious for this hot shot black detective to git – and if’n he don’, well, then they’s about to fix that thar problem theyselves. Tibbs has no real intention on leaving until the job gets done, however, because his pride is on the line.
Screenwriter Stirling Silliphant (who also worked on the television series “Perry Mason”) adapts John Ball’s novel brilliantly. Not only is the murder mystery interesting, it’d probably be good enough to stand the movie up on its own without the help of the intense characterization. There are plenty of unforeseen events and turns to keep you guessing until the end if you wanted. However, you may be too distracted by the inner workings of the characters. This screenplay is very sharp and couldn’t be executed better. It shows a side of bigotry not often seen: that intolerance does not always equal ignorance. The film is a battle of two egos. Neither lead is completely good, or inherently bad. The culture clash that they experience forces them to revaluate their thinking and sparks a lot of heated exchanges. This is all punctuated by the outstanding acting by Sidney Poitier (Tibbs) and Rod Steiger (Gillespie). Poitier at times seems pretty uncomfortable on screen, which I’d like to attribute to as part of his role rather than an acting misstep. Either way, he doesn’t quite own the part the way Steiger does. Rod shows incredible range and depth full of emotions that get turned on like a light switch. It all just flows out in one of the most incredibly natural performances I’ve seen.
The cinematography by Haskell Wexler (“Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”) is nothing short of genius. Immediately in the film, you can see the sharp contrast (read conflict) conveyed in the visuals with harsh rim lights providing the brightest spots on the screen. As the movie progresses, this distinguishable difference between light and dark lessens and we get a more neutral and natural look. The looks and the feels of the scenes vary widely, depending on what’s being depicted. The frantic chase scene with handheld running camerawork smoothly cuts together with the lingering scenes at the station. This is also a credit to editor Hal Ashby who’s impeccable pacing proves that a deathly slow sequence can be not only watchable, but also fascinating.
There are a couple of musical missteps in the form of inappropriate cues and out of place songs, but otherwise the film is near perfect. Director Norman Jewison has assembled a poignant, thought-provoking piece of art that warrants not only watching but analyzing and studying.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home