In Contention

Tag: Cary Grant

  • LIFE WITHOUT OSCAR: 1943 and 1944

    Catch up with the idea behind this series here.

    The Academy and America were in the thick of World War II and patriotism or sentimentality were the order of the day. “Casablanca” and “Going My Way” were the two big winners in the history books and while I can hardly argue with the former, the latter hasn’t aged well at all. It was the first film to win Best Picture in front of a nationwide audience as ABC broadcast the ceremony for the first time… on the radio. The event was still filmed for newsreel purposes though. Don’t believe me? Ask the dishes (Youtube!)

    The ceremony was beginning to look more and more like what we are used to, with Best Picture getting whittled down to five, powerhouse films taking more and more of the awards and one guy getting nominated for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor for the same performance. Okay, maybe we never got used to that last one. A quickly changed rule made sure that never happened again but it’s too bad they can’t as easily change the history books to reward these films instead.

    1943 – “Le Corbeau” (Henri-Georges Clouzot)

    I’m not sure why some foreign titles retain their original title in popular conversation and some don’t, but the American DVD release of this film goes by “Le Corbeau” and so shall I. Translated as “The Raven,” it’s an early film made by one of my absolute favorite filmmakers of all time, Henri-Georges Clouzot, who only ever received one nomination for Best Foreign Film in his life.

    (more…)

  • 7/31 Web Round-up

    Rose Byrne• Rose Byrne, leading lady at last. [Daily Telegraph]

    • More on the story that won’t go away as the “Moneyball” drama spills into the pages of Vanity Fair. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

    • Stephanie Zacharek wonders whether the “Judd Apatow moment” might be over. [Salon]

    (more…)

  • Is Alfred Hitchcock — gasp! — over-appreciated?

    Alfred HitchcockRandom thoughts…and writing this I risk having my head taken off by angry fans and film buffs, but I have always had some issues believing Alfred Hitchcock to be the great filmmaker artists and historians have claimed him to be. In many ways, despite having personally lectured the man and his work to film school classes, I feel he may be the most overrated filmmaker of all time.

    Aim your weapons and open fire on me, as I have placed a target on my back and surely know it, but there must be some folks out there who share my opinion?

    Admittedly, “Psycho” is a powerful film.  It was responsible for ushering in a new form of horror movie, and “Vertigo” is beautifully made, but is there anyone else out there (again) who finds the characters in his films a little…cool, remote, ah, hell…cold? Never have I felt anything for a Hitchcock character.  Never have I invested myself emotionally with a single one of them, not even when portrayed by the great James Stewart or Cary Grant.

    It bothers me that “Hitch” had the film finished in his head by the time he started shooting, leaving nothing for chance and removing any sense of creativity from the actors. He  spoke, they listened and moved and that was that. No where can I find any reference to any collaboration between the director and his actors, which to me is essential in filmmaking and strengthens the characters, giving the actors something to attach themselves to. If an actor is shown how to do it all, how to move, how to speak, how to play the role, when and where are they permitted to be creative?? Look at the dreadful acting in “The Birds” and you get an idea of what I mean.

    “Frenzy” turned out to be a very powerful film, truly frightening, and his last good picture.  However, if you ask me, his best film was “Lifeboat.”

    OK, have a go…my secret is out.  I’m not a Hitchcock fan. My God the shame, the shame…the horror.  Tell me why I should think otherwise.