Seldom have Kris Tapley (www.incontention.com) and I agreed so completely on a film`s merit and its chances for Oscars as we have on The Artist, the French film that has been taking the industry by storm since Cannes. I cannot remember a foreign language so captivating audiences since Life is Beautiful (1998) somehow convinced audiences, critics and Academy members that is was a film worthy of attention and Academy Awards. Never forget that Roberto Benigni’s Holocaust fairy tale, which alone should spell caution, for many, trivialized the Holocaust the besmirched the memories of the millions who died in the death camps that the Nazis operated with such brutal precision. Watching him win Best Actor, not only the Academy Award but the Screen Actors Guild left me numb and very, very angry. Among the nominees in 1998 along with the hyper active Italian actor-director were Edward Norton in American History X (1998), Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan (1998) and Ian McKellan in Gods and Monsters (1998). Though Norton was the rightful winner in my mind for his searing performance as a racist skinhead who learns the error of his ways, any one of the three would have been a more worthy winner than Benigni. His film, Life is Beautiful (1998) would win three Academy Awards which led him to use the Oscars as his crowning achievements!! Standing on chairs, acting the fool, I wonder if he ever watches the replay of his reactions and recognizes what an absolute buffoon he was being. Apparently he was the most sought after dinner guest during the Oscar campaign, feted and toasted by the biggest stars in the business, though some saw through the film, Steven Spielberg and Warren Beatty among them.
Is The Artist gearing up for the same sort of treatment by the Academy, or have they learned a thing or two in the years since awarding Benigni his Oscar? The Italian actor-director followed his triumph with the disgraceful live action version of Pinnochio (2000), one of the worst films I have ever seen. Going through the film with a painfully annoying falsetto voice, Benigni looked nothing the Oscar winning actor he was. Massacred by the critics, he has been oddly absent in recent years, certainly losing the chance to captilize on his Oscar success. With The Artist, the feeling seems to be that because the film celebrates the history of the cinema in its depiction of the transition from silent to sound, the picture should be applauded and welcomed into the Oscar circle!! I have to agree with Kris Tapley, on this one, because though the film is lovely too look at, and sometimes great fun, I always had the nagging feeling I was watching a bit of a gimmick. This part of film history has been explored before, beginning with the delightful American musical Singin’ in the Rain (1952), which hilariously told the tale of an actress, beautiful, a big silent screen star, but with a voice that scared cats, and her slow realization that her best days are done with sound coming in. But the studio loves her so they devise a plan to keep her in the game, that will eventually lead to her public humiliation. An energetic musical masterpiece, the film moves with breathless speed, and thoroughly entertains from beginning to end.
The Artist is a romance set n Hollywood in the years spanning 1927 through 1932, when sound had began to conquer the silent film. A male star in decline, George Valentin, nicely portrayed by Jean Dujardin connects romantically with a rising star as he finds himself struggling to adapt to sound cinema.
Director Michel Hazanavicius has made a nearly silent film in the era of talking film, and created a beautiful looking film with some of the most impressive cinematography I have ever seen. He has made a feel good film, a light breezy film that does give great insight into when movies began to speak, but let’s be serious here, the movie is not the masterpiece it is being declared. I mean if the Academy is going to get serious about nominating great foreign language cinema, they need to be at least consistent. Why was Amelie (2001) ignored, or A Very Long Engagement (2004), both vastly superior French films snubbed for a Best Picture nomination along with dozens of worthy nominees over the years? The Artist did not bring me as much sheer giddy joy as Amelia (2001) nor fill me with awe as did A Very Long Engagement (2004), yet seems to be on track to a Best Picture nomination. Sorry I don`t get it, it`s a good film, impeccably well made, with fine performances at least one perhaps worthy of an Oscar nomination, but the film is simply not a great film. It just did not work for me.
Read Editor, Clayton Davis’ take on the film here.
Related posts:
6 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
John, I always admire when you go out on a limb for a film. This time however, I could not disagree with you more. The film is the only film to score four stars from me this year and it’s one of best films of the 21st century, in my opinion.
Not saying you’re wrong in your opinion, but I found the film as something special and while I can see your comparison to Life is Beautiful and the same feel about the film voters had for Roberto Benigni, this is something much more extraordinary and not at all gimmicky.
I think Foote is onto something here. “The Artist” at first watch is just remarkable. However after I went home and thought about it more, and saw it again, I felt different. It wasn’t as thrilling or exciting or even magnificent anymore, it was just good. What “The Artist” does is what I like to call the “Avatar” effect. What “Avatar” had going for it was the incredible unique 3D technology. “The Artist” follows that path to the spot with its black and white, silent-film novelty. Once you go beyond that you are left with a rather unoriginal, sort of stale passed film that is cute but arguably not the best. It’s a seldom romance at best just like “Avatar”. Though Dujardin is quiet possibly a great and respectable player to the Actor category, “The Artist” should not be analyzed as this great story of the black and white revival of films sort of thing. For that look to “Hugo” to do a more impressive, unique take on it.
Thank you — exactly what happened with me — first glance, wow, but then two days go past and I have not thought once about the film — so I go again, and am underwhelmed…totally so — I love it when films celebrate the history of the cinema, but feel this one used a gimmick to do so, and in the process becomes, sadly, avereage — I hope tha Academy is not bamboozled as they were with Life is Beautiful (1998).
I despise Roberto Benigni. His winning for Best Actor that year only demoralizes the Academy Awards, I´m sure many know that. Any of the nominees were more deserving – including Nick Nolte, who you didn´t mention. The true winner in my view, though, was Ian McKellen.
Honestly, I find it almost funny to compare a travesty – such as “Life is Beautiful” to a masterpiece – such as “The Artist”. If anything is comparable to Roberto Benigni´s performance this year that would be Leonardo DiCaprio´s in “J. Edgar”. Actually, it´s easy to say that a foreign language actor relies on gimmicks to gain recognition – Roberto Benigni, Marion Cotillard, Jean Dujardin – but even though I agree with Benigni, I have to say that gimmicks, IMO would be: Jim Carrey (in everything, even in “The Truman Show”), Cate Blanchett (in “The Aviator”, “I´m not There” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”, Daniel Day Lewis (in “Gangs of New York”), Frances McDormand (in “Fargo” and in “North Country”), and many more.
The same year Benigni won for “Life is Beautiful” Gwyneth Paltrow won for “Shakespeare in Love”… What about that? I put that in my gimmicks performance list too. Actually, all of the nominated actresses that year – Emily Watson, Meryl Streep and even Cate Blanchett (who´s great in the FIRST Elizabeth) rely on some sort of gimmicks in their roles – with the exception of Fernanda Montenegro, who truly should´ve won. And believe it or not, that 70-year-old Brazilian ended up having a more sucessful career in film (in South America and Europe) than young-American-promise Gwyneth Paltrow… Now there´s something the Academy should learn.
Jean Dujardin is perfectly deserving of recognition and of a Best Actor Oscar this year. If he´s going to win, I don´t know – Clooney is just as deserving – but I see nothing similar between Benigni and Dujardin other than the fact that they´re both foreign.
Define gimmick? My definition of it for The Artist is that the director wanted to make a silent film, come hell or high water, long before he had the clout to do so — for me, did you read that? For me I could not get past the gimmick of that and the directors’ indulgence to create such a film — that’s me, I do not think The Artist is a masterpiece on any level, though I concede the performance of the lead actor is very good — as for your others, though not a huge fan of Paltrow, her work in Shakespeare in Love (1998) was very fine acting — watch her breathless wonder at being awakened sexually, say to her nursemaid, “It’s a new world” to understand the glee in her character’s discovery — JIm Carrey in The Truman Show (1998) I might buy, but not in Man on the Moon (1999) which was an astounding performance — and Blanchett in anything?? No sorry, she’s one of the greatest actresses on film and imnhabits each role she playas. wre disagree my friend.
Well, Mr. Foote, obviously you´re entitled to your opinion about Blanchett being “one of the greatest actresses on film”, and I´m entitled to mine that ‘The Artist’ is, in fact, a “m-a-s-t-e-r-p-i-e-c-e”… As we are also to think the opposite about each other´s opinion: With the exception of “Elizabeth” and “Notes on a Scandal” – and maybe “Veronica Guerin” – I think Blanchett has relied on make-up, phony accents and gimmickery – YES – in much of her work. Same goes for Johnny Depp – only in his case it´s even worse: take out the wigs and make-up and what do you have? Actually, Depp is, in many ways, even more similar to Benigni than Jean Dujardin. Gwyneth Paltrow did do a fine job in “Shakespeare in Love”, I agree. I´ve got nothing wrong with her saying to Imelda Staunton ” ‘Tis a new world! ” – it´s pretty good, actually – but that´s not all her performance consisted of, unfortunatelly… Anyone remember Gwyneth as actor Thomas Kent? Do I think there´s a gimmick somewhere over there? YOU BETCHA. Good thing Hillary Swank showed up the following year showing everyone how it´s made in “Boys Don´t Cry”.
Oh well, that´s what movies are – open for interpretation and debate. I have to say I am, in this case, happy to disagree with you on this.