Oscar Contenders and Pretenders

Guest columnist Tony Greer reviews Flags of Our Fathers, Marie Antoinette, and Fearless. In honor of the election season regular columnist Vince Patton takes a look back at the disappointing film, All the King's Men.

A JOURNEY INTO BRAVERY AND TRUTH

Once you see the young faces of soldiers glowing with fear and surprise, it is evident that the ride through this wartime moment in history depicts a tale of emotional bravery and truth. Director Clint Eastwood, with help from screenwriters Paul Haggis (Crash) and William Broyles Jr. (Jarhead), successfully formulates an outstanding movie experience of sacrifice, honor, and deception that will transport you to one of the most significant periods in wartime history. A masterpiece and a must-see for all for it teaches, Flags of Our Fathers explores the value of human life, freedom, and the meaning of heroism.

The movie tells three stories, all relating to the famous photo depicting several American soldiers raising the American flag on top of Mount Suribachi on the Island of Iwo Jima. The first story recreates the battle on the island where 6,000 Americans died securing the location for a base in order to launch bombers against Japan and to assist troubled U.S. aircraft. The Japanese were determined to fight to the last soldier to keep Americans from occupying the island, and they lost 21,000 Japanese in the process. The second story takes us on a journey with three surviving soldiers who appear in that famous photograph. Selective government and military officials use the soldiers and the photo to help build financial and moral support for the war. This story reveals a hidden truth that ultimately leads to ethical questions and human tragedy. The final story is a touching narrative of a father telling his son of the events that took place during the battle capped by the flag-raising moment and the difficult adjustments after the war.

There is no question that Clint Eastwood has once again created an emotional masterpiece revealing the human condition during a time in history in which time stood still and moved too quickly. The movie is superb as it reveals details that will educate even the best historian. Eastwood deftly balances the three stories. For two hours-plus he shows the horrors of war and its effects, the prejudices concerning African American and Indian cultures, the façade emitted by politics and the media for dollars and glamour, and explores what being a “hero” really means to a soldier. The movie features excellent imagery even after the movie ends with the use of actual still shots from the island battle that may bring tears to the eyes of many viewers. The camera work is just as brilliant and effective as it was in Eastwood’s last Oscar winner, Million Dollar Baby. The musical score composed by Eastwood and longtime partner Lennie Niehaus is perfect for the film’s somber tone. Just as impressive are the performances by Adam Beach, Ryan Phillipe, and Jesse Bradford, who portray three of the soldiers believed to be in the photo. Flags of Our Fathers is surely an Oscar contender. But more importantly, it is an elegantly written and directed film of awesome power that will move you regardless of how many times you see it.

ARTISTIC AND BEAUTIFUL TO THE EYES, EMPTY TO THE HEART AND MIND

Sofia Coppola’s new film, Marie Antoinette is an artistic and beautifully visual experience that lacks the historical substance to be taken seriously. The young director is gifted with a style all her own, but her latest film will leave most audiences less than satisfied. Despite its shortcomings, Coppola’s new film is a delight to watch as long as you just have fun with it.

The story follows Marie Antoinette (Kirsten Dunst) as a young 14 year-old Austrian girl who must move to France for an arranged wedding with the young Louis XVI (Jason Schwartzman). Her lifestyle changes to a life of confusion and boredom as she is constantly pampered, expected to have children, and must live her life with a husband who is both uninterested and immature. She parties like most teenagers do, spending a great deal of money without reason. Once Louis XVI father, King Louis XV (Rip Torn) dies, the situation takes a turn causing financial disaster for France and the end of Marie Antoinette’s reign as the queen.

Most viewers will expect a movie of this type to have some historical significance, but this film has very little. Coppola’s choice to create an artistic and abstract movie using 80’s style-music such as “I Want Candy,” by Bow Wow Wow works to some degree. Coppola places us in the mind of the teenage queen who’s on a quest for fun despite the enormous political and economic pressures facing her country. The art direction and cinematography are perfect in just about every scene, and Kirsten Dunst is stunning as Marie Antoinette. Her work here will most likely earn her an Oscar nomination. The supporting cast is also competent, but any momentum the film generates in the middle third of its running time is lost in the film's final scenes. The historical events are merely props, and the film comes to an abrupt ending leaving you puzzled, empty, and asking yourself, “what?” It really does not matter that the film eventually becomes disappointing, you just have to have fun with what works and ignore the rest.

EXCITING ACTION AND BEAUTIFUL SCENERY BUT NOT MUCH ELSE

Jet Li’s return to the traditional Chinese martial-arts style film is a breath-taking experience of precise choreography and very little else. Fearless, although beautifully filmed, lacks direction, emotion, and sufficient character and plot development.

Jet Li plays Huo Yuanjia, China’s last hope to save a broken culture from western and European domination. Base on the life of Huo Yuanijia who rallied the Chinese people together, it is a journey through inner demons, politics, and honor. After seeing his master defeated in battle, a young Huo Yuanijia is determined to avenge that loss, only to discover he must battle his own failures. This leads him to a destructive life of selfishness and drunkenness. A tragedy leads Yuanijia to a life of exile in a small village, where he rejuvenates his inner strengths with the help of a blind woman. This Chinese warrior returns as the ultimate hero, battling the world for honor.

As in Jet Li’s previous film Hero, the battle scenes are well staged. The film works best when the fight sequences take center stage, revealing multiple fighting styles that include strength, speed, and swordplay.

Unfortunately, Li fails to portray this reckless warrior turned hero with emotional impact and energy. Instead he is almost lifeless until he enters the ring for battle. Then there is the second half of the film, which is dull until Yuanijia returns to his place of stardom. This transition almost seems like you are watching another movie and weakens the main plot. “Fearless” can be considered a modest success if you enjoy martial-arts action and beautiful scenery. Historically and thematically, the film is incomplete and less than satisfying

REMEMBERING ALL THE KING'S MEN THIS ELECTION SEASON

All the King’s Men, which may have limped out of second-run theaters by now, is the most recent example of a project fueled by a star-studded cast, an A-list director, and a provocative production team to fall flat into Hollywood mediocrity. Despite early reports from the Toronto Film Festival, All the King’s Men is not the greatest cinematic disaster since last year’s Alexander, a ponderous and poorly conceived work by Oliver Stone. It’s simply not the rousing success audiences should expect from a film loaded with this considerable talent. Filmed in New Orleans in 2005, All the King’s Men was scheduled to be released later the same year but was beset by delays due to Hurricane Katrina and numerous problems in post production. This ultimately determined the film’s release more than ten months later.

Based on a Pulitzer-prize-winning novel by Robert Penn Warren, All the King’s Men is a remake of the Oscar-winning 1949 film starring Broderick Crawford. The remake is directed by Steven Zaillian, who first rose to prominence for writing the Oscar-winning screenplay for Schindler’s List. Sean Penn stars as Willie Stark, a mid-level government staffer who runs and wins the governorship of Louisiana in the 1940s. Stark, a loud politician, who champions causes for the poor and the downtrodden on his way to victory, is slowly corrupted by power. Although the film features some intermittent scenes showing Stark delivering some passionate lines to the poor kinfolk who ultimately elect him to office, the film never paints a portrait that is as complete as Penn’s performance deserves.

The film features a legion of today’s leading stars in supporting roles including Jude Law, Kate Winslet, Patricia Clarkson, Mark Ruffalo, James Gandolfini, and an in-form Anthony Hopkins. Structural problems prevent the first-rate cast from delivering the Oscar-caliber performances to which we have grown accustomed. Hopkins, the eldest big-name actor in the cast, delivers the film’s best performance. His eyes and speech belie a man, who has traveled the perilous roads of politics but who is settled and solemnly committed to a strict code of morals and ethics in his retirement.

All the Kings’ Men is an incomplete film. Its two hour and ten-minute running time could have easily been two hours and thirty minutes, which might have provided the audience with crucial scenes to connect plot points that are introduced or implied in one scene and then not revealed until many scenes later or not at all. There was simply more story to tell than Zaillian knew how to tell, indicating the film was derailed by editing as well as structural problems. For instance, the film opens with Willie Stark sitting in a passenger seat with a wide-eyed Jack Burden (Jude Law) sitting in the back, heading to confront a judge, portrayed by Anthony Hopkins, and then to virtually no effect, flashes back to Stark’s early days in politics. Stark befriends a mid-level hood known as Tiny Duffy, played by James Gandolfini. Later Stark publicly humiliates Tiny and then illogically places him on his staff. In addition, he hires Sadie Burke, a sly and experienced political operative, played by Patricia Clarkson, who is miscast here. The film gives the audience scant opportunities to observe anything that would compel Stark to run for the governorship and even fewer examples of Stark’s corruption, which led to calls for his removal from office.

Hopkins and Penn are such gifted actors that they’re able to rise above the flawed screenplay to give us hints of the themes of power, corruption, greed, betrayal, and lifelong love that still resonate with all who read the novel by Robert Penn Warren and saw the original film adaptation more than two and half decades ago. Much was made out of Democratic Party consultant James Carville’s involvement in producing the film and the supposed similarities between Stark and Huey Long, on whom many believe the original film was based. The film should have had even more relevance at the time of its September release given the accusations and news of scandal in George W. Bush's administration. But ironically, it is Carville’s former charge, Bill Clinton---no stranger to the s-word himself, who is actually a closer comparison to the big-bellied and womanizing governor that Penn portrays. Carville’s association with the film should have given the film political authenticity and heft, but instead this remake is a muted and muddled misstep of a film whose all-star cast of characters are all bark and no bite.

Grade: C