roger deakins – Smaller Pictures

Going into the 92nd Academy Awards, it seemed that pretty much every category was a lock. Joaquin Phoenix was favoured to take home the Best Actor gong for Joker, Renee Zellweger winning Best Actress for Judy and Sam Mendes was the strong favourite to win Best Director for 1917 with the latter ultimately winning Best Picture. How much the Academy surprised us then when the Best Director trophy was awarded to Bong Joon-ho for Parasite and then his film won the Best Picture award, beating the odds. Personally I was very happy as I had placed a bet on Parasite to win so there was a monetary reward for myself but the happiness goes to another more serious level. 1917 is a prime example of a quintessential award film. Don’t get me wrong, 1917 is a brilliant film that is full of revolutionary technical achievement, particularly Roger Deakins’ cinematography but it is no secret that the Academy and other Western award bodies have a love affair with war films. So much so that it has become a running joke in the film industry that to win awards, you have to make or star in a war film.

For those who are not in the know, Parasite is a Korean film exploring classism and inequality in a society that only benefits the rich and leaves those poorer to live in the gutter (quite literally). It has been the source of much hype since its premiere at last year’s Cannes Film Festival where it won the top prize, the Palme d’Or, in a rare unanimous vote, marking the first Korean film to win the prestigious award. Korean cinema is among the best in the world and has been a leading institution for years for filmmakers and film lovers and it felt like it was finally getting its due in the mainstream. Bong Joon-ho has previously delved into English-language with Snowpiercer (2013) and Okja (2017) which have become much-loved modern classics and released to acclaim; however, I think it’s poignant that Bong’s ascendance to the global audience has come from a Korean-language film that explores Korean society. It is very much detached from Western society in both its subject matter and filmmaking technique, allowing Bong to direct without the restrictions that Western studios demand. The fact that a film like Parasite, a film that is inherently unique in its style and content can beat a film like 1917 shows that there is an appetite for a different kind of film experience. It also shows a promising step forward in what audiences now expect. Naturally, franchises such as the Marvel and DC films still top the box office but Parasite concrete proof that people want more variety in the cinemas as well. Parasite’s subsequent box office success after its award wins confirms this. Now that it’s been given the chance to screen in more cinemas, it’s been able to demonstrate that there is an audience who want to watch foreign-language films, snubbing the assumption that Western audiences don’t want to watch films with subtitles.

There are many people who dismiss award season as pointless and dim, viewing it as celebrities patting themselves on the back. I don’t think it is as simple as that though. The truth is people do pay attention to awards season and follow the films that are successful. Of course, a lot of time there are the usual suspects who are nominated time and time again, sometimes undeservedly but when you have a film like Parasite that isn’t given the same chance as a mediocre English-language film then the exposure that award season brings is crucial for the film’s box office success.

Overall, there were some brilliant films this award season but Parasite was the clear standout. The fact that it won the major awards is a sign that the Academy is looking at artistic merit and not just succumbing to making it a popularity contest. Parasite’s win may not seem significant but the importance cannot be understated. Hopefully this will spark the beginning of an awards body that seeks to be more inclusive and diverse, giving all films an equal chance.

Here are my reviews for some of the films of the 92nd Academy Awards:

Winners: 1917, Joker, Jojo Rabbit, Judy, Marriage Story, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Parasite, Toy Story 4

Nominees: A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, Bombshell, The Irishman, The Lighthouse, The Two Popes

Snubs: Dolemite Is My Name, Hustlers, Midsommar, Uncut Gems

What did you think of Parasite’s winning streak at the Oscars? Let me know in the comments below!

1917 is a World War I epic that seems to be the one to beat when it comes to the Best Picture award. Co-written, directed and produced by Sam Mendes, the film acts as a tribute to his grandfather, Alfred Mendes, based on stories that he would tell about the war. Following two young soldiers, Schofield (George MacKay) and Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) who are tasked with travelling across enemy lines to warn off a British attack before they fall into a trap set by the Germans. The film has become well-regarded for its flawless editing, designed to look like two continuous shots. As well as beautiful technique, 1917 also boasts a stunning cast that includes well-loved actor of the big screen such as Colin Firth and Benedict Cumberbatch as well as TV favourites such as Daniel Mays and Andrew Scott. As expected, Mendes delivers and the continuous shots and editing only exemplify the non-stop nature of war. There is only one point in which the audience is allowed to relax at the start of the third act of the film. The writing is simple as Mendes lays focus on the physicality and the atmosphere rather than the dialogue. There are few monologues and those with speeches such as Andrew Scott’s Lieutenant Leslie are at rare moments of stand still. Co-written by Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns, the script is minimalist in dialogue. Even when following the two Lance Corporals on their journey, we never really hear Schofield’s backstory because he is so withdrawn. One brilliant scene is when Schofield is picked up by a passing British unit and they are sat in the back of a truck. Schofield sits silently as the soldiers around him comment on their various backgrounds, imitate their General and comment on whether occupying other countries is worth the damage. It’s a poignant scene which brings in a humane aspect that is often missing from World War films.

The performances are impressive, particularly by George MacKay who is always on camera. He carries the film in the same way that he carries the message to the troops. It is no easy feat as an actor to hold so much pressure from such a big film but MacKay has shown promise from the early days in his career and his subsequent breakout performances in Pride (2014) and Captain Fantastic (2016). 1917 exploits MacKay to a mainstream audience that he won’t have been subject to in such a way previously. His Lance Corporal Schofield is reluctant to go on the mission and keeps his cards close to his chest but his determination to see it through is fearless, particularly in the final scenes as he runs through the trenches. Schofield and Blake appear to have different takes for their mission at the beginning. Blake is insistent on setting off immediately whereas Schofield logically believes in waiting until dark. Because of the emotional stake that Blake has in the mission (his brother is among the troops heading into the trap), Schofield has to ensure that Blake’s heart doesn’t lead his head.

The two protagonists balance each other out as Blake risks his own life to save Schofield when a bomb is set off in a German trench. Chapman is also fantastic as Blake who appears naïve due to his sentimental nature. When encountering a German soldier whose plane was shot down in a dogfight, Blake’s gut reaction is to assist and get the soldier some water to ease the pain whereas Schofield doesn’t hesitate to shoot at the enemy. As mentioned before, the supporting cast is littered with stars from the small and silver screens. Admittedly, the supporting cast are granted one scene each so it’s more of a cameo, but each actor makes the most of their moments. Andrew Scott particularly delivers a brilliant monologue as a Lieutenant who has little hope in winning the war whereas Benedict Cumberbatch’s Colonel Mackenzie views he retreat from battle as a sign of defeat. The fleeting appearances from the supporting characters is thanks to the perfectly linear narrative of the film itself. We see the two Lance Corporals setting off to warn the Devonshire Regiment and ending with Schofield sat beside a tree in a mirror image of the opening shot.

It would be a big misjustice not to mention the revolutionary cinematography and editing provided by Roger Deakins and Lee Smith, respectively. Both men are at the top of the game in their respected fields and they work fantastically as a team. What these men have managed to achieve feels as claustrophobic and in your face as the war itself. There are many comments from people saying that the continuous effect took some getting used to but for me it felt natural and flowed perfectly. The editing is in a similar vein to the technique used in Birdman but on a bigger scale. What Deakins does so brilliantly is simultaneously provide big explosions shots filled with action while also maintaining great focus on the individual protagonists’ faces. Despite everything that is going on around the soldiers, the audiences’ eyes are fixated on the characters. Deakins’ colour palette is muted as expected in a war film with greens and browns. There are no exaggerated colours or futuristic spectacles. Deakins ensures that the film is very much grounded in its reality. Together, Deakins and Smith manage to create a film that is visually captivating and stunning, making the best use of the environment given and its limited landscapes.

On the musical side of things, Thomas Newman’s score for this film is beyond incredible and has deservedly earned him his 15th Academy Award nomination. This year has seen a strong competition in the score category with both Thomas and Randy Newman pulling punches for their scores for 1917 and Marriage Story, respectively. Undoubtedly, the Best Original Score gong will go to Hildur Guðnadóttir for her stellar work on Joker making her the first woman to walk away with the award. It shouldn’t go unnoticed, however, that Thomas Newman’s score is among his best. Much like the editing, the film is reliant on its score which acts like a thread connecting the scenes. Needless to say, if Newman does end up winning, I wouldn’t be disappointed.

Overall, 1917 has proven to be a much better film than I had originally anticipated and I found myself moved and stunned by the technical and artistic achievement that Mendes has managed to pull off. I’m not sure if it’s a film that you need to watch more than once as I personally got everything out of the film that I needed in one go. I imagine that in time, it will become renowned and known for its technical aspects and the uniqueness in that field rather than the characters.

What do you think of 1917? Let me know in the comments below!