Driving Miss Daisy: 1989

I finished up the 1980s with the classic Driving Miss Daisy, a film I swear I saw before but as I watching it last night had no memory of, which makes me think it's one of those movies I think I've seen because it's so famous but really I haven't. The film is really matter-of-fact about prejudice. Miss Daisy is an older Jewish woman who claims that she isn't racist, but some of her comments and the way she treats her employees suggest otherwise. It's a bit more complicated, though, in that it seems like she just doesn't want to need employees at all. She'd rather take care of herself, but her health doesn't allow her to do so. Miss Daisy (played by Jessica Tandy) doesn't want to think of herself as rich because that wasn't her life growing up, but her chauffeur Hoke (played by Morgan Freeman) reminds her that some people would say that she is rich. It's through his voice that the honesty in this film is most present. Hoke is a down-to-earth working man who tries his best to break through to Miss Daisy. The film is about their friendship.

While I had a basic understanding of the film prior to watching it, I didn't realize that Miss Daisy was Jewish, which becomes an important part of the story when her temple is bombed and when she experiences prejudice when on a trip in Alabama. It's these experiences that connect Miss Daisy to Hoke. Both of them have witnessed terrible events and been mistreated because of who they are. What's interesting, though, is Miss Daisy refuses to see how they can be compared. It's like she doesn't want to be part of that group that is mistreated, even though she clearly is. Because of her wealth, Miss Daisy can stay in her bubble and avoid most of the ugliness in the world. Or at least she can distance herself from it and tsk-tsk it all without actually experiencing it. In this clip, Hoke tells Miss Daisy about the temple bombing and shares the story of a lynching he witnessed when he was younger:

Miss Daisy's refusal to see how she and Hoke are similar because of these stories disappointed me. I wanted her to see the connection and realize how the world was and still is. Her acknowledging the similarity would have broken down her prejudice. Instead, she's just in denial.

While the film certainly brings up issues with race and religion, overall it doesn't seem to go far enough with either topic. I have to wonder if it's willingness to cover these issues was reason for the Best Picture. Looking at the other nominees (Dead Poets Society, Field of Dreams, My Left Foot, and Born on the Fourth of July), I guess Driving Miss Daisy is the best, but I've only seen two of those films. It just seems like a surprising choice, but maybe it shouldn't since the year before Rain Man won and stories about relationships won in the early 1980s.

Well, that's it for the 1980s. I'll take a bit of time off before I begin the 90s. I have to say I'm excited about starting the 90s--the decade when I began watching the Oscars. I've already seen several Best Picture winners of the 90s, so some I'll be rewatching and some I'll be skipping. And I'll be sure to let you know why.

Rain Man: 1988

I'm getting so close to the end of the 1980's Best Picture winners. I set the goal of finishing the 80s before the school year started, and I think I might just meet that goal. I already have my library's copy of 1989's Driving Miss Daisy. I'm ready.

But before I get ahead of myself, this post is supposed to be about Rain Man, a thoughtful story about family and what it means to each person. It's also a film that portrays autism in a positive light as Charlie's brother Raymond (played by the amazing Dustin Hoffman) has severe autism. I had seen Rain Man years ago, but I only remembered some of the scenes in the later part of the film (notably the casino scenes). I had forgotten that Charlie (played by Tom Cruise) didn't know he had a brother and how the father left most of the inheritance to that brother. (Okay, so I didn't remember  much of anything about the movie other than Hoffman's outstanding performance.)

As I watched this time, I thought about how difficult it must have been at times for Cruise to play the brother without autism. His reactions when Hoffman's character Raymond has an emotional meltdown or repeats himself over and over seem so real. Cruise's character goes from being an egotistical jerk to a loving brother (that's not a spoiler...you should know going into this movie based on the premise that there will be change in the character who can change), and the transformation is not obvious. He simply begins to like his brother, and the liking becomes more. It seems real, and Cruise really convinced me that he was Charlie and that he was going through this change.

Charlie attempting to figure out Raymond

I liked how this film left me feeling good while also making me think. I've had plenty of Best Picture winners that have made me think. I've had some that made me feel good. But I haven't had may do both. I'm glad that the Academy recognized a movie like this because sometimes you need a movie that does both well. And Rain Man certainly does.

The Last Emperor: 1987

I'm currently slogging my way through The Last Emperor. The film is just so long. I know it has to cover the entire life of Pu Yi, the last emperor of China, but it seems to drag at times. The time period and events are interesting, but the way the director Bernardo Bertolucci presents them seems too slow for the content.

The film is set in 1950 in a Chinese prison where the Emperor and other warm criminals are being detained. Just like when he was a child, the Emperor is incapable of doing anything himself. His entire life someone has dressed him, bathed him, even tied his shoes for him. The film then flashes back to different points in Pu Yi's life, starting in 1908 when the previous Empress named him as the new Emperor when he was only 2 years old. The structure works well for this type of story, but I found myself more interested in the time in the prison than the development of Pu Yi. As a child and young man, he's a self-absorbed brat, and while the acting is excellent, I didn't enjoy watching that type of character. I'm thinking it was a true picture of the boy and man, but that didn't mean I wanted to watch his character continue to become more selfish instead of realizing his flaws and maturing.

At this exact moment, the film is in 1967, and it seems as though Pu Yi may have finally learned to think about others. All it took was the ruination of his life and the destruction of everything he knew. See, the story is interesting. Maybe another director's take on the film would work better for me.

Out of Africa: 1985

Out of Africa was another epic, at least what I'm calling an epic, with a run time of 2 hours 41 minutes. It's so odd to me that this film won the year before Platoon because they are incredibly different. That's happened before with this blog, where I've gone from one year to the next and though, "How are these two movies on the same list?" But I guess that's the beauty of watching the Best Picture winners. Or that could explain why I'm often confused with what wins.

Regardless, Out of Africa was a good film but nothing that I would tell people they have to see. The film is based on the true story of Karen Blixen (played by Meryl Streep), a Danish woman who marries her friend, mainly to gain the title of baroness, and moves to Africa to run a farm. Originally, the farm was to be a dairy farm but her idiot husband had other ideas: he made it a coffee farm that was destined to fail. And it did. While her attempts to make the farm successful and to work with the local tribe that live on her land are interesting, the plot is actually a romance. Karen's marriage fails when her husband cheats on her, repeatedly, and when she meets Denys (played by Robert Redford).

Although I think the film was marketed as a romance about Karen and Denys, the film is more about Karen and her determination. The other white settlers, mainly British, view her as odd. She's too independent for a woman in the WWI-era, and they see her kindness and interest in the tribal people as inappropriate. I was interested in how the characters talked about the land. The British said the land belonged to the Crown (England), but Karen was brave enough to remind them that the land didn't belong to white people at all: it belonged to the natives who were there first. At one point, she has to fight to find land for the natives on her farm. She has enough faults that this noble act doesn't make the story saccharine, but it certainly makes me admire her even more than I did as I watched her life on the farm develop.

So I guess when I think about this film, I can honestly say I liked it. The cinematography included some beautiful shots of the savanna and animals. The characters were interesting, and the story had some depth. But even with this, I wouldn't say that the film excited me.

Platoon: 1986

I had to skip over Out of Africa (1985) due to it being checked out of my library. But never fear...I have placed a hold and hope to have it soon. Right now, the 1980s are kicking my butt with long Best Picture winners. Fortunately, Platoon is 120 minutes and excellent but dark, which shouldn't be surprising since it's about the Vietnam War. The story follows Chris Taylor (a very young Charlie Sheen), a college student who volunteered to join the army in 1967 to fight in the war and who soon learns how hopeless this war was.

The film starts with him arriving in Vietnam, and the opening music is a melancholy classical piece that seems to hang over each moment in the scene. As Chris leaves his plane, he and the other new soldiers encounter body bags that are waiting to be sent to the U.S.

What struck me in this opening is the sound. The music works to set this sorrowful tone, and the noises of the jungle follow the music as the setting changes. The jungle sounds provide such a strong contrast, and I found myself nervous as the soldiers moved through the growth, expecting at any moment something to grow wrong because of how the music made me feel. It was a powerful use of a sound, and just one of many moments in the film where I experienced something that makes this film truly worthy of the Best Picture award.

Platoon is one of those films that leaves me thinking. At the end of the film, in his internal dialogue, Chris says, "We did not fight the enemy; we fought ourselves." I think he's right about this war and about more. When we fight, is it really against someone or something? Or is it more about us not understanding?