MYST POST Double Feature: Before Sunrise and Before Sunset

I decided to watch these movies based on the article Mr. D posted on women in movies and I have always been interested in this trilogy because it was lower budget films that got a lot of attention, the second and third even being nominated for Oscars.

Before Sunrise was filmed in 1995 and it is very obvious by how the movie looked and how it was presented. However, I fell in love with it immediately. This didn't seem like the typical romantic comedy. The formulaic structure that seems to always be present was gone and in place was a story where both characters had their own flaws and insecurities, rather than just the vision of a perfect world. I think it is because of this that this movie has gained a lot of attention and was so well acclaimed to have obtained not one, but two succeeding movies.

What really stood out to me right away was the script. This movie was written in such a smart way with realistic dialogue and events that didn't seem like a fantasy or a made up romantic fairy tale. The chemistry between the two actors and their endless conversations is what made the movie so striking and endearing. After I looked it up, I saw that the director Richard Linklater teamed up with Kim Krizan to write the script in order to obtain an honest female voice in the movie. This obviously is what makes the movie so real and why the script doesn't seem forced.

Additionally, not much action happens. Since the movie is about their one night together, there are a lot of scenes, in fact most of the movie, where they are just talking. Talking about life, love, experiences, and dreams. So, interestingly, there were a lot scenes that were one long shot. They would last up to maybe even 6 minutes it felt like. This had to take a lot of skill on the actors parts to be able to film that without messing up. These shot choices also contributed to the overall feel of the film and what made it so unique.

Furthermore, the lighting is very dark, but not in a depressing or sad way. This may be because of when the movie was filmed or because it is late at night, but the whole movie has this dark silhouette to it that somewhat contrasts the love that we are seeing on screen. Interesting choice made by the director.

Obviously, I loved this movie. I give it a 5/5.

I then, of course, immediately wanted to watch Before Sunset. Filmed nine years later, it continues to tell the story of Celine and Jesse after they meet again, nine years later of course.

There were a lot of similarities in this sequel. The lighting and long shots were both present. In a way, some could argue that this is a lot like the first in the trilogy because they are just walking around talking. However, Linklater is able to create something completely different. Again, the script was phenomenal. In fact, like I mentioned, this film was nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay. A huge feat for an independent film.

After watching both films, I looked up the score on Rotten Tomatoes. Before Sunrise received 100% from critics and 93% from audience while Before Sunset received 95% from critics and 92% from audience. Even though I loved both films, I was honestly surprised when I saw these ratings. What I think is amazing is that Linklater was able to maintain such a strong story and create such a beautiful sequel that fans and critics alike both loved, which is hard to do regardless of the genre. This shows his talents as both a director and a screenwriter.

I think what people love most about both these films is the ideas presented in them. Love and women and understanding women is a huge part of both films. It is clear that women can be independent and that men don't really understand them to a certain extent, and vice versa. These movies cause the audience to think about that and about their own lives. It seems like most romantic comedies are lying to you, while these are telling you the truth.

I also give Before Sunset a 5/5.

FFS #2: Oscar Winners for Best Picture and Best Director

I decided to watch films that received an Academy Award for both Best Director and Best Picture-arguably the two most prestigious awards. Although this has happened with quite a few films, I chose to watch these three because they were all so diverse and I wanted to find a commonality that the Academy may be looking for in award winners.

Annie Hall was directed by Woody Allen and released in 1977. One of his more famous films, this seemed to break all sort of rules in filmmaking. Allen's character repeatedly broke the fourth wall and talked to the camera-something that was rare before this film. Out of all of these films, I think this one had the best script and personality to it. Through Allen's directing and acting it was apparent that he put a lot of time and energy into the script which he co-wrote and the delivery of the lines. Rarely have I seen a romantic comedy that I found so original and engaging and not as cliche and boring. The Academy clearly noticed this because they also gave Annie Hall an award for Best Original Screenplay.

The next film I watched was American Beauty, a 1999 film directed by Sam Mendes. Among Best Picture and Best Director, the film also won Best Original Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and Best Actor (Kevin Spacey). First off, if you have not seen this film, then I highly recommend it. Although the plot is hard to explain, this is probably one of the most real films I have seen. Spacey well deserved his award and the film was beautifully directed and presented. I could have probably watched this with the sound off and have been just as stunned as I was by the story because the shots were perfected done to every detail and adds to the mood of the entire movie. The editing was typical but it didn't need to be anything special because of everything else the movie had to offer. When put in the context of it being made in 1999, the fact that it won Best Picture is understandable because of the message the film gives out, which tends to be what the Academy loves.

Lastly, I watched The Departed which was directed by Martin Scorsese and released in 2006. I chose this film because I had known there was a lot of controversy surrounding the awards it won and I wanted to see for myself whether or not it actually deserved it. This film also won Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Film Editing. Out of all the awards it received, I have to say that the editing award was very well deserved. It was edited in such a fast pace way that keeps you interested that you almost forget the film is 2 and a half hours long. One specific sequence that really interested me (I watched it about six times) was when there were short scene cuts back and forth between Damon and DiCaprio's characters. There were many moments like that because their characters are so connected but only appear in about three scenes together. If the editing had not been done to connect them so fluidly and effectively, then it would have felt awkward when they finally meet in the climax of the movie.

Personally, I loved this film and would probably put it in my top 10, but I am kind of conflicted over whether or not it deserved Best Picture. I didn't quite get the feelings I got when I watched Annie Hall or American Beauty. So, I looked up what all the controversy was about and discovered that many put The Departed on lists of "Worst Best Picture Winners Ever." According to Peter Eramo, Jr. of Listverse, who ranked it #6 on his personal list, said "I love Martin Scorsese and am a huge fan of so many of his films, but this had no business winning the top two awards of the night, let alone the honor of being nominated. If any film actually stood out that year, Scorsese would have gone home empty-handed once again. But, alas, no film existed."

Seeing this article really made me wonder what the difference is between a great film and a "Best Picture." It seems that there is no clear cut answer and that it is different for everyone. Although I enjoyed The Departed probably the most, that was only because I love thriller movies and it was catered towards my taste. That doesn't mean that it is more deserving than Annie Hall, which I liked but could probably not watch again and again. So, who decides? It seemed that the connection between all three of these movies was that they were loved by many and they made an impact during that specific year. So, therefore, the winner can depend on that year and what other movies were out and what political/social issues we are facing at that time. The Academy Awards seem to be a tricky thing to try to figure out. Regardless, all of these movies and many other winners are, in my opinion, deserving for one reason or another. Whether or not everyone necessarily agrees.

Article: http://listverse.com/2010/05/12/top-10-worst-best-picture-winners/