"New Choice!"

There was another great exercise for comedy writers in Andy Goldberg’s improv class last Wednesday. This one was called “New Choice!” Two people would do a scene and periodically someone would say something and Andy would interrupt with “New Choice!” The performer then had to devise an alternate line. If Andy wasn’t satisfied he’d again bark “New Choice!” Sometimes it would take two or

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1965: Omar Sharif in Doctor Zhivago

Omar Sharif did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Dr. Yuri Andreyevich Zhivago the titular character of Doctor Zhivago.

Doctor Zhivago is the excellent follow up by David Lean to Lawrence of Arabia. This film certainly differs in many ways from that film the biggest being the lead character. In Lawrence of Arabia the main character of T.E. Lawrence absolutely controlled the film, and as made the world notice his extraordinary measures. Doctor Zhivago on the other hand though is not a particularly active individual being a man who is most acted upon. He does not change the course of Russia, he in fact can barely control his own existence and is forced to move along with the changes of Russia. Also I suppose I should note that unlike O'Toole Sharif was not nominated for his leading role despite winning the golden globe.

Omar Sharif has a difficult task which is to carry this over three hour long epic on his shoulders even with his character being only the most common man at times. Sharif really takes this fact in stride though, and does not try to be anything more than what Zhivago should be. Funny enough originally Peter O'Toole was the first choice to portray Zhivago, and the fact that O'Toole turned it down was certainly a good thing. One characteristic that seems clear in Zhivago is meekness, and if there is one thing that Peter O'Toole most certainly is not is meek. Sharif though never tries to be more than what Zhivago should be and makes the most of his character despite being such a meek man.

Omar Sharif gives a very understated performance in the lead role that stresses the fact that Zhivago is not an extraordinary man by any measure. Rather just a man trying to live his life particularly early on in the film as he goes through what is expected of him marrying the woman he was posed to marrying finding a properly supportive profession as a doctor, even though he desires to be remembered as a poet, and watching all the events around him only as an observer. Sharif is very good at being this average man because he so honestly portrays the part. He does not try to fancy up what does not need to be, there is a life in this man, but only really a life that desires to live not much more than that.

Sharif effectively reflects a successful, but in many ways, average man when it comes to viewing the changes in Russia that come from the revolution. Sharif shows his reactions, at least at first, to be mostly astonishment at what is going on around as Yuri's interest never really is the revolution at hand. He just is a bystander and he only reacts to the various occurrences taking place in Russia never once taking action to implement any sort of change. When he faced with losing most of his house to revolutionary changes he acts almost slight bemusement at the idea, Sharif showing that Yuri is quite good in taking it in stride at first. The changes do slowly wear on him such as when the state takes more and more of him.

Sharif is good in showing the way that even a man who tries to take things for the best even at the worst can't  deal with the suffering caused by all of the traumatic events in Russia. Sharif still does not show that Yuri changes his nature by any means he is still he same modest man, but there is a growing sadness is in performance. It is all very low key and mostly involves small quiet gestures by Sharif, but he is quite effective as showing the emotions of a sane man in an insane world. For example his scene with Tom Courtenay's Strelnikov, Courtenay of course is electrifying in the scene with his intense depiction of the dehumanization of a man, but Sharif is just as important in showing the completely human and heartbreaking reaction as he shows Yuri's sadness and disbelief over the change in the man.

Of course I should mention that a pivotal part of the film is the central love story between Yuri and Laura (Julie Christie). Now Sharif here is quite excellent as he builds up the love of Yuri, and again Sharif does not overplay this. Early in the film he is good as we see him notice her, and Sharif conveys an unshakable feeling for the woman who Yuri does not even know who she is. Of course they do meet, and Sharif is very good in showing the love that slowly grows with him. He never comes out with it obviously, and at first they do not act upon since they are both married. Even when they finally do have an affair Sharif still stays true to the character, and leaves much unsaid. Sharif and Christie make their relationship something special because both stay subtle and make it far more truthful than if they had conveyed the emotions in a broader fashion.

It would have been very easy for many actors to try and portray the character in a different more constantly active, and could frankly have been trying to steal scenes away from the likes of Rod Steiger and Tom Courtenay. That would have been the wrong approach though. In one scene in the film Zhivago states that he would rather just live life rather than try to be the surgeon for the world, and that is very much Sharif's portrayal. He does not try to control any scene of the film with his performance, but rather he stands firm in his realistic portrayal of an ordinary man in an extraordinary situation. This really is not the usual performance for an epic, but Sharif makes the most of his character and successfully carries the film.

Read More

Review: To Rome With Love

How many movies does a writer/director have to make before he no longer has to follow any rules of logic or good storytelling? How many movies until he’s allowed to just recycle elements from his other movies and no one cares? Whatever that number is Woody Allen obviously has passed it. And that’s fine, for what it is. But not fine when he’s still considered a genius and if he should

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1965: Sean Connery in The Hill

Sean Connery did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Joe Roberts in The Hill.

The Hill is an excellent film about the inner workings of a British Army Prison in the middle of the desert which has many internal disruptions after one of the prisoners recently brought in has died due to punishment.

The fact that Sean Connery received no awards interest for this film is no surprise. He was James Bond at the time simple as that, and it would take a long time for him to be separated from the character, and even longer for the academy to bother recognize him. Also he was not helped by the fact that The Hill, although recognized other places, was completely ignored by the academy. This is completely absurd of course because this is a great film, infinitely better than A Thousand Clowns, and for the academy not even to recognize Harry Andrews who won The NBR for Supporting actor, shows the Hill to be one of the biggest oversights by the academy.

Sean Connery portrays one of the prisoners of the camp Joe Roberts who was a former Sergeant Major. He is very different than the rest of the prisoners who are there for theft, going awol, or some other petty military crime, Roberts there is for punching an officer after refusing to send his men into a surely fatal mission. Roberts also was a successful career soldier and his fall from grace was sudden. Connery is perfect for the role of the once completely loyal soldier. Connery shows early on that he is not the same as the rest of the men, and his stance, and look shows us Roberts's history before coming to the prison.

Connery is great here because he still does keep much of what a career soldier who have from his very proper posture to his ability to carry out the orders, but there is something very different about him that shows how he fell out of favor. Roberts is in rebellion of what he has once served so faithfully, but it is not from laziness or cowardice but from his own sense of right and wrong. Connery does not portray this anger as some random notion that has just suddenly come from nowhere, but rather it was a slow realization of the all of the problems with the military that he has suffered from for far too long.

Something very interesting that Connery does with the role is show that the same conviction that he would have had as a soldier carries right over to his attacks against the system he was once part of. This is a very different role for Connery in that he is always a captive in the film, and Roberts does not fight his way out the situation rather he thinks his way out of it. Connery same power of his presence that he used in his roles as a action hero like James Bond is also quite presence here as he has the same if not greater conviction in his performance here as the hero who has to use his wits instead of his fists to win the day.

Now I almost considered putting Connery in supporting since so much time is given to so many characters in this film, which is part of what makes it such a strong film, but I still do believe Connery is lead even though he might not even have the most screen time in the film. The reason for this is Roberts still is the driving part of the film, and is the one who moves the story forward. Although technically speaking the problems begin due to the death of one the prisoners Stephens (Alfred Lynch) caused by the brutal treatment of the sadistic Staff Sergeant Williams (Ian Hendry), it is Roberts who makes sure that Stephens's death will not mean nothing.

Before the death though Connery is excellent in showing exactly how Roberts will not stand for the cowardly Williams. He makes it clear that here Roberts only has hatred for the utterly horrendous human being that is Williams. The strength is within Connery's eyes here showing that Roberts will not suffer the fool of Williams no matter what, and there is always a quiet rebellion going on. Connery is excellent in portraying the intelligence of Roberts. Roberts has easily surmised exactly who Williams is and what his plan of attack on the prisoners is, and Connery never leaves any question to Roberts's strength that continues in the prison.

Connery is particularly superb though in the moment in which he describes the details of Roberts's cowardice charge and the reasoning behind his attack on his superior. What is notable here is that there is no passion in his portrayal, but rather a very sad cynicism. He does not infuse his action with any pride, not because he thinks he was wrong, but rather Connery instead shows that Roberts has made the heartbreaking discovery that despite his fervent attempts to save his men from a suicide mission, that it meant absolutely nothing in the long wrong as they still all died after someone else lead them in anyway.

Connery conveys though that his earlier experience is what sparks his passion to see that justice is done over the death of his fellow prisoner. Roberts finds his own punishment for speaking out, and in his scenes of pushing for justice most of it is speaking retching in pain over a beating he has been given. Connery is excellent here particularly in his scene where he confronts the Regimental Sergeant Major Wilson (Harry Andrews the head of the guards over the death. What is special here is Connery does not convey only anger here like he does in his scenes with Hendry, since Williams is a sadist and Wilson genuinely thinks his helping the men through his harsh treatment.

In his scene where he goes head to head with Wilson though is amazing as Connery shows Roberts basically fall apart in his frustrations over the failures of the code. This is a very different side to Connery here, but he is completely convincing as he shows that really Roberts feels that his whole life has been a falsehood because of the failure of the code he spent most of his life going by. It is an incredible scene because he combines not only his pain he is constantly feeling over his severe beating, but as well his despairing feelings toward the only thing that he has known for his entire life.

The late scenes though are possibly his best as Roberts lies wounded on the floor, but still uses his considerable will to prod the few good men of the prison to do the right thing. Connery through his very quiet portrayal here is superb as he brings to life the fierce determination of Roberts. There is nothing but power in his portrayal as he shows that no matter what Roberts will see justice done. He makes the sheer force of will of Roberts in this scene absolutely come to life, and makes his ability to bring the best out of the men completely believable. This is an excellent showcase of Connery's talent as he not only utilizes his more commonly found command of the screen, but as well effectively shows us that he is fully capable of creating an emotionally resonate character portrait.

Read More

Check out my new website!

The website for my book, THE ME GENERATION... BY ME has been revised and really spiffed up!   There's now a sample chapter and a whole photo gallery with never-before-seen pictures of the era, lost drawings of mine, and other goodies.  You can enlarge 'em.  You can do a slide show.   There are even captions!  Also, some videos of the Sunset Strip riots and other '60s fun times.  Prepare to spend

Read More

Writing problem: what to do if you get stuck

This
happens often as you write your script or novel. You come to a point
where you think you’ve written yourself into a corner. A plot point
requires something and you just can’t get there. Wait
a minute, he can’t swim to safety; he’s in a wheelchair. Exactly how
is she going to get to the Pope to sell him Girl Scout cookies?

This is one of the benefits of a being in a partnership –

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1965: Michael Caine in The Ipcress File

Michael Caine did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Harry Palmer for the first time in The Ipcress File.

The Ipcress File is an effective spy thriller about a spy trying to undercover a strange kidnapping and mind wiping plot.

The 60's was a popular time for spy films and 1965 had several of them three particularly notable ones though that show very different depiction of being a spy. There was of course the very romantic one found in Thunderball, and the extremely cynical and pessimistic depiction found in The Spy Who Came in From The Cold. The Ipcress File is somewhere in between the two. The Ipcress File stresses far less entertaining of spy life like routine surveillance as well as a mundane living, but there is still some humor found here unlike the insistent double crosses and dirty dealings found in The Spy Who Came in From Cold.

Caine portrayal of Palmer is also somewhere in between Sean Connery depiction of James Bond, and Richard Burton's depiction of Alec Leamas as well. Just like Connery's Bond there is an enthusiasm here that he puts into his job vigorously, and there are times where he does seem to enjoy his job. He though is not entirely different than Alex Leamas though either as Palmer still has many tedious duties to deal with lives a relatively humble life, and has a to deal with some of the back room conspiracy although it is not nearly as devious, and therefore does leave Palmer as nearly as much of a embittered man as Burton's Leamas.

Caine is quite good in the role by creating a balanced portrait of this spy. A key feature of Harry Palmer is his sense of humor which also factors into the fact that he tends to be insubordinate as well. Palmer is constantly cracking small jokes to his sometimes quite not amused superiors. Caine takes the right sort of low key approach here that realizes Palmer's sense of humor, but he does not over due it to become an overly comic performance either. Caine has just enough fun with his performance to lighten the mood a bit in the film, but still when more weight is needed for a scene Caine is completely up to the task.

In his performance as Palmer Caine effectively combines the excitement with the tedium that he encounters as a spy. Caine in the moments where Palmer is tracing someone or dealing with something very important he shows a clear conviction that shows Palmer's devotion to his work. Caine is appropriately keen in the role, conveying the intelligence of Palmer. Caine though does not make Harry completely domineering though. Palmer really is not an expert spy, just a good one, and really Caine does well in portraying his frustrations just well as skills. Of course a great deal of the time Palmer is not doing particularly interesting work, and Caine is good in showing that really Palmer uses his humor just to avoid boredom.

Caine stays consistent with his portrayal for most of the film until the very end when Palmer is captured by the enemy and put under mental torture. Naturally Caine loses that charm and poise he had earlier on as he suffers through the physical and psychological strain put upon him in captivity. Caine is strong here as well showing the extreme pain Palmer goes through in trying to resist the programming his captors are trying to embed in him. Although it is relatively fast in the film in showing the process Palmer undergoes, Caine is brings the horror of it to life. Caine is good here because although he shows a strong resolve in Palmer, he also makes it true that Palmer after all is only human.

This is a very good performance by Michael Caine and it is no surprise that this role helped him secure himself as a leading man. This is original and interesting depiction of this spy who is never derivative despite all of spies at the time. Caine uses his unique screen presence and on screen marvelously here to make Harry Palmer a down to earth, and very likable hero. He makes Palmer the relatively average spy who it is far likely we would be, than say James Bond who we would like to be. Although I would say this is not the greatest spy performance of the year, that still goes to Burton, it is an excellent one nevertheless.

Read More