Snugglecub – Page 6 – Academy Award Best Picture Winners

1943 – Charles Bickford

1943 – Charles Bickford

The Song of Bernadette

This movie had an incredible script, so much so that no matter what character you look at, it was kind of hard to go wrong. But if that’s true, then why do I have so many misgivings about Charles Bickford’s performance? Was he good? Yes, but he was not great. I’d call his performance adequate. He only had one facial expression in the entire film. He was stoic, and that was it. Even when he needed to be skeptical, unsure, loving, kindly, angry, or even priestly and forgiving, he was nothing more than stoic. I don’t know if he deserved his Oscar nomination.

I mean, I looked up a photo of the actor in a publicity picture, one where he is wearing a suit and tie instead of the robes of a clergyman. The expression on his face in that pic is exactly the same as in this film. No smile, no expressive emotion, nothing but sternness. But then I have to ask, did this lack of emotion serve the character, or did it detract from the performance? And I suppose, in certain scenes, it did. But there were times I wanted more.

Bickford played Abbé Dominique Peyramale, the parish priest of Lourdes. At first he is a doubter of Bernadette’s visions, then a curious skeptic, then a believer, and finally a true advocate. I’m not saying the actor did a terrible job. I wouldn’t say he stood out as a bad actor. He did just fine. He looked the part, seemed to be age appropriate, and had a good speaking voice. But if I’m being picky, then I’ll also say that there was no softness to him. There was very little about him that felt inviting or intimate. I wasn’t drawn in by his fatherly relationship with Bernadette.

I think his best scene was the one where he says goodbye to Bernadette as she is leaving to join the Sisters of Charity of Nevers. But I think this had just as much to do with the script as it did with the actor. But here, at least, he displayed a modicum of kindness, and perhaps even sympathy for the girl, though you wouldn’t know it looking at Bickford’s face. It was exactly the same as it was every other time he was on the screen. And just as an interesting note, his character embodied one of the few historical inaccuracies in the movie. The real Peryamale never visited Bernadette on her deathbed. He’d actually died several years before her.

1943 – Jennifer Jones

1943 – Jennifer Jones

The Song of Bernadette

Jones turned in an incredible performance, there’s no doubt about that. And the Academy agreed. She won the Best Actress Oscar. This was the perfect marriage of a great actress and a well-written script. The character of Bernadette Soubirous, a poor peasant girl who has a vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary, performs a few miracles, and eventually becomes Saint, though the movie didn’t actually cover her canonization. Jones’s inspired performance had a wonderful innocence about it that seemed to perfectly capture the extremely humble nature reportedly possessed by the real Bernadette of Lourdes.

Jones was only 23 years old when The Song of Bernadette was filmed, so she had youth on her side. She was actually quite beautiful, but they made her look plainer and more like a girl of peasant stock. But the simple-minded, uneducated nature of the character was all Jones. She never acted too clever or too wise. Some of her best scenes were ones in which even she seemed confused by what was happening to her. But the core of her performance, which Jones played to perfection, was the unwavering faith of the young girl, and the honesty with which she spoke of it.

There were very few scenes where Jones was able to show a smile or display happiness, which was actually one of the prominent themes of the film. Several times, Bernadette reported that the Lady in her visions told her “I cannot promise to make you happy in this world, only in the next.” And the actress held true to that idea. She rarely smiled. The one scene where she did was when the visions were over and she looked forward to the prospect of working as a maid and marrying a young man who loved her. But the notion of an ordinary life was quickly squelched by the priest, telling her that her duty was to become a nun and spend the rest of her life in a convent.

Jones really turned in an inspired and inspiring performance and I’m glad she won the Oscar. The Academy made the right decision. And kudos to whoever cast her in the role. She was perfection. She captured the innocence and humility of the Saint and elevated the already wonderful script to a higher level.

Spider-Man: Far From Home Character Posters

Spider-Man: Far From Home Cast Photos

Spider-Man: Far From Home

Cast Photos

Character Posters

23 – Spider-Man: Far From Home

This was a fun movie, but not one of my favorites in the MCU franchise. And as I think about it, I have to admit that it isn’t about the film itself. It’s that it feels a little superfluous. That doesn’t mean I don’t like the movie. I really do. But the first three phases of the MCU were all gearing up to the climax of Endgame. And Endgame was so good that what else was there to say before moving on to Phase IV? But apparently, Kevin Feige thought there was one more story to tell to close out the Infinity Saga. But to me, it feels too much like an afterthought.

There was a brief scene that dealt with the return of the general populace after The Hulk’s snap, and then we were off to the races with a new story that didn’t seem to have much to do with the Saga at all. I mean, what did it do except tell a cool Spider-man story that was mostly self-contained. Yes, the whole premise of the story takes its cue from the death of Tony Stark, so maybe it is like a coda to the larger tapestry to date. I guess my point is that I think it might have fit better as a great opening to the Multiverse Saga rather than an end to the Infinity Saga.

Anyway, Tom Holland, who is absolutely my favorite Spider-Man, did a fantastic job. The narrative is about Peter Parker just trying to be a normal teenager, going on a trip to Europe with his classmates, and trying to tell MJ how he feels about her. The conflict comes when Nick Fury gives Peter a pair of super-tech-AI sunglasses, left to him by Stark, that give him, and only him, complete control over very powerful weapons and intelligence technology, something a child should really not have. Peter just wants to be a teenager. And I found that I was just as interested in those mundane parts of the narrative as I was in the superhero aspects of the story.

But there were a few things I noticed that supports my assertion that this should have been a Phase IV movie. For example, they talked about the concept of a multiverse. In several scenes, they explored the possibility of Peter Parker becoming the new Iron-Man, before settling on the fact that he should just be himself, and use the powers that already belong to him. Sure, Happy Hogan is still there to provide Parker with Stark technology for new and personalized Spider-suits, but Peter finds that he is stronger when he’s not trying to be something he is not.

Of course, once again, Marvel knows how to give us great actions sequences. They are big and fast-paced, flashy and intense. Yes, maybe they are a little heavy on the CGI, but when it’s this good and hyper realistic, who cares? Everything looked incredible. There is one mind-bending scene that comes to mind where Spider-Man is trapped inside Mysterio’s illusions and the scenes and environments change so rapidly, even the viewer begins to lose track of what is real and what isn’t. And Beck nearly kills Peter, getting him hit by a speeding train. The only two elementals we spend any time with are fire and water, but both the battle scenes were incredible to watch. Holland did such a great job and apparently did many of his own stunts.

Jon Favreau is always great as Happy Hogan, and I liked his relationship with Peter’s Aunt May. But I also really liked the actors who played Peter’s classmates, MJ, Ned, and even Flash Thompson. And I have to give a big shout out to Martin Starr as Roger Harrington. He was funny in just about every scene in which he appeared. I also liked the teenage romance between Ned and Betty Brant. But the best teenage romance was the one between Peter and MJ, played by Zendaya. And lastly, Samuel L. Jackson was still fantastic as Nick Fury, even though a post-credit scene revealed that it was really Talos, the Skrull operative we met in Captain Marvel. So there were plenty of ties to the rest of the MCU, but I don’t know. I still think it would have been a better beginning to the Multiverse Saga, then an ending to the Infinity Saga. But that’s just me, and what do I know? Clearly, Feige knows what he’s doing without my input.

Top 10 Favorite Parts

Peter finds out something is going on between Happy and Aunt May. And “You do not ghost Nick Fury!”
The fight with the water elemental. And the arrival of Mysterio
Nick Fury tranquilizes Ned and Peter’s meeting with S.H.I.E.L.D.
The appearance of Night Monkey and the fight with the fire elemental.
The reveal that Mysterio is actually a bad guy and the meeting of the disgruntled ex-Stark employees.
Peter tells MJ that he is Spider-Man
Spider-Man has to fight the illusions of Mysterio.
Happy talks with Peter and helps him build a new Spider-Man suit.
Beck’s drone strike against London, and Spider-Man’s battle to save the city and his friends. Also, when Spider-Man takes down Quinten Beck.
The ending where Peter confronts Happy and May about their relationship. Also, Spider-Man gives MJ a wild ride through the city.

1943 – Charles Coburn

1943 – Charles Coburn

The More the Merrier

I have mixed feelings about Charles Coburn in this film. For one thing, I don’t particularly care for the film. I didn’t like the character Coburn played, Mr. Dingle. And yet, he played it the way the script demanded. He was a bully, a manipulative old con-artist, and yet, I think I was supposed to like him. Yes, I get that it was a silly romantic comedy, but the character of Mr. Dingle just raised my hackles, and it was partly the fault of the script, and partly the fault of the actor.

Mr. Dingle is a businessman who is in Washington for a short time. He lies to a crowd of strangers so that they won’t be competition for occupancy of the spare bedroom in Miss Milligan’s apartment. And we’re supposed to like how clever he is. Then when she tries to tell him no, that she wanted a female roommate, he brushes past her into the apartment and completely ignores her protestations. I keep trying to tell myself that it’s just supposed to be a silly comedy, but my modern sensibilities are offended by the very premise of the movie in the character of Mr. Dingle. She should have called the police and had him arrested, but against her better judgement, she agreed to let him stay, instead.

Then the very next day, he invites a complete stranger into her home as another tenant, because he thinks he will make Miss Milligan a good husband, as if he had any right to arrange her life in that way. And the rom-com nature of the film says that I’m supposed to like the match-making old meddler because he has good intentions and the attractive young couple are obviously meant to be together.

But here’s the thing. Coburn played it just like the script said he needed to. So was he a good actor, in that respect? Yes, he was. But I didn’t like the character that was created, and I think I was supposed to. So what does that say about the actor? Did he do a good job? On the one hand, yes, because he did what the script needed. But on the other hand, a good actor should have made me like Mr. Dingle, despite him being a bully and a charlatan, and in this, Coburn failed, and I really don’t know if any actor could have done it. But the Academy voters clearly didn’t agree with me. Coburn took home the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.

1943 – Jean Arthur

1943 – Jean Arthur

The More the Merrier

Hmmm… How to say this delicately… This is the movie that made me dislike Jean Arthur. I’m not saying she was an awful actress. I’m just saying she played an annoying character. And as far as I can tell, that is partially due to the annoying script, but it is most certainly the fault of the actress, as well. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen this film, and there are things about the plot I neither liked the first time, nor did my opinion change this time. Let me explain.

Jean Arthur was fine, for the most part. I’ll say that again – for the most part, she was fine. She looked beautiful, she understood that she was in a romantic comedy, not a serious drama, and she played it all with an easy air about her that was attractive. And she knew how to act the more serious parts. In fact, I’ve seen her in other movies that had a similar feel, and she was just fine. Mr. Smith Goes to Washington comes to mind. But the way this movie ended just stuck in my craw.

So she falls in love with Joel McCrea’s Mr. Carter. I mean, who wouldn’t? She breaks her engagement with Mr. Pendergast. Again, who wouldn’t? And she gets married to Mr. Carter in a shotgun wedding so there wouldn’t be a scandal that would ruin her reputation. So now she’s married to the right man, and she should be happy, but she’s not, and the movie isn’t exactly clear on why. She is sobbing in the most ridiculous way. She isn’t exactly crying. She’s just making this ear-splitting, droning, fakey, whining sound with no real point, like the noise a two-year-old makes to get the attention of a parent.

And is it because she thinks he only married her to save her honor and her reputation? It shouldn’t be. She already knows he actually loves her. He already said so in their bedtime conversation. Is it because he has official military orders to go to Africa the next day? It shouldn’t be. She knew that going into it. So I’m confused as to why she’s whining, and it seems that she is too. She just stands there keening inarticulately. And I know this is supposed to be a silly comedy, but it seemed that Miss Arthur was confused about her motivation in that final scene, and I was, too. So Best Actress? I don’t think so.

1943 – Greer Garson

1943 – Greer Garson

Madame Curie

Greer Garson played herself once again. You could easily transplant her into the exact same characters in some of her other films, and you’d never notice the difference. She had the same look, the same accent, the same cadences, the same facial expressions, the same attitude. She was just nice and wholesome, and not much else. There wasn’t a mean bone in her body, which matched her costar, Walter Pidgeon perfectly. There just wasn’t much to her character that stood out to me, and it made me wonder why she was nominated for best Actress.

But Greer’s part in this movie did have one saving grace for her, one deeply dramatic scene that had to have been the reason she was nominated for an Oscar. It was near the end, after Madame Curie learns that her husband has been killed in an accident involving two horses pulling a carriage. She went catatonic, refusing to eat or drink as she processed her new reality. The makeup on Garson made her look drab and sickly. The dead look in her eyes was something I have never seen from the actress. And then once her old friend leaves, she gets up and goes through a few special objects that brought up memories, and they have an effect on her. She turns away from the camera and begins sobbing and crying. It totally fit the scene and Garson was good.

I say good, but not great. First, she hid her face, so you couldn’t see her full unbridled emotional journey in her eyes. It was there, but it was hidden from the viewer, and I think I would have been more invested in Madame Curie’s pain if I could have seen her face. There was one other scene in the film where she showed a bit of strong emotion. She was angry when she thought that four years of difficult and tedious work had produced no results. Again, she was good there, but not great. And what’s more, I think that maybe she could’ve been better.

Like her costar, I am not convinced she should have been nominated for Best Actress, except that she appears to have given audiences what they wanted, good-natured wholesomeness that bordered on unrealistic. But that’s what she was good at. And I have to admit, she looked just as beautiful as ever, so that helped.

1943 – Walter Pidgeon

1943 – Walter Pidgeon

Madame Curie

Let me just say, right off the bat, I am not exactly sure why Walter Pidgeon was nominated for Best Actor for this role, and here’s why. We’ve seen him play this character many times before. I can only imagine that he was just playing himself. He didn’t stretch himself as an actor. You look at his performances in How Green Was My Valley, Mrs. Miniver, Blossoms in the Dust, and even Flight Command, and I’ll fully admit that these are the only films that featured Pidgeon that I have ever seen, but he played the exact same character in each one. There wasn’t even a slight varience. The way he played each roll was exactly the same.

Yes, ha played a likeable character, but there was nothing new, nothing interesting, nothing deep, nothing daring. He was a nice guy, through and through, and he was very well paired with Greer Garson. Apparently, Hollywood loved seeing the two of them together on the big screen. In this film, he played Professor Curie, who was supposed to be a confirmed bachelor who thought that women had no place in a scientific profession. But really, I didn’t buy his protestations to the female student assigned to work in his lab. He was too nice, just like he was in all those other films. And then he became golly-gee-whiz twitterpated, and ended up marying her.

He didn’t have any real dramatic scenes, no real conflict, no real opportunity to show off any acting skills. The most we got from Pidgeon was mild and well-mannered frustration, or consternation. Yes, there was one scene where he attempted to defend the honor of his wife in front of a college budget committee, when they tried to pass her over because she was a woman, but there was no real drama there, nor any comedy, for that matter. He just played a nice man who was speaking up for his wife, as any good husband should.

He seemed to take innocence and wholesomeness to a new level. But maybe that’s just what audiences wanted to see from him. Maybe that’s what the rather bland script demanded. Or maybe, Pidgeon just didn’t turn in a performance that was worthy of an Oscar nomination. Either way, this is the only time I’ve ever seen Pidgeon sport a beard, and I have to say, it suited him. He looked very handsome.