Midnight Cowboy (1969)

 Cowboy wannabe Joe Buck (Jon Voight) comes to New York to be a hustler only to become a victim of the city’s unsympathetic, dog-eat-dog sensibilities. These qualities are mirrored and refracted by streetwise transient Ratso Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman), whose relationship with Buck grows as Buck’s very troubled backstory unfolds.

This is the first and only X-rated film to win Best Picture, and while it’s pretty tame and easily in R-rated territory by today’s standards, this film remains a very tough pill to swallow. The plot summary reads like a relatively standard “two people from different sides of life find common ground and become friends against all odds” but there is far more depth and less conventionality to be found. Even if there wasn’t, this film is less a showcase of plot than of acting, and Voight and Hoffman deliver some of the best you will ever see. There’s no guarantee of a happy ending or that the characters will be made better by their situation, and the outcomes for Buck and Rizzo are not equal or fair. The first time I saw this movie, I was only 14 or 15 and far too young to appreciate it or detect the nuances. While it occasionally falls victim to the ‘60’s (like the overlong Warhol party scene), Midnight Cowboy is even today a brave, unique and unforgettable film that brought themes of homosexuality to the Academy Awards decades before Brokeback Mountain. Everyone deserves to see this film, and although it can be a road with rough terrain, the journey is worth it.

This was my first time seeing this movie and I didn't really know what to expect.  The first hour is a silly, optimistic comedy about this bright-eyed country boy going to score some rich cougars in the big city.  Sounds great, right?  Well I think he goes to New York with about $60.00.  Clearly that doesn't last very long.  There is even a scene where Buck actually gives the woman he slept with $20.00 for a cab... Not super lucrative.  The second half of the movie really changes things up and it gets pretty real when they have to squat in a condemned building just trying to get by.  However, it still maintains some humor throughout.  I agree with Tim, pretty tame for an R rated movie but groundbreaking at the time.  Highly recommended! 

In one particular scene, Ratso and Joe get into an argument over cowboys. Ratso states that "Cowboys are fags!" Joe's response is "John Wayne is a cowboy! Are you calling John Wayne a fag?" Coincidentally, Dustin Hoffman and Jon Voight were nominated for the Best Actor Oscar for their roles as Ratso and Joe, respectively. They lost out - to John Wayne for his role in True Grit. 

Ratso Rizzo: I'm walking here! I'm walking here!

Oliver! (1968)

This musical adaptation of Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist is about an orphan who is constantly hungry.  He asks for some more gruel at the orphanage.  They kick him out.  Then he picks a pocket or two with the help of the Artful Dodger.  

First, this movie BEAT Funny Girl! What the heck?  This in no way, shape, or form compares to the quality in Funny Girl.  FG is much more polished.  AND BARBRA! She's brilliant!! Her single performance in FG is better than the entirety of Oliver! So why do I dislike Oliver!? WELLLL first of all, the musical is bogus.  The book is not a fun, light book.  It's depressing.  Trying to make a fun musical about orphans is weird but in the last thirty minutes shit gets real.  I mean dying whores real!  It really is the most bipolar musical.  Annie really takes this idea and perfects it.  I mean it's a hard knock life but the end of Annie is so happy.  ANd it's just too cute to be sad.  Oliver! just ends... and not with an exclamation mark.  Before you think that I am ripping Oliver! to shreds, I was in this play.  AND I had to listen to the music every day for one whole summer.  I mean, I was the Rose Seller... VERY VERY important!  Jeeeeez! And if you are ever bored and want to try and find a video online with me doing an Oliver meets Elephant Man impression, I'm pretty sure it's why Tim fell so deep in love with me...

Where to begin? First of all, Oliver! is a perfectly okay film but the show itself is doomed at the drawing board. Most of the works of Charles Dickens don’t seem to lend themselves well to musicals and even in the narrow realm of musicals about beggars are there many better options, like Annie or The Newsies. Sure, these may be the happiest poor people since Burt in Mary Poppins but of course they’re hungry; think of all the calories that are needlessly burned by all that singing and dancing. Katie’s claim that this film is bipolar is best represented by how the fun and jaunty “Oom-Pah-Pah” song is almost immediately followed by Nancy being beaten to death by Sikes. The chase for Sikes goes on about ten minutes too long and oddly feels like the end of Frankenstein with all the torches and yelling. All this aside, there is one upsetting fact that ruins the whole film: Mark Lester, the child who plays Oliver, did not do his own singing in the film because he couldn’t carry a rhythm or a tune. He was overdubbed by the daughter (!?) of the music arranger/supervisor of the film. So this kid was cast as the titular character of a musical, stepping over the dozens of talented boys in the cast and they couldn’t even overdub him with one of those kids. Once you know this fact, you can’t ignore how Oliver’s thin singing voice is a girl and the movie is ruined. There may be a reason why a musical didn’t win Best Picture for 34 years after this. Ultimately, this film is more memorable but also far more frustrating than Gigi and I will be hard pressed to watch it again.

The first film with an MPAA rating to win an Academy Award for Best Picture. 

Oliver Twist: Please sir, I want some more.

In the Heat of The Night (1967)

In the small town of Sparta, MI, a wealthy and important local businessman is found dead in the middle of the street. Detective Virgil Tibbs (Sidney Poitier) of Philadelphia, on his way out of town from visiting his mother, is arrested for the crime simply because he is a black man with money. Tibbs’ name is quickly cleared but his boss and his pride demand that he stay and lend his expertise to local police chief Gillespie (Rod Steiger). As the compelling case is revealed, Tibbs is forced to confront not only the prejudices of southern United States and Gillespie but also his own.

Since we started this blog, I couldn’t wait to arrive here because Katie had never seen this film and it is one of my all-time favorites. On top of being a powerful character study and just a great suspenseful mystery, In the Heat of the Night is a relevant character study and parable about discrimination that makes fellow Best Picture nominee Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner seem quaint. That film was considered a “big deal” because a black man is involved in an interracial relationship- imagine the gasps that came from an audience in 1967 in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement when Tibbs is slapped by a plantation owner and Tibbs slaps him back. That scene alone brings my jaw to the floor every time and ensured that this film had no plans to make its impact quietly. The grainy cinematography that lays bare the gritty, urban landscape defined the cinematic look of the ‘70’s and would become standard in many of the finest films of the next 15 years. This film would spawn a sequel and a TV series but nothing could ever recapture the power of the original, which still stands as one of the greatest films of all time.

This was my first viewing of the movie and anytime it would come up in conversation, Tim would get so excited.  "AHHH SOOO AMAZING!! AHHH AHHH!"  Right before we started the movie, Tim was hoping he hadn't ramped it up too much.  AND he hadn't.  It's a damn good movie.  The slap that Tim talks about it without a doubt the climax of the movie.  When Mr. Tibbs leaves, the plantation owner is on the verge of tears because of two very important things.  1. Poitier packs a man-sized slap. 2. This man's whole way of life is over and that slap made him see that real quick.  I don't think I will ever love this movie as much as Tim but it I did really enjoy it! 

According to Sidney Poitier, Tibbs' retaliation slap to Endicott was not in the original script nor in the novel on which the film is based. Poitier insisted that Tibbs slap Endicott back and wanted a guarantee that the scene would appear in all prints of the film. According to Stirling Silliphant, the slap was in the original script though not in the novel.  

Virgil Tibbs: They call me MISTER Tibbs!

A Man for All Seasons (1966)

In 16^th century England, Sir Thomas More’s convictions are tested when he refuses to approve King Henry VIII’s divorce from Catherine of Aragon in his obsessive desire for a son and an heir to the throne.

I was worried that this would be a generic uptight period drama, like a Tom Jones that wasn’t remotely funny. I was pleasantly surprised (but not blown away) by A Man for all Seasons, a film that at best nearly recreated the splendor of Olivier’s films and at worst resembled a bland BBC telecast. Perhaps    A Man For All Seasons was better left on stage but it had some good moments. I enjoyed Robert Shaw’s interesting turn here as Henry VIII, even if most of his dialogue was shouted at the top of his lungs while within an arm’s reach of the person he was speaking to (he must have been prepping to yell at a shark a few years down the road). I was pleased to see that this film acknowledged that Henry VIII was a man that enjoyed humor and music, which were basically the only things he had time for during the rare instances that he wasn’t eating, having sex or killing one of his wives. Many other performances were not as memorable except for an early performance from a young and goofy-looking John Hurt and a heart-wrenching Wendy Hiller as Alice More. But Paul Scofield as Thomas More is truly the star of the show and the glue that holds it together, and he carries this film into the ages (and into the somewhat abrupt “here’s-where-they-are-now” ending a la American Graffiti except everyone dies or becomes jailed). While not one of my favorite of the Best Picture winners, I’m glad I could experience it and can recommend it to most people I know. 

I don't think I enjoyed this movie as much as Tim did.  I didn't hate it.  But boy, I thought a lot of it was boring.  It was kind of vanilla to me.  Seeing an extremely young Vanessa Redgrave as the misunderstood Anne Boleyn was pretty interesting.  She couldn't be more than 17 years old in the  movie.  Not only that but Orson Welles played the obese cardinal and a young John Hurt with a scraggly beard played More's friend turned foe.  It was fun to see all these people in the film... but I didn't really take a lot from it.  There were great acting moments but their weren't a ton of memorable ones.   I personally enjoyed fellow nominee "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf?" more. 

But it does make me think of this:

Orson Welles used an exact duplicate of Cardinal Wolsey's official seal, as well as authentic sheepskin parchment and a quill pen. 

Sir Thomas More: "I do none harm, I say none harm, I think none harm. And if this be not enough to keep a man alive, in good faith I long not to live."