Welcome to a new feature on Reel Thoughts – and, perhaps, something I should have begun a long time ago. In light of a recent discussion that heated up (in a good way) in the Oscars group (request membership!), I have decided, since my Netflix queue is pockmarked with contenders and winners of Oscars past and semi-present, that I would call attention to and/or highlight this status, since I frequently, if not always, am inspired to watch such films because the Academy saw fit to recognize them at least through nominations. Now, some may call that a narrow or limited worldview, but the fact of the matter is that I, personally, watch many types of films, not just Oscar films, and, just like for the AFI Project, this feature will be associated merely with what's up on the queue, not to the exclusion of viewing those other films (and will apply to only those films I haven't blogged about before--though I may go back and edit the others--and to those that are not on an AFI list). Notably, I am drawn to the Oscar contenders, though, because I love the broadcast with all of its overwrought pageantry, and sometimes, just sometimes, I think the Academy gets it right.
So, for a film deemed an "Oscar Flashback," you'll see these new elements in addition to the format to which I, and perhaps you, have sort of grown accustomed in this blog (if you're paying attention at all, thank you): a mention of the Oscar for which the film was nominated or won and a list of the other nominees. It's important to have context, see. There will also be a comparison discussion, if at all possible – as in, did the film deserve to win or lose, not only in my humble estimation but also in the grand context of the awards themselves. After all, the most convolutedly celebrated and despised aspect of the Oscars is the political and populist propensity of the Academy to award some films and not others, deservingly or no. Of course, there are those who just don't like the concept of an Oscars, but, to those readers, I would submit that this portion of my blog is probably not your cup of tea anyway.
So, the first Oscar entry flashback is Boys Don't Cry (which is also the first of the quintet of LGBT-themed Oscar films I alluded to previously), for which Hilary Swank won the Best Actress Oscar and for which Chloe Sevigny was nominated for Best Supporting Actress (film year 1999; awarding year 2000). The other nominees in both categories were:
Boys Don't Cry - Hilary Swank
Girl, Interrupted - Angelina Jolie
Boys Don't Cry is a biopic about Teena Brandon aka Brandon Teena, a transsexual man who was ultimately raped and murdered in rural Nebraska in 1993. Swank plays Brandon, and as the film opens, Brandon is establishing his male identity in appearance while fleeing his hometown of Lincoln, Nebraska, for nearby Falls City due to some petty thefts and other misdemeanors for which a warrant for his arrest has been distributed. While in Falls City, Brandon becomes associated with a rough crowd, including John (Peter Saarsgard), Tom (Brendan Sexton III), and Lana (Sevigny), for whom Brandon falls and who used to date John. While Brandon lives with another member of the group, Candace (Alecia Goranson - Becky from Roseanne!), he also gets a reputation for being a bit of a ladies' man. The film explores the growing relationship, sexual and romantic, between Lana and Brandon that begins almost immediately, but when the warrant for his arrest catches up with Brandon, he is jailed in the women's section of the prison, and the local paper publishes the arrest. Lana visits him and is accepting of the truth, but when John, Tom, and John's family learn that Brandon is biologically female, they visit their bigotry upon Brandon with the worst ultimate consequences.
This film is actually very well put together, thanks to the direction of Kimberly Peirce, in her debut outing. She clearly thoroughly researched her subject and put together the building blocks of this film in an engaging way. Between creative uses of lighting and camera and a well-chosen soundtrack, she heightened the emotional intensity of an already emotionally intense subject and made it hard to look away even as it was hard to watch. As an independent picture, there weren't many flashy technical elements, but Peirce strategically and artistically painted Brandon's chaotic life with washes of light and dark that upped the emotional ante of the picture.
Of course, the true trademark of this film is the no less than gutsy and riveting performance of Swank. Of the five Best Actress films nominated from 1999, I've only seen two now: American Beauty and this one. While Annette Bening was truly nutty and interesting in the former, which is one of my favorite films, I can't imagine how Swank would lose this award at the time she was given it. She took on a difficult character - difficult not only because Brandon was a transman but also because the emotional context was so powerfully confused and gut-skewering by the time Brandon's physical gender is discovered - and she did it in such a way that disbelief was completely suspended.
Of the supporting actress nominees for 1999, I have seen three: this film, The Sixth Sense, and Being John Malkovich. I have not seen the winner, Girl, Interrupted, so I can't comment as to whether Angelina Jolie deserved to win that particular award. I can surmise that this was also a tough role for Sevigny, playing a woman confused but ultimately accepting of her relationship with someone having a sexual identity crisis, who is left behind when John and Tom commit their heinous actions. She also played Lana extremely convincingly. It's Swank's and Sevigny's performances that define the film and make it as good as it is.
Aside from these two actresses, however, the film isn't perfect. The performances from the rest of the ensemble, most of which are relatively unknown B-actors, are not quite as skillfully rendered, with the exception of Saarsgard, who put a fresh spin of evil on the consequences of old prejudices. Also, apparently some license was taken with the story, which is to be expected in a transition to film but can also serve to undermine the point of making the film to begin with. Apparently, the real Lana sued the filmmakers because of how her character was portrayed in addition to inaccurately showing some of the details and chronology of events, and since she's a sympathetic character (even if she is shown to be young and spun out on drugs), there is a problem with taking license in what is a biopic meant to highlight certain themes, such as bigotry against transgendered individuals. Also, I like the title of the film, but if you're going to use the title of a fairly well known Cure song, why use a remakeof the song in the film? Perhaps, Peirce couldn't get the rights, but the remaking artists could? I feel like both versions should have been included because I was personally expecting the Cure's version. It's a small gripe, but, again, it's the title of the film, and that's a fairly well known song.
It was hard for me to love this picture because of its subject matter and minor flaws as stated above, but it's still a powerful and emotional movie that can inspire true anger and sadness at the state of the world today (or even just ten years ago). Transsexuality is still largely misunderstood if understood at all, but resorting to violence when confronted with what one does not understand is not right or appropriate, which is the underscoring theme of this piece. In ratings land, I think this film deserves an 8 for being very good but with minor flaws. In the test's land, I don't see it passing, simply because I could never watch this film more than once. It's hard to watch, and it should be - but because of that, it doesn't merit repeat viewings and, therefore, a place in my collection. Still, it's a good film, deserving of its Oscar, and recommendable to those interested in Brandon Teena's story.