In recent years, my
favourite part of the Oscars has become the special awards voted by the
governors of the Academy “to honor extraordinary
distinction in lifetime achievement, exceptional contributions to the state of
motion picture arts and sciences, or for outstanding service to the Academy.” I tend to think of them as
the old-timer Oscars, although this year’s choices show they’re not always
that. This year I knew what day they were being decided, and amused my wife
while we were on vacation by constantly checking out the Hollywood Reporter website for news; it ended up being announced a
day later than expected, apparently due to difficulties in notifying some of
the recipients, which only prolonged the idiocy.
Angela Lansbury
When it finally came out,
it wasn’t a bad list, even if I wouldn’t personally have chosen any of the
names on there. The traditional old-timer award went to Angela Lansbury, who of
course everyone knows and loves. She’s been unsuccessfully nominated for Oscars
three times, as far back as 1944, so the lifetime achievement case is evident. My
reservation would be that her contribution to cinema is pretty thin: she got
off to a fast start, but soon moved primarily to television and theatre for two
decades, with The Manchurian Candidate
(another of her nominations) as her only movie highpoint. She had another
flourish in the 70s, but only in easygoing or prematurely aged stuff like Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Agatha
Christie mysteries, before returning to TV (eighteen Emmy nominations without a
win, mostly for Murder she Wrote) and
the stage again (five Tony awards). To sum up, the movies probably don’t have that
much to do with why people know and love her.
For that reason, I’d have
been more likely to give the award to more purely cinematic icons. My own
favourite choice would be Catherine Deneuve, although she’s worked almost
exclusively outside Hollywood. Doris Day is often mentioned – she was the top
box-office star for several years, and was nominated once for best actress –
but perhaps her long retirement somehow removes her from consideration, not
that it should. Good arguments, of different kinds, could be made for Albert
Finney (five losing nominations, going back to 1963), Burt Reynolds (not so
much artistic respect, but a healthy rein as a top star, and one losing
nomination, although probably sullied in the Academy’s eyes by his long
stagnation) and dozens of others. George Segal’s body of peak-career work, to
cite a personal favourite, is much stronger than Lansbury’s, but I doubt if
anyone with a vote remembered that.
Steve Martin
The next recipient, Steve
Martin, came as a bit of a surprise, if only because he doesn’t seem like
enough of an old-timer – he’s 68, but it’s all relative. Martin is a comic icon
and a class act, but similar to Lansbury, it’s questionable whether his work in
movies is the largest part of that. Too often, he’s seemed to be coasting
through second-rate material while saving his main creative energies for his
books, screenplays, music projects and even talk show appearances, where he’s
almost always funnier than in most of his pictures (it no doubt helps the case
that he’s hosted the Oscars three times). In terms of close contemporaries,
Bill Murray’s body of film work is much stronger than Martin’s is. Still, it’s
hard to feel too bad about Steve Martin getting an Oscar, if only for his
“anecdote” about how he made Jack Lemmon’s career by persuading Billy Wilder to
cast Some Like it Hot with two men
rather than two women.
By choosing 86-year-old
Piero Tosi, the Academy cleverly ticked off three boxes at once. First, they
awarded another chronic near-misser – Tosi has five unsuccessful nominations.
Second, they showed it’s not just about Hollywood – all five nominations were in
foreign films (Tosi has never worked in an American movie – in fact, he’s
reportedly never been to the US at all!). Third, they shone the rotating
spotlight on one of the technical categories (last year, for instance, they
recognized a stuntman; before that, make-up) – this year, costume design.
Taking all that in the aggregate, it’s hard to see anyone objecting. Now, it’s
also hard to see many people having strong pro-Tosi feelings: the costumes from
Death in Venice are hardly the branch
of world cinema most crying out for recognition. I already mentioned Deneuve,
but how about still-living giants like Jacques Rivette and Alain Resnais? But
given the presumed strategic underpinnings of the choice, I guess this was
never going to be a Tosi vs. Rivette showdown.
Angelina Jolie
Finally, Angelina Jolie
was chosen for the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, given “to an individual in the motion picture industry whose
humanitarian efforts have brought credit to the industry.” The citation refers
to her as, among other things, an “impassioned advocate for humanitarian
causes, traveling widely to promote organizations and social justice efforts
such as the Prevent Sexual Violence Initiative.” Of course, Jolie is
dramatically far from any old-timer status – she’s only 38. It’s remarkable,
given her wild-child not-so-distant past, that she so rapidly remade herself as
to be chosen for what is, in effect, the ultimate mark of class; held up as the
most glittering embodiment of the industry’s grace and benevolence. For a point
of comparison, Jerry Lewis spent decades as a passionate advocate for his
chosen cause, but had to wait until he had one foot in the grave to receive the
Hersholt award, probably because of the crass, if not creepy, aspects of his
particular style of advocacy. The Academy’s vision for the award is best
illustrated by its recent choice of Oprah Winfrey, even though she barely
qualifies as “an individual in the motion picture industry.” It wouldn’t be
such a surprise if, say, Kate Middleton received the award in the near future.
Anyway, judged by that standard, Jolie appears to be a deserving winner, and it
wouldn’t be a great surprise if her partner Brad Pitt (and for that matter,
Clooney and Damon and the whole gang) picked up the same award in coming years.
The
Governors’ awards were presented at a banquet the other week, but sadly, that
event is never televised, and reportedly is all the better for it: we just get
brief extracts during the main ceremony in February, as a respite from the
eye-rolling choices in regular categories and the time-filling contrivances.
Writing on this same topic a couple of years ago, I evoked the joke about how
the title of “World’s oldest person” must be jinxed because the recipients
never seem to live for very long afterwards. Maybe a couple of this year’s
choices indicate a reluctance to get stuck in that morbid territory, which is
fair enough. Still, if you think of “people with Oscars” as the world’s most
exclusive movie club, it’s one in which veterans like Paul Mazursky, David
Lynch, Gena Rowlands, Max von Sydow, Liv Ullmann, Jeanne Moreau, Harvey Keitel,
Nick Nolte, Harry Dean Stanton (yeah!) and our own Donald Sutherland deserve to
spend a few of their golden years, so that’s what I’ll be rooting for. Once
they’re all in the club, I’ll start rooting for Kate Middleton.
No comments:
Post a Comment