Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

No clear Oscar award favourites

mneoOT

hans petrovic

For New Zealanders, picking this year’s Academy Award winners is no easy task for two reasons: Only about 60 per cent of the films nominated have been seen in this country; and none of the films seem sufficiently outstanding to completely sweep the pool of prizes, such as “Out Of Africa” or “The Last Emperor” in past years, or some years when there were two great films, such as “Amadeus” and “The Killing Fields,” competing against each other.

My own choices are limited by the films I have seen, and the knowledge that my personal favourites are not necessarily the same as those picked by members of the American Academy of Motion Picture Arts, who have their own reasons for selecting, or ignoring, certain films.

The main categories are:

Best picture: “The Accidental Tourist,” “Dangerous Liaisons,” “Mississippi Burning,” “Rain Man,” “Working Girl.”

My choice would be “Mississippi Burning,” for its stylish, hard-hitting presentation of racial ten-

sion in the United States in the early 19605. The director, Alan Parker, has a good eye for striking scenes and atmosphere, and elicits fine performances from his entire cast. However, with the strong Right-wing tendency in the U.S. at present, this simply may not be a good time for a film espousing social justice. Of the others, “Working Girl” is fine but probably too slight for the top honour; “The Accidental Tourist,” with William Hurt in another comedy, has received very mixed reviews; and “Dangerous

Liaisons” may be a little too "arty.” This leaves only “Rain Man,” with an outstanding performance by Dustin Hoffman as an autistic savant, to put your money on as best film.

Best director: Charles Crichton ("A Fish Called Wanda”), Barry Levinson (“Rain Man”), Mike Nichols (“Working Girl”), Alan Parker (“Mississippi Burning”), Martin Scorsese (“The Last Temptation of Christ”). If Charles Crichton wins the best director Oscar, it will be as much in recognition of his past great Ealing comedies (“The Lavender Hill Mob”), as for the success of "A Fish Called Wanda.” Mike Nichols won an Academy Award for “The Graduate” (Dustin Hoffman’s first film), but “Working Girl” is not up to the standard of that. For the reasons mentioned above, Alan Parker will probably miss out. Martin Scorsese will probably be given a consolation prize, such as the filming rights of Salman Rushdie’s “The Satanic Verses.” This again leaves only Barry Levinson for “Rain Man.” Best acton Gene Hackman (“Mississippi Burning”), Tom Hanks (“Big”), Dustin Hoffman (“Rain

Man”), Edward James Olmos (“Stand and Deliver”), Max von Sydow (“Pelle the Conqueror”).

Dustin Hoffman, who has been nominated for Oscars before (“Midnight Cowboy,” "Tootsie”), seems certain to get one for his carefully studied performance of the autistic older brother in “Rain Man.” A close runner-up would be Gene Hackman as the down-to-earth F. 8.1. agent in “Mississippi Burning.” Tom Hanks was great as the man-child in “Big,” but surely not yet Oscar material, and Edward James Olmos is an unknown factor. For the record, Max von Sydow won a standing ovation at last year’s Cannes , Film Festival for his role in “Pelle the Conqueror,” which won the Palm d’Or for best film. Best actress: Glenn Close (“Dangerous Liaisons”), Jodie Foster

(“The Accused”), Melanie Griffith (“Working Girl”), Meryl Streep (“Evil Angels”), Sigourney Weaver (“Gorillas in the Mist”). My choice is Sigourney Weaver, who manages to show a wide range of emotions, and an evermadder face, as the protector of the apes in “Gorillas in the Mist.” Meryl Streep* was fine with the Aussie accent and black wig in “Evil Angels,” but Hollywood probably feels she has already won her fair share of Oscars. Malanie Griffith also was great in “Working Girl," but the role is a little light-weight. This leaves Glenn Close (nominated for last year’s “Fatal At-

traction”) and Jodie Foster, in two films that have not been seen here yet. If not Weaver, it will be one of those two.

Best supporting acton Sir Alec Guinness (“Little Dorrit”), Kevin Kline (“A Fish Called Wanda”), Martin Landau (“Tucker: The Man and His Dream”), River Phoenix (“Running on Empty”), Dean Stockwell (“Married to the Mob”). Only one of these films has been seen here yet, and although Kevin Kline certainly gave a hilarious performance as the psychopathic Otto in “A Fish Called Wanda,” it was a role probably still too slight to merit the award. Of the other unknown factors, Sir Alec Guinness stands out as a fellow who deserves another Oscar. His first was for best actor in “Bridge on the River Kwai” (1957), and this one would probably be his last. The BAFTAs gave him a special award last week.

Best supporting actress: Joan Cussack (“Working Girl”), Geena Davis (“The Accidental Tourist”), Frances McDormand (“Mississippi Burning”), Michelle Pfeiffer (“Dangerous Liaisons”), Sigourney

Weaver (“Working Girl”). If she does not get the best-actress award, Sigourney Weaver may be given this one for her role in “Working Girl” as a consolation prize. Of the other performances I have seen, Frances McDormand was particularly touching as the wife of the racist deputy sheriff in “Mississippi Burning,” while Joan Cussack’s was only a small part in “Working Girl.” Geena Davis is an unknown factor in “The Accidential Tourist,” although Michelle Pfeiffer may surprise everyone with a win for her role in “Dangerous Liaisons.”

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19890330.2.95

Bibliographic details

Press, 30 March 1989, Page 16

Word Count
888

No clear Oscar award favourites Press, 30 March 1989, Page 16

No clear Oscar award favourites Press, 30 March 1989, Page 16

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert