If there was ever a film that people scratched their heads in confusion for winning the Oscar for Best Picture, it would be "Green Book". While it has been deemed a solid film, some felt that a more unique film should have won such as "Black Panther" or "BlackKkKlansman". Others even go on to say that the film was actually not deserving its awards and even slam the film for various issues. So, I wanted to take a look at the film to finally answer the titular burning question. It's the fall of 1962 and Tony Lip is in need of a job as the Copacabana is closed for renovations. He gets an offer to be the driver/assistant for Dr. Don Shirley, a gifted pianist who is planning to tour in the Midwest and Deep South of the US. Tony agrees under his negotiated price and embarks on a two-month journey. Although polar opposites at first, the two men start to form a bond that isn't gated by their colour or background. The story is more on the minimal side as it's really the chemistry between Tony and Shirley that grows as the film progresses. The film is not a white-savior story as the haters portray it to be. Yes, Tony is hired to protect Shirley at times, but it's not like Tony is fighting for him in every scene nor is Tony even a knight in shining armour that stands up for all minorities. It's more about the moral support and how the two learn off each other rather than Tony battling for social justice and society to change. The tone is lighthearted and tends to be more comedic than the typical biopic. I managed to get a lot of laughs out of myself and that's mainly due to Tony and the interactions between him and Shirley along with a few ignorant bystanders. While it's funny for the most part, there are some nice dramatic moments, mainly surrounding Shirley's abuse and his speech to Tony about feeling isolated in the world.
Viggo Mortensen is phenomenal as Tony. From the Brooklyn accent, the Italian-American meat-headed attitude, his enormous appetite, his obliviousness, to his caring nature when it comes to his family and Shirley, Tony is just a wonderful personality. The only issue with the character is the one scene in the beginning where he tosses the glasses that two black workers drank from in his house. I wouldn't mind if he acted like this in the rest of the film, but Tony never actually acts anything as close to that after that scene, which is really odd and almost harms the character in a way. He's so great in the film that his acting nomination might not even cover his performance. Mahershala Ali as Shirley is almost on the same level as Mortensen in the acting department. While I felt that Mortensen did a better performance, Ali still does a stand-out job in portraying the socially-tortured and posh pianist. While the film covers racism and prejudice with the mistreatment of Shirley, I find the dynamic between the two leads to be interesting as Tony, aside from that aforementioned scene in the beginning, is not portrayed as a typical racist. He's just ignorant with what he says about Shirley not fitting in with other African-Americans and how he's more black than him in regards to how he lives and the social class he inhabits. The two leads are the soul of the movie. Along with these heavy hitters, there's also a solid group of side characters. Aside from the racist one-scene characters that really come across as just the right amount of despicable, there's Linda Cardellini as Dolores, Tony's wife who receives his letters from the road-trip, Mike Hatton as George, the American bassist in Shirley's trio, and Dimiter D. Marinov as Oleg, the Russian cellist who Tony butts heads with. One thing I like is the extended family of the Vallelongas being present. Although they just act like the typical Italian family that the media has been accustomed to, the fact that certain members of the family are played by real family members of the Vallelongas is really special. The cast is generally solid, but it's really being supported by the two pillars that are Mortensen and Ali, whom the latter earned an Oscar for his performance and piano-playing.
Peter Farrelly is best known for his work on comedies such as "Dumb and Dumber" and "There's Something About Mary" along with his brother, Bobby. While still being a comedy, Peter stretches his filmmaking skills to the biopic genre, which proves to be a great choice on his part. The first thing to note about his work on the film is the impressive reconstruction of 1962 America. The film only contained a budget of $23 million, so a director has got to be careful in spending the money on the setting. Farrelly cleverly uses certain neighbourhoods, scenic routes, costume design, and vehicles to achieve the time period and it's extremely effective in bringing the viewer back to the early 60's without having grand sets or city altering. The lighting is also just wonderful as the film is just bursting with bright, natural colours during the day, and crisp nighttime shadows at night. It can be a very picturesque movie all thanks to Sean Porter's cinematography. Although it's not the most imaginative or ambitious camerawork, it gets the job done well with some nice close-ups of the characters and the landscape shots whenever Tony and Shirley drive or stop during their trip. The music by Kris Bowers is also really good with its use of music and songs being played around the time era, and the original score being more soft and hearty rather than showy. It's a bit familiar and generic at times, but I find that it really works. Overall, Farrelly did a great job in his departure from crude comedies into a more heartfelt and humorous experience.
"Green Book" is a film that rightfully deserves the praise and awards it receives, even if others prefer different films. Outside from an awful moment with Tony that feels very out of character, the film has an interesting story based on a true friendship, strong comedy and drama, acting from Mortensen and Ali, the loveable and believable chemistry of the two leads, the setting of 1962 being expertly recreated by a limited budget, visually pleasing cinematography by Porter, Bower's charming score, and Farrelly's directing being able to reach outside the reputation he's been known for in his work. Sure, it seems safe and far from being a unique film in terms of its themes and approach to writing, but it's still a great movie all around. Did it deserve to win Best Picture? Maybe not. But is it a horrible choice for the accolade? Far from it.
Verdict: 9.5/10. An almost perfect film if one simple scene was cut out of the final product. Aside from that, it's one of my favourite biopics to date.
No comments:
Post a Comment