Plot intro...s...
The Lion in Winter
England, 1183. Ageing, cantankerous King Henry II (Peter O’Toole) is concerned about which of his three surviving sons, Richard (Anthony Hopkins), Geoffrey (John Castle) or John (Nigel Terry) will succeed him. When his estranged, scheming wife Eleanor of Aquitaine (Katharine Hepburn) arrives for Christmas celebrations, the court machinations really start to escalate.
Funny Girl
New York, early 20th century. Young, clumsy, sharp-talking Fanny Bryce (Barbra Streisand) wants to become a star of the stage. Insecure about her looks and ability, she often turns to comedy as a crutch. Stage impresario Florenz Ziegfeld (Walter Pidgeon) notices her ability and the film charts her rise to fame as well as her tumultuous marriage to gorgeous gambler Nicky Arnstein (Omar Sharif).
A winning tie at the Oscars is a rare and notable thing- it has (so far) only happened six times in its near-100 year history. This is the only time it happened in the Best Actress category, and the second and most recent time in any acting category (there was a tie for Best Actor in the '30s). The most recent was 10 years ago in the Best Sound Editing category between Zero Dark Thirty and Skyfall.
This tie could not have happened to a more dynamic and disparate duo. Hepburn had nearly 40 years of experience under her belt, two Best Actress Oscars (one from the previous year) and a lion-taming personality that kept the men in check (she would repeatedly call out Peter O’Toole and Anthony Hopkins’ late arrivals after a night of drinking during the making of The Lion in Winter). Streisand, meanwhile, was a Hollywood ingenue. Just 26 years old (Hepburn was 61 at this point), she had made a name for herself in music and Broadway, originating the role of Fanny Bryce. But Funny Girl catapulted her to international stardom and now she is recognised, revered, idolised and imitated on the same level as Madonna, Cher, Liza and Dolly. It’s a very satisfying tie between two immensely iconic names.
But, of course, many people (including myself) can’t shake off the age-old question- who should have won? On one level, it’s irrelevant- they both won, they both deserved it, there doesn’t have to be just one winner, deal with it. On another level, it’s fun to analyse. Morally speaking, it should have been Streisand. As previously mentioned, Hepburn already had two Best Actress Oscars and was due to win another in the early '80s. Statistically speaking, however, it should have been Hepburn. Only members of the Academy can vote and membership is achieved through contributions to the movie industry. Funny Girl was only Streisand’s first movie therefore, at first, she didn’t have membership and couldn’t vote for herself. This would have meant that Hepburn would have won by one vote. But Academy president Gregory Peck rather cheekily fast tracked Streisand’s membership and she was able to vote, effectively causing the tie.
But what do I think? (This question is, of course, why you’re reading this blog, surely). For me, Funny Girl is the superior of the two films. The Lion in Winter is great entertainment, it’s a campy, humour-driven depiction of 12th century England, displaying the dangers and intensity of court intrigue but at the same time mocking how farcical the whole process is. It is far more fun than more ponderous '60s period dramas such as A Man For All Seasons, Becket and Anne of the Thousand Days. It is laden with snarks, put-downs, deliberately convoluted plottings and melodrama. I especially enjoyed the way it depicted life in 12th century castles. Courtiers and servants all jostling, arguing and sleeping on top of each other. Dogs wander and defecate freely and everyone is surrounded by the drafts and darkness of these unhomely Norman castles.
However, it’s over-long by about 45 minutes and its energy becomes exhausting. About half an hour in you quickly realise that the complicated machinations of the King and Queen, their sons and the King of France are so changeable, with every character being so disingenuous, that you’re not really supposed to know what’s going on- because even the characters don’t. Exactly which son is on whose side, who is lying to whom and why, all of this becomes irrelevant and you’re meant to enjoy the farcical chaos of the film. But without an involving plot, it all becomes cold, uninvolving and a bit pointless.
It also suffers (or benefits, depending on how you look at it) from the fact that Hepburn out-acts everyone. Yes, even celebrated actors Peter O’Toole, Anthony Hopkins and Timothy Dalton. She runs rings around them. The film is fine when she is off screen, but it comes to life when she is on it. Whether she is insulting the King, breaking down over her traumatic life, or craftily manipulating, well, anyone, Hepburn epitomises one of the most formidable and powerful women in history.
Funny Girl, meanwhile, is a flawless gem for me. As a musical it’s fine. It gave birth to the song Don’t Rain On My Parade but other than that the music is not especially well known or enduring. But Streisand gives one of the funniest, most charming, most poignant performances I’ve ever seen. Every one-liner hits a bullseye, every act of physical comedy shows incredible talent and expertise (scenes such as Fanny’s ruination of a rollerskating musical number and her own rendition of the ballet Swan Lake left us both howling). And above all, Streisand depicts a woman going through a very powerful growth.
We first meet Fanny, all grown up, when she delivers the infamous line to her reflection “Hello, gorgeous”, which is far more wistful and delicate than when people imitate it (Streisand said it to her Oscar statuette when she received it). Then we flashback to her youth. She’s sharp-witted but blunderous, impulsive and erratic (and hilarious). As heartbreak and maturity sets in, Streisand seamlessly adds in more dignity and tragedy to the performance. Later, when Fanny is fending off reporters who are trying to get the goods on her husband’s arrest, her one-liners are no longer coming from a place of joy and rebellion but from desperation and exhaustion.
So if I were a voting member of the Academy, it pains me to say it, but I’d probably have voted for Streisand. Not that I want to let down my girl Katharine but I think Streisand gives a performance that is truly unique and demonstrates a wide range of talents (acting, singing, dancing, comedy). If we ever do a top ten blog post, I have a feeling Streisand will be in there.
Lion in Winter: There is no particular scene or moment here, I just want to highlight Hepburn’s performance. It’s one of the best of her career (and, considering her career, that’s saying something) and it keeps the film ticking along.
Lion in Winter: The length of the film is my biggest gripe. Either they needed a less frantic plot or slice off 45 minutes or so.
It’s the age-old question: Katharine or Barbra? You can hear the pitchforks of the adulating gays being sharpened ready for battle from here.
These are two very different films – one is an overlong but refreshingly gritty historical drama. The other is a bells-and-whistles musical with some amazing standards of modern musical theatre ('Don’t Rain on My Parade'; 'People'; 'My Man'; 'Funny Girl') throughout.
I’m delighted to say that Hepburn and Streisand are both phenomenal in their respective roles, and both fully deserving of this shared trophy. I don’t think I can pick a favourite of the two.
Streisand shines as Fanny Bryce in a performance that meticulously recreates the physicality and voice of the legendary comedienne Fanny Bryce. If you want to see the real Bryce, take a gander the early Best Picture winner The Great Ziegfeld where she stars as herself, bowls into a dressing room scene, wipes the floor comedically with everyone else on screen and then sings a very sad song with remarkable pathos.
Streisand has done her homework. The jerky gait, the sharp as a whistle comebacks – they all ring true in Barbra’s capable hands. She then pairs this character study with a real ability to show what Fanny is feeling, underneath the layers of performative comedy. When Bryce hurts, we see it beneath the rictus grin or playful demeanour. Streisand is also very, very funny. One scene where she’s allowed to watch her lover play poker, on the proviso she doesn’t react – we see her fully reacting with sheer nerves and terror, only to switch into a dead-eyed zombie as soon as her lover turns to look at her. It’s comedy perfection, with every single comedy beat achieved beautifully.
All this isn’t even touching on Streisand’s voice which is one of the greatest in 20th century theatre and film. She delicately sings, she belts, she allows emotion to pour through while astounding with her vocal gymnastics. One always feels that she’s taken this career extremely seriously. Not for Streisand’s vocal chords the casual damage of age – even in her 70s and 80s, her ‘instrument’ is an extraordinary beast (just look at her 2016 Netflix special).
So surely it should have been a clean win for Streisand in a virtuoso performance at the centre of a finely balanced and perfectly delivered movie musical? Not so, for here, with a bang and a crash, comes Hepburn with quite a different proposition: an exceptional performance in a very flawed film.
The Lion in Winter is soapy, melodramatic, about an hour too long and doesn’t really know what it wants to say. King Henry II is off shagging the young woman he also wants his son to marry (??), meanwhile his three sons all struggle for power. There’s a full positioning of Richard the Lionheart as gay, a cast including Anthony Hopkins, Peter O’Toole and Timothy Dalton and a lot of people charging around holding flaming torches or brooding on battlements. I do not consider it a particularly good film.
However it is watchable, for one very simple reason: Katharine Hepburn, in one of the best performances I’ve seen from her. Do you love Diana Rigg as Olenna Tyrell in Game of Thrones? Of course you do. Well, here’s her predecessor.
Hepburn’s Eleanor of Acquitaine is ferocious. She is determined that her favourite son will be king. She wants to be free of the imprisonment her husband keeps her in. She also wants – above all else – to make him hurt. Eleanor in this play veers between jovially making all those around her terrified, and showing her vengeful teeth in full howl, and god does Hepburn lean in. She’s jealous, angry, upset, scared and powerful.
Hepburn manages the whole thing with ease – from the triumphant beginning to the triumphant end. Her husband and sons may be bruised and aching but she sails back to prison laughing. It’s exceptional – to manage the flood of feelings and the way she manipulates everyone around her and make it all seem feasible and gripping.
I think we’re all aware Katharine Hepburn is one of the greats – particularly this late point in her career where it feels like she did a Meryl Streep (post Devil Wears Prada) and re-entered the cinematic arena more able to showcase her own individual skills. This film cements her as one of the most amazing talents working in this era – and she does all that without changing her accent a jot. An American Eleanor of Acquitaine? Sure!
Funny Girl: Barbra’s ability to capture Fanny Bryce is just wonderful – particularly her performance of the standards Bryce herself used to sing. It’s a gorgeous tribute from a-then upcoming legend to a historical one.
The Lion in Winter: There’s so many lines that Hepburn elevates through her performance, but this exchange stuck out, beautifully delivered with so much rage, fear and pain:
Henry II: Is it rich, despising me? Is it rewarding?
Eleanor: No – it’s terrible.
Henry II: Then stop it!
Eleanor: How? It’s what I live for!
Funny Girl: I do miss the comedy in the second half when it becomes more of a romantic drama.
The Lion in Winter: The film itself isn’t very good. It’s a shame as when Hepburn isn’t on, the quality and engagement drops hugely.
Mark
Funny Girl: 10/10
The Lion in Winter: 5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment