Dolores Claiborne (1995)

Now here is an example of complete Oscar oversight. This movie has a fantastic acting, an interesting story solid direction, yet  not a single Oscar nomination? I have lost some respect for the academy right at this moment. Kathy Bates stars as Dolores, a woman who is accused of murdering Vera Donovan (Judy Parfitt, who is a powerful presence). Jennifer Jason Leigh as Selena St George (Dolores' estranged daughter) and Christopher Plummer as Det. John Mackey, who is determined to 'catch' Dolores for Vera's 'murder' after he couldn't convict her of killing her husband 18 years earlier.

Now i want to get one thing clear, this is based a Stephen King novel (and i love his novels, in fact he's my favourite writer- oh yeah and i, like, read the book) so i kind of had preconceptions before i went in, i knew what i thought the characters would look like and i knew how it was to end. But the best thing about the film is that it twists our expectations right on their heads, i knew what would happen, but i was biting my nails along with the characters anyway. So therefore: bravo to Taylor Hackford (director), Tony Gilroy (screenplay), the actors and of course Stephen King who though of it in the first place.

I want to focus on each of the four principle actors individually if that's alright with you..
Kathy Bates is awesome. Anyone who has read my review of Misery knows that i think she is one great actress (i like her more than Streep, there i said it!) She brought Dolores (as great character on the page) to a whole new sort of life on the screen, she deserved an Oscar nom AT LEAST for such a great performance that was both sympathetic and tough. So its a hell of a thumbs up from me.

Jennifer Jason Leigh as Selena was a surprise, i could certainly see the character i had envisioned and was very satisfied with her performance, she over did it occasionally but i think she was solid and captured a side of Selena that wasn't shown in the book, i think JJL enhanced her. This is a performance that deserved an Oscar nom for best supporting, she portrayed the tortured and dark humored Selena with great confidence and she was easy to sympathize with.

Judy Parfitt was a scene stealer, a complete and utter scene stealer. She even took some away from Bates! Which as many know, would be pretty hard to do. Parfitt was perfect in every form for this role, she captured the essence of 'bitch' that Vera embodied but still was able to portray a humane side. Best supporting actress right there.

Christopher Plummer is fondly remembered as Master Von Trapp in The Sound Of Music (1965) but let me tell you: He's great. It's not a showy role but he does all he is required to do and is damn convincing. Maybe not best supporting actor worthy but certainly worthy of praise.

Now for the three supporting roles...........
Joe St George (David Strathairn) is really good. He is so convincing that i really hate him, we all cannot wait to see the end of him. Believe me you will feel  feel no sympathy for Joe St George.
John C Reilly gives solid support as Constable Frank Stamshaw and that is really the main cast in a nutshell.
Ellen muth (as young Selena) was good, but i didn't always believe her performance. However i think she did a good job in her emotional scenes (which were what the majority of her scenes were anyway).

I really liked this movie, it's not the best I've ever seen but that doesn't mean anything because i've seen a lot of great movies, BUT this film is still amazing. It has believable characters, a great story and wonderful direction, what's not to like? But if you really hate certain accents then you might find it grating because the accent of Bates, while very good and highly unusual (to me anyway) can be a bit tiresome if you notice that sort of thing.

"Sometimes being a bitch is all a woman has to hold on to" Vera Donovan (Judy Parfitt), Dolores Claiborne

Misery (1990)

This is a surprising and suspenseful adaptation of the Stephen King book of the same name. I had read the book before i saw the movie and i have this to say: it's not as good as the book but the film is nothing less than extraordinary.

Misery is about Paul Sheldon (James Caan) a well known writer who has gotten into a car accident. He is then rescued by his number one fan, Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates). But problems arise when she finds out he has killed off her favourite character (Misery) she becomes obsessed with Misery being brought back to life. And holds Paul hostage until he finishes the book 'Misery's return.'

In my opinion the movie isn't as good as it's hype lead me to believe. But strong performances , great direction by Rob Reiner and brilliant cinematography carry us over the lesser parts of the story. The close ups of faces reminded me of old films, almost reminiscent of Hitchcock's work in his 1940s suspense thrillers. The use of close ups amplified the feeling of isolation that Paul feels and they bring us up close to Annie Wilkes' off-putting cheeriness and then to her complete madness. The movie is even funny in parts which is one advantage it has over the book.

I noticed that the movie developed some secondary characters (namely the Sheriff -Buster played by the late Richard Farnsworth) more than the book. And yet sometimes it is hard to see the motivation of the characters, which is okay with Annie because she is crazy anyway but with Paul and Buster you have to wonder 'why?'
But i don't want to nitpick as i may spoil parts for you. I maybe wrong about it anyway. The ultimate downfall of the film is that there isn't as much detail as what was given in the book, we don't see as much development in Paul and Annie which is something that i didn't really like. But again, i could be wrong.

The movie would be nothing without Kathy Bates though. No-one could play Annie Wilkes except her. Bates brilliantly captured the unhinged mind of Annie, playing her unnervingly joyous moments as though Annie were a child who was just told she could have as much ice cream as she liked. That's almost what Annie Wilkes was- a child. She had the imagination of a child, she threw tempers like a child and when she didn't get her way she wrecked things. A childish personality trapped in the body of a grown woman with a psychotic mind.
 But, perhaps more unsettling about Annie is the simple scene where she watches TV in her bed while eating Cheetos like any normal person.

Misery succeeded in believability, both in performances and in writing. But the occasionally under explained plot points annoyed me because i have a good memory of the book. However these points may have been left vague intentionally which, when i think about it, added some extra thrill to it. Strangely enough, any of the flaws this movie had enhanced the unease it gave, which makes me think that if it had been (excuse the pun) by the book it may not have been as great. However the sub plot with Buster and his investigation took us out of the confinement of the house, lessening the tension. (SPOILER) Busters death (i don't think he was called Buster i the book but that doesn't matter) was better handled though, much more realistic and shocking. It's a less is more sort of thing.

The hobbling scene was more gruesome in the book but in the movie it is dealt with well (albeit it was altered slightly) and what is perhaps more interesting is we don't get to see his feet, it is all left to our imagination, and why? Because imagination is a deadly weapon. If Paul Sheldon had had no imagination he wouldn't be in this nightmare in the first place. If we had no imagination, Misery wouldn't be half as scary.

"Did i do good?" Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates) Misery