Oscar’s Love Affair with Biography
On this very auspicious day — today is the 200th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, America’s most charismatic President (tinted and gorgeous above) – it’s a small leap to consider all the times that the Academy Awards have fallen for the charms of the biographical. From the very beginning of the Awards, actors and actresses making like historical figures have won the heart of Oscar, and of course this coming year is no exception. With both Frank Langella — as Richard Nixon — and Sean Penn — as Harvey Milk — contending for the Best Actor Award, the lure of real reel characters is alive and well.
In 1934, biopics littered the Best Picture category. The Barretts of Wimpole 1935′s Mutiny on the Bounty, ripped from the salty pages of genuine maritime history, won for Best Picture, and three actors — Clark Gable, Charles Laughton and Franchot Tone — were all nominated in the acting category. A year later, Paul Muni took home the gold f Apropos of today’s special anniversary, in 1941 Raymond Massey was nominated for the movie version of his spectacular stage success as Abe Lincoln in The ladies came to the forefront the next year, with Greer Garson In 1947 Larry Parks was nominated for his role as consummate 1953 was a banner year for the biography. Jose Ferrer got a nomination for The trend continued. In 1955 James Cagney received an Oscar nom for And of course the nominations and wins have never stopped for actors and actresses playing real people. There are so many that the list could go on forever, but I promise to take a look at the next batch in my post next week here. Here are some photos of the real-life historical characters behind the Oscar nominations and winners: ![]() Disraeli
![]() Elizabeth Barrett Browning ![]() Emile Zola
![]() Father Flanagan
![]() Sgt. Alvin York
![]() Bernadette Soubirous
![]() Toulouse Lautrec 6 Responses Oscar’s Love Affair with Biography
What a thought-provoking blog, Medusa. I suspect that biopics from the studio era, which I find are sort of addictive, even when I know how wildly inaccurate they can be, helped the movie studios feel respectable and audiences to feel uplifted, even if they are amusingly boring at times. On the other hand, they encapsulate such optimism about the future and the real hopes of Americans that their ideals will become reality, that I can’t help but be touched by the best of them. This is especially true when an actor transcends the earthbound script with a moving characterization, as I discovered recently when viewing Edward G. Robinson in Dr. Ehrlich’s Magic Bullet (1940). While the Production Code prevented the filmmakers from explicitly discussing the STDs that Ehrlich treated, along with other illnesses, Eddie’s matter of fact, humane approach to his part was so good that I did get misty eyed near the end of the story–and in a novel twist, Dr. Ehrlich wasn’t even an American! My favorite biopic from this period is probably Roughly Speaking (1945), the story of Louise Randall Pierson, a woman whose life, on the surface, was nothing but a failure, but was in reality the picaresque adventures of a survivor. Great stuff, with very likable performances by Rosalind Russell & Jack Carson, neither of whom allows any false nobility to overwhelm their characterizations. One thing that I’m always struck with older biopics is that in many cases the subjects, though from the 19th century, were not THAT long dead. We are always endlessly fascinated by people who are no longer with us, dead as we will be, yet their legacies live on. It’s good to remember! Even though we gloss things in biopics maybe a different way — and for different reasons — than in earlier decades, those honest portrayals do transcend. I need to watch Dr. Ehrlich’s MB!! Hmmm…Father Flanagan really looks like Karl Malden. And Sgt. York bears a resemblance to Frederic March. Boy, Elizabeth Barrett Browning sure had the bedroom eyes, didn’t she? [...] Morlock, Medusa, did a lovely overview of “Oscar’s Love Affair With Biography,” Part I and Part II. My article is a different spin, but inevitably some ground will be retread. Please go [...] Leave a Reply |
Archives
Featured Sites
Popular terms
3-D
Actors
Actors' Endorsements
Animation
Anthology Films
Awards
Books on Film
British Cinema
Character Actors
Chicago Film History
Cinematography
Classic Films
College Life on Film
Comedy
Comic Book Movies
Czech Film
Dance on Film
Digital Cinema
Directors
Disaster Films
Documentary
Drama
Early Talkies
Editing
Educational Films
European Influence on American Cinema
Exploitation
Family Films
Film Composers
film festivals
Film Noir
Film Scholars
Filmmaking Techniques
Food in Film
Foreign Film
French Film
Gangster films
Genre spoofs
Guest Programmers
HD & Blu-Ray
Holiday Movies
Hollywood lifestyles
Horror
Horror Movies
Icons
independent film
Italian Film
Literary Adaptations
Martial Arts
Melodramas
Method Acting
Mexican Cinema
Monster Movies
Movie Books
Movie locations
Movie Stars
Music in Film
Musicals
Outdoor Cinema
Parenting on film
Polish film industry
political thrillers
Pornography
Pre-Code
Producers
Race in American Film
Remakes
Road Movies
Romance
Romantic Comedies
Russian Film Industry
Scandals
Science Fiction
Screenwriters
Semi-documentaries
Short Films
Silent Film
silent films
Social Problem Film
Sports
Sports on Film
Stereotypes
Straight-to-DVD
Studio Politics
Suspense thriller
Swashbucklers
TCM Classic Film Festival
Television
The British in Hollywood
The Hungarians in Hollywood
The Irish in Hollywood
The Russians in Hollywood
Theaters
Underground Cinema
VOD
War film
Westerns
Women in the Film Industry
Women's Weepies |
Very interesting but not surprising that the Academy loves biopics. And, what a coincidence, I was just reading an overview about biopics an hour before I read your blog. And, it is inspiring me for future topics. Thanks Medusamorlock.