OVP: The Conversation (1974)

Film: The Conversation (1974)

Stars: Gene Hackman, John Cazale, Allen Garfield, Cindy Williams, Frederic Forrest, Harrison Ford, Teri Garr

Director: Francis Ford Coppola

Oscar History: 3 nominations (Best Picture, Original Screenplay, Sound)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2026 Saturdays with the Stars series, we are looking at the men & women who created the Boom!-Pow!-Bang! action films that would come to dominate the Blockbuster Era of cinema.  This month, our focus is on Harrison Ford: click here to learn more about Mr. Ford (and why I picked him), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

Harrison Ford's public persona has long been of a man who didn't really want to be a movie star.  A lot of this, I have long-suspected, is at least partially untrue (otherwise why do it, especially when he became bonkers rich & didn't really need to do it anymore...after all, his wife is also a talented actor who now rarely works).  But it is interesting that Ford's fame came relatively late.  The role that made him a movie star was Star Wars, which was released just days before his 35th birthday. For comparison's sake with some of his 1970's peers, Al Pacino at that age had several Oscar nominations and the Godfather franchise, Dustin Hoffman had been Ben Braddock & Ratso Rizzo, and Jack Nicholson & Peter Fonda had both boarded a motorcycle into legend.  Ford spent much of the 1970's balancing his time between small roles in movies and making furniture for people like Joan Didion, Valerie Harper, & George Lucas.  Ford's movie career, though, is really interesting because he appeared in a lot of interesting movies, among them Michelangelo Antonioni's controversial Zabriskie Point, and three Best Picture nominees: American Graffiti, Apocalypse Now, and today's film The Conversation.  For all of the talk about Ford at one point before Han Solo nearly quitting the industry to work as a high-profile carpenter, the more intriguing idea might be what he did in this film: taking on the role of distinctive, very handsome character actor in important auteur-driven features.

(Spoilers Ahead) The Conversation is a movie best headed into with you knowing as little as is humanly possible, so while I provide a spoiler alert on all of my reviews because I generally want to know as little as possible about all movies I'm going to, this one in particular it helps to go in blind so I'll reiterate that now.  The movie follows Harry Caul (Hackman), a man who runs a service that essentially follows people and records them for money (it is not lost on me that The Conversation, which competed with Chinatown for Best Picture in 1974, bears a striking resemblance to the Roman Polanski film as both are about private investigators who uncover more than they expected from a routine case).  Unlike Jake Gittes, Harry Caul does not advertise and is not well-known for his work.  He is, instead, anonymous to the point of unhealthy, keeping everything about him at a distance to the point his girlfriend (Garr) doesn't ever visit his apartment and he doesn't even have his own phone.  This is driven by wanting to avoid retribution, but also the very real threat of violence in his career.  Similar to Chinatown (again) there are allusions to a previous case throughout the film that the audience only understands to be too horrific to mention, and that haunt both detectives to the point they are constantly in fear of repeating it.

The Conversation is considered a landmark film, but because Francis Ford Coppola had it come out the same year The Godfather, Part II (one of the greatest movies ever made), it always feels like it doesn't get its due, and so I wasn't entirely sure what to expect headed into this-would it be a really handsome movie, one that stands up but can't compare with a picture as perfect as Godfather II, or would it be just as exceptional.  Again, similar to Chinatown, it's not clear until the last moments what's happening, and it's also not clear where The Conversation will land in that comparison.  But as the movie concludes, you realize it's also a true masterpiece.  We understand as the film ends that Harry has no idea what he's walked into, and what he's helped cause.  He assumes that the conversation between Frederic Forrest & Cindy Williams at the beginning of the movie is of a couple that might be having an affair, and becomes concerned when he uncovers (while listening to the clips that he initially won't hand over to a man known as "the Director's" assistant without first meeting the Director himself) that a part of the clips that he couldn't initially hear says "he'd kill us if he got the chance."  When he meets the Director (played by an uncredited Robert Duvall) he becomes worried for the young couple's safety as it's clear Cindy Williams is the Director's wife.  But as we learn in the waning moments of the film, he's missed something on the tapes-the emphasis in Forrest's reading of the word "us."

Because as the film ends, it's a case where Frederic Forrest has murdered Robert Duvall's husband with help from his lover, leaving all of the money (and secret organization he has) to Cindy Williams, and leaving them the opportunity to end up together.  The movie's sound work is legendary (and Oscar-nominated) for a reason, as not only is the entire setup with Hackman's Harry filled with us getting whirs & blurs from the recording equipment, but also the film tells in flashback narrative things the audience will have missed.  The film clearly inspired everything from The Usual Suspects to Severance (which borrows heavily from The Conversation's score), and you see why-this is a movie that shows paranoia is justified...and cannot be resolved.  We end the movie with Harry knowing he is being watched, knowing that he can't escape or be safely private...and having to give in to that to not go mad.

Harrison Ford's role is a key component & a crucial part of this story, even if he's only in about three scenes.  He plays the Director's assistant, and plays him with a level of bureaucratic cool that you kind of just assume he's a jackass (also according to most reports, Ford played him as gay which kind of comes across in the way he's super bitchy in a way you don't find a male character in the 1970's, even if there's no hint of this other than him wearing a stylish green suit in one scene that Ford bought with his own money), one who has gotten to this position through being absurdly handsome and honestly it's the sort of character you assume you don't need to pay attention to as the movie progresses.  Because I am writing this about Ford, though, I was paying attention, and it gives you a whole other angle here.  Ford's Martin Stett is the only figure in the film who 100% knows everything that's going on we learn as the film goes by-he works for the Director, but he's also clearly aware of the affair, and given that he's still working for Frederic Forrest & Cindy Williams in the end, it's possible he orchestrated all of this in connection with them.  The paranoia seeps into the actual film...was this all a setup to use Harry, kill the Director, and give the young couple everything they wanted?  Only Ford's Stett, who calls Hackman in the end to tell him he's being watched, knows for certain, and makes him the true antagonist of the picture.  Ford is good in this, and as we'll talk about next week, that layered acting ability didn't totally diminish when his visage started to adorn the postered walls of teenage boys, but as I said above-it's hard not to think of Ford in the same way we think of someone like Robert Duvall or John Cazale, someone who added extra layers to already great movies, as a supporting character actor, while watching The Conversation.

Saturdays with the Stars: Harrison Ford

Each month of 2026 we are looking at an actor or actress who found their fame in action films, fighting bad guys & saving the day.  Last month, we spoke about Bruce Lee, an actor who (like Steve McQueen before him) died relatively young and forged a type of movie star that hadn't really been seen before.  This month, as promised, we are going to start a six-month run of actors who made virtually all of their successful films post-1975.  To start that, we'll begin with the one guy who did have two big movies before 1975 (American Graffiti & The Conversation), but who would become synonymous with two characters that would reshape the cinematic landscape after Jaws, and make him the movie star's movie star, an action hero that the whole family could root for, even if his prickly public demeanor might bristle at such superlatives.  This month's star is Harrison Ford.

Born in Chicago, Ford (like Bruce Lee last month) had a clear path before him if he followed his parents' footsteps into show business.  His mother was a radio actress, and his father a former actor & advertising executive.  He grew up in a mixed faith household, his mother being Jewish while his father was Irish-Catholic, and both were quite progressive, something that Ford would carry for the rest of his life (the rare action film star of the modern era that is very much a Democrat).  Though incredibly handsome, Ford's initial forays into entertainment were middling, getting bit roles in westerns while George Hamilton & James Caan (both roughly the same age as Ford) got top-billing in the same pictures.  So frustrated with acting was he that he had a side gig as a carpenter (one of his clients included writer Joan Didion), and were it not for George Lucas seeing his potential in American Graffiti, he might have made that his life.

But Lucas saw something in Ford that soon the entire world would, as he put him as Han Solo in Star Wars, a movie that would make him a household name, while Lucas (as a producer) a few years later would give Ford the role he might be most synonymous with, Indiana Jones.  These two movies launched highly lucrative franchises for Ford, but they were hardly the only movies that really commanded the public's attention.  Throughout the 1980's and 90's, Ford was one of the most bankable stars in Hollywood, particularly when it comes to launching action franchises.  So famous is Ford that part of me almost didn't want to include him here because I struggled to come up with four major films that I hadn't seen of his (according to Letterboxd, I have seen 28 of his films).  So while we won't review Star Wars and Indiana Jones (as I've seen them all many times), we will talk about them, alongside some of Ford's other biggest pictures of the era, including two forays into more serious acting.

Who is the Next AFI Life Achievement Honoree?

Francis Ford Coppola winning the AFI statue
from past winners George Lucas & Steven Spielberg

With the recent passing of Robert Redford, an interesting trivia topic comes up, one we've talked about on occasion on this blog but not in a few years.  Redford, screen luminary, movie star extraordinaire, film festival pioneer, & Oscar-winning director, has always felt like the oddest person to never win the AFI Life Achievement Awards, one of the highest honors for an actor or director, to the point that I have long-wondered if he just didn't want to accept (it's hard to imagine it was never offered to him).  With his death, though, it invites the question of who will be the next person to win the AFI Life Achievement Award, and I thought it'd be fun to make a Top 10 list of the people I think are likeliest to be next.  Before we get to the list, I came up with a list of criteria that usually hint at who will be the next AFI Life Achievement Award winner.

Age: The average age of a winner is roughly 70, though that's definitely an average and we have seen a pretty wide range of ages winning this (i.e. don't count someone out like Francis Ford Coppola, the  most recent winner, who took it at 86 in April).  19 of the winners have been in their 70's, which is by far the most common age group to have won in, and no victor has been older than 90 (top in age was Lillian Gish) or under 46 (Tom Hanks was the youngest, and that win was criticized enough that I doubt they go for someone that young again).  As a result, bonus points to anyone somewhere between about 65 and 79, though obviously they could and have leaned outside that age range.

Occupation: The award is open to anyone in the film industry, but like most honors, it's more geared toward movie stars.  70% of the winners have been principally known for acting, and all but one of the remaining victors have been film directors (the sole person who was neither was John Williams, and there's really no living behind-the-scenes person who could rival Williams in terms of public perception, so it's going to be a movie star or a director).  The film directors who did make it are extremely well-known, just as famous to the public in recent years as a movie star (think George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, and Steven Spielberg), so don't count on aging directing superstars like Mike Leigh or Ridley Scott, as they likely aren't famous enough.  They're also not American which brings us to...

Geography: This is the American Film Institute Award, and while that title doesn't preclude anyone, it sure helps if you're American.  92% of the winners were Americans upon the time they won (this includes people who enjoyed dual citizenship like Elizabeth Taylor, Nicole Kidman, and Sidney Poitier), which is potentially why foreign-born icons like Charlie Chaplin, Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, & Laurence Olivier never won, and likely why figures such as Anhtony HOpkins or Sophia Loren (who otherwise would have been shoo-ins) haven't taken the honor yet.  The four foreign-born figures who did win (Sean Connery, David Lean, Julie Andrews, and Alfred Hitchcock) don't really have a lot in common, so it's hard to find some commonality to one person getting in if they aren't American other than a lot of fame.

Oscar History: If you're going to be taking the AFI title, it helps (a lot) if you're an Oscar winner.  78% of all of the honorees were at the time of their victory winners of at least one competitive Academy Award, and another ten were nominees (two of which, Henry Fonda & Martin Scorsese, would win competitive Oscars post their AFI ceremony).  The only person to have never been nominated for an Oscar and still win the AFI is Steve Martin, someone you'd be hard-pressed to find an obvious corollary to today.  This pattern has gotten even stronger in recent years-85% of the past twenty recipients were Oscar winners (excluding Martin, George Lucas, & Harrison Ford).  So it's likely that the next person to take the AFI will have won a competitive Oscar.

Gender: The ceremony seems to be trying to correct this in recent years, but it's still very much a boy's club at the AFI.  78% of all winners have been men, and the ceremony has never honored a woman who was solely or principally known as a behind-the-scenes figure (women like Shirley MacLaine, Barbra Streisand, and Diane Keaton have all directed films and won the AFI, but all three made their names in movies as actors).   I also wouldn't read a lot into the last winner being male...it doesn't feel like a tradeoff situation as a rule (i.e. the next could also be a man).

DeMille/Kennedy: There are at least two other awards (other than Oscar) that are a strong indicator of whether or not someone will take the AFI trophy-the Cecil B. DeMille Award and the Kennedy Center Honor.  58% of all winners of the AFI were also DeMille winners and of those who were alive to receive it (the Kennedy Center Honors started last of the three honors, in 1978, so John Ford was dead by the time they rolled around despite having already won the AFI), 70% of the AFI Award victors also won the Kennedy Center Honor.  24 people have pulled off all three.  While the AFI has occasionally led the field (ie someone won it there before they picked up other honors, like Steven Spielberg or Elizabeth Taylor), it's a pretty strong indication if you're primarily known for film and you win one of these trophies that you're going to win one (or both) of the others.  One could make a sincere argument that the list of people who have taken the DeMille or Kennedy Center Honor without also having an AFI is particularly short right now, so AFI may be forced to add a new name to the roster next year.  Of the 16 living DeMille and/or Kennedy Center victors (without an AFI) who have meaningful cinematic contributions, almost all of them have something stopping them from taking this leg of the Cinematic Life Achievement Triple Crown (I started calling it that years ago...and it has not caught on).  There is one non-American (Sophia Loren) and one American more commonly known for citizenship in a different country (Anthony Hopkins).  There are figures with major contributions to cinema but who are more known for TV (Dick van Dyke, Lily Tomlin, Rita Moreno, Billy Crystal) and music (Cher, Bette Midler), and then there are a few figures due to health or antipathy to such things might not show up at all (Joanne Woodward, Woody Allen).  There's also the new stain on the Kennedy Center Honors due to the heavy involvement of President Trump that might make it hard for Sylvester Stallone to get this award given he won with that asterisk next to his name.  That actually only leaves five figures who could be considered real contenders that AFI hasn't picked yet, four of which I'll list in my Top 10, and the fifth of which I'll cite in the Honorable Mentions.

Fame: This is a hard one to quantify, but all of the winners have to be famous, and tend to still be extremely well-known when they won.  This has become even more pertinent in recent years.  Arguably the last time someone who wouldn't have been a household name still the year they won was Robert Wise in 1998, and in the past few years we've seen actors who are very active in modern filmmaking like Diane Keaton, George Clooney, and Denzel Washington take the trophy, so I suspect that the winner next year would either be still revered or quite frankly be someone whom you'd expect to be getting top billing on your local marquee still.  This means that names like Ellen Burstyn, Sissy Spacek, Julie Christie, Faye Dunaway, Mia Farrow, or Goldie Hawn, names that probably have earned this kind of distinction but aren't really household in the same way as Clooney, Streep, & Washington, are going to struggle to get a citation without some sort of revival.  This ceremony is funded by advertising revenue, and as a result they need a bigger name for ratings.

With all of that said, here are my guesses as to who the Top 10 contenders for the trophy are.  Sound off in the comments if you have predictions as well!

Honorable Mentions: Lots of options here, but seven names that come to mind are Anthony Hopkins, Robert Downey, Jr., James Cameron, Ron Howard, Eddie Murphy, Ralph Fiennes, & Jessica Lange.  All of them have debits, ranging from a curmudgeonly persona off-screen that might preclude such an honor to not having a strong enough filmography to not being American, but these are names I wouldn't be shocked get into contention.  I will note that in the past when I've done this prediction list I missed future winners because I didn't know they'd be having a moment (i.e. I had Coppola as someone whose time had likely passed until Metropolis came out and he seemed to make a point of wanting to get these honors on his resumé before he died or to remind people that movie won't be his epitaph), so some of these might be contenders, but I don't see them being immediate threats.

10. Tim Burton

It feels weird not to list a single person primarily known as a director on this list, even though directors rarely win this award, and the concept of the celebrity-director is increasingly passé, but more than Cameron, Howard, or even Quentin Tarantino, it feels like Tim Burton is the kind of guy that gets in with AFI.  Inevitably, he's going to get an Oscar moment at some point, and that will invite conversations about his singular filmography.  In many ways Burton's personality feels at-home here.  He's a California-born director, and similar to someone like Mel Brooks (a past winner) he has made or advanced the careers of a lot of stars (such as Johnny Depp & Winona Ryder) who haven't really had a moment with the AFI, and this would be a way of acknowledging that very successful segment in Hollywood.  Call it a hunch that he could win this.

9. Sally Field

A more conventional choice would be Sally Field, a recent Kennedy Center Honoree, and an actress who has been doing a lot of the "I'm a legend" rounds in recent years (not just taking the Kennedy Center Honor, but also the National Medal of Arts and the SAG Life Achievement Award).  Field is also well-regarded (it helps if you're popular), and has had a diverse career as a two-time Academy Award winner who has gone back-and-forth between populist hits and art-fare.  Also, and most critically, she is one of the rare stars of the 1970's & 80's who still works regularly in major projects and is known to a new generation of moviegoers in a way that, say, Faye Dunaway would not be that hasn't won this yet.  In some ways Jessica Lange makes more sense (she also has had television success in recent years), but for some reason she doesn't seem to be getting these types of awards (and with Trump in office, it's doubtful she'll get help from the Kennedy Center), so I will continue to bet on Field.

8. Viola Davis

You could make a sincere argument that Davis shouldn't be on this list.  In terms of leading work in films, she has  the most recent and arguably most scant filmography of these artists.  But there's a sense that Davis, one of the great talents of her generation, was cheated out of a longer career due to Hollywood's inability to give leading roles to Black women, and one wonders if that contributed in part to her recent Cecil B. DeMille Award (don't look at me like that-name another actor with as short of a filmography as Davis has had as a leading star that has won that award).  Only three Black actors have ever won the AFI Life Achievement Award (Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, & Denzel Washington), and none of them have been a woman.  I think Davis makes sense here, particularly with the recent passing of Cicely Tyson, and it's more a question of if, not when, she'll win.  But she's rated lower as I think they make her wait just a few films more before they give her this statue (but it's coming).

7. Brad Pitt

Brad Pitt's wildly successful F1 (can you believe it made over $600 million?!?) earlier this year confirmed what we all know about him-he's one of the last movie stars of his era, someone who can still actually open a movie without creative IP attached (albeit he had the world's largest sport attached, but that's another story).  Pitt's problem is going to be less about his filmography (given his stature in the industry and his long career, it's hard to begrudge him this statue) and more so that Pitt is a bit of an online pariah right now.  That doesn't matter as much in Hollywood (see how he starred in a massive hit movie earlier this year), but advertisers don't want to touch him in an era of a boycott-heavy electorate, and the thorny allegations in his divorce with Angelina Jolie make me think that they might wait a few years to see if things cool down with him (this could also be the case with Johnny Depp & Ben Affleck, who I didn't list on this countdown, but obviously feel in the wheelhouse of someone who would win this).

6. Matt Damon

Pitt's Ocean's Eleven costar Matt Damon feels far more likely to win.  One wonders if they'd consider doing a pair between Damon and his childhood best friend Ben Affleck, but of the two I think that Damon, with his squeaky clean off-screen persona would be an easier sell.  Damon is actually old enough to win one of these statues now (for those wondering if I'm crazy for putting him on here), just a few years north of potential future contenders like Reese Witherspoon and Leonardo DiCaprio, and I think is a serious threat to take this, though I partially believe that he'll get the DeMille first, mostly because they tend to like younger and they love getting movie stars to show up.

5. Jeff Bridges

Robert Redford for many years was my go to answer for "who is the weirdest living person without an AFI Life Achievement Award."  With his death, that title passes to Jeff Bridges.  Bridges is such an odd exclusion from this list I constantly have to remind myself he's never won-he's a movie star from way back (and further back still if you remember he's a NepoBaby), an Oscar winner, and has a fame that means different things depending on how old you are, which is also the sign of someone with a robust filmography.  Bridges is certainly the type of person who should have an AFI Life Achievement Award (it will be a miss, similar to Redford, if he never wins), and if I was asked to unilaterally give this out to someone next year, he'd be my choice.  But his inability to win even when he could've gotten it 10-15 years ago makes me wonder if he's demurred, or isn't really on their radar.

4. Samuel L. Jackson

Bizarrely, Samuel L. Jackson has never won any of the three major Triple Crown Awards, though he did recently get an Honorary Oscar.  Jackson is a ubiquitous movie star, perhaps not to his credit (it's worth noting that Michael Caine never won any of these three prizes either, mostly because he had so much crap to go with the jewels in his filmography), but Jackson is such a big star it feels wrong that he doesn't win this award.  In many ways, between his forays into countless major franchises (Star Wars, MCU, Jurassic Park, XXX) to his position as a muse for both Quentin Tarantino and Spike Lee he is the prototype for how to navigate the IP era, so you have to believe they know they should pick him, particularly given the embarrassingly low number of Black actors who have won this prize.

3. Tom Cruise

The Top 3 are not a question of if, but when, for the victory.  All three are 1990's movie stars who have stayed relevant into the 2020's (sometimes for television, sometimes in the case of #3 for mining his filmography for legacy sequels), but they are all too famous to never win this award.  Cruise is third both because he is about to win an Honorary Oscar (and in my opinion, likely to win a competitive one next year too, which makes the Honorary statue feel like a waste when it could've gone to, say, Catherine Deneuve who needs it more), but Cruise has graduated beyond the tabloid toxicity that once nearly wrecked his career (i.e. another reason they'll likely wait on Brad Pitt), and has become the savior of the movie theater industry.  The ageless screen star probably doesn't like that he's now at the age where you win lifetime achievement awards, but it'd be nice if he won it while some of his earliest costars (like Dustin Hoffman & Jack Nicholson) are still around to give it to him.

2. Julia Roberts

Another ageless movie star that feels like she's too young to win this, but has entered that era is Julia Roberts (our Star of the Month last month!).  There's more urgency around Roberts to win, in part because she's clearly the Queen of the 1990's movie stars (you could see a world where, say, Sandra Bullock or Demi Moore also win this statue at some point, but not before Julia), and also because she seems to be itching to do this again.  In recent years she's been working more regularly, appearing in films that might gain a reputation (even if it's a bad one) like Luca Guadagnino's latest, and clearly wants to cement her place as one of the last great movie stars before IP took over Tinseltown.  Roberts, in a similar fashion to Cruise, also wants to get this statue while all of the actors whom she starred opposite early in her career are still with us (as sad as it may seem Richard Gere is 76, Dustin Hoffman in 88, & it's unlikely most of her older costars in Steel Magnolias stay around much longer)...this would be the time to give it to her.

1. Jodie Foster

But I'm going to put someone who has the DeMille (unlike Julia & Tom) at #1.  Jodie Foster doesn't have as plentiful of a filmography as Roberts & Cruise (and isn't famous in the same way anymore), but her two Oscars and recent successful run on True Detective add a timelessness to her star persona that you can't really rust.  I also think it's noteworthy that she's a feminist icon, and a film director (and would be the first openly queer person to win the award).  As I stated above, no woman has ever won this award primarily for being known for directing, but several have histories with directing, and Foster would add to that list.  She's also 62, so just a few years shy of the prime age that wins this award, and giving it to her early is hardly a moment that will age poorly (no one really focuses on winning too early if it was someone who was always destined to win).  If I had to bet on who wins next, I'd put my money on her.

1981 Oscar Viewing Project

We are officially announcing our 30th completed Oscar Viewing Project.  As of yesterday, I have officially seen all of the narrative, feature-length nominees from the ceremony, and as we do here, we'll be ranking all of the major categories.  You'll note with this list that part of the reason that I got some of these completed was that 1981 is one of the most repetitive Oscars ever-all five of the Best Picture nominees got Best Director nominations, and they produced half of the acting nominations (in the pre-2009 era, this was a pretty high metric).  In terms of the box office, though, this is who led the field:

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. On Golden Pond

3. Superman II

4. Arthur

5. Stripes

6. The Cannonball Run

7. Chariots of Fire

8. For Your Eyes Only

9. The Four Seasons

10. Time Bandits

Of these, I have seen only five of the top box office draws of the year.  The 1980's, especially the early 1980's, were still in the era where box office and Oscar's tastes were pretty much synonymous, so this is a relatively light list for Oscar nominees (as the only five films that I've seen are the five that are listed below).  I will for sure see Superman II & The Four Seasons before I complete the year for the My Ballot (where I pick the nominees...hopefully should complete that here by early June, though we'll do the 1957 My Ballot next)...the remainder are more of a question mark (make your cases for them in the comments).  If you're new here, also, look at the bottom of the page for links to all of our past 29 OVP's.

With that said, it's time to start impressing Jodie Foster, firing up your IBM computer, & wanting your MTV.  And of course, let's remember the movies...

(Note: Raiders of the Lost Ark received a Best Sound Editing Oscar at the ceremony as a special prize.  Given its nominations in other categories, I obviously saw this film, but wanted to make sure to note it-when we get to the My Ballot in the next two months for 1981, I will have this be a competitive race)

Note from John: When I did this series during the time when I wrote individual articles, and had this blog be a daily part of my life, I made a point of highlighting each nominee in my many write-ups.  While I will be writing these every time I complete a year (we'll have at least one OVP and/or My Ballot every month going forward), I can't make that time commitment, either in terms of number of articles or in terms of giving each nominee their due with a mention.  I promise, though, that I have given each nominee their due under the confines of the specific category while making my rankings (and of course I've seen every single nominated picture), including giving higher rankings to movies I didn't like if the craft was better than ones I did like (Oscar should consider that!).  Hopefully you enjoy the trimmed-down, but still devoted to the original concept version of the OVP we'll have going forward!

Picture

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. On Golden Pond

4. Chariots of Fire

5. Atlantic City

The Lowdown: This is, all things considered, one of the best Best Picture lineups that Oscar assembled during the 1980's, an era of moviemaking I generally find a bit underwhelming.  None of these movies is bad, but the two truly great ones of the lineup are Raiders and Reds, both from directors at the peak of their creative powers.  I'm going to favor Spielberg's Raiders.  It's less in Oscar's wheelhouse (but these are my choices for a reason), but I think that it is a tighter film, and defines the action-adventure genre.  Reds will be showing up again though (and as you'll see in the coming categories, is a movie I loved).

Director

1. Steven Spielberg (Raiders of the Lost Ark)

2. Warren Beatty (Reds)

3. Mark Rydell (On Golden Pond)

4. Hugh Hudson (Chariots of Fire)

5. Louis Malle (Atlantic City

The Lowdown: We're also going to give Spielberg his second OVP statue for Best Director, once again for a movie he didn't actually win for (can't stress enough how the links to the years we've covered are at the bottom of this page).  It's such a perfectly shot movie, giving us Harrison Ford's iconic archaeologist and a series of flawless adventure sequences.  Beatty's breathtaking too, though, particularly that effortlessly romantic scene at the train station.

Actor

1. Warren Beatty (Reds)

2. Henry Fonda (On Golden Pond)

3. Paul Newman (Absence of Malice)

4. Burt Lancaster (Atlantic City)

5. Dudley Moore (Arthur)

The Lowdown: Don't feel too bad for Beatty, though, as he's going to get a Best Actor statue for our OVP next.  The big fight here for me is between Beatty, whose John Reed is such an impassioned, imperfect example of a revolutionary (pun intended) man, bitter about his inability to be everything he dreamed (but still accomplishing true greatness).  Fonda is excellent in On Golden Pond, wrapping up a career that surely should've gotten an Oscar by then, but as a reminder we pick these winners in a vacuum, so it's possible that we're turning down Fonda's only shot at an OVP win from me, but objectively Beatty is stronger.

Actress

1. Diane Keaton (Reds)

2. Meryl Streep (The French Lieutenant's Woman)

3. Katharine Hepburn (On Golden Pond)

4. Marsha Mason (Only When I Laugh)

5. Susan Sarandon (Atlantic City)

The Lowdown: With the exception of Sarandon (who I think doesn't get Malle's tricky material) this is an underrated "all-timer" lineup, including the best thing I've seen (to date) from Marsha Mason.  For the win, though, it's between Streep and Keaton.  Streep's French Lieutenant's Woman has its detractors (including Streep herself), but I love what she does here, defining two women in similar fashions, both controlled by the same man.  There was a time I considered giving this to Streep (whom, it should be noted, has yet to win one of our OVP's or My Ballot's), but Keaton's sensational here, and giving the best dramatic performance of her career (don't you wish she'd do this instead of yet another spin on Annie Hall just once more?).

Supporting Actor

1. Jack Nicholson (Reds)

2. John Gielgud (Arthur)

3. Howard Rollins, Jr. (Ragtime)

4. Ian Holm (Chariots of Fire)

5. James Coco (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: A lot of first-time OVP rendezvous this year with actors like Hepburn, Mason, Sarandon, Lancaster, & Newman, but it's hard not to think getting to talk about Jack for the first time is the biggest highlight of the bunch.  One of my all-time favorite actors, and you see why here.  His Eugene O'Neill is ruthless, him taking on the role of the "scorned lover" so deliciously ("you're a cheap gutter whore from Portland" being one of the most quotable lines he nails here).  Gielgud is delightful in Arthur and Rollins is the best part of Ragtime, but I am going to give this to Jack (who is definitely in the running to get the most total OVP and My Ballot acting statues before this is over).

Supporting Actress

1. Maureen Stapleton (Reds)

2. Melinda Dillon (Absence of Malice)

3. Elizabeth McGovern (Ragtime)

4. Jane Fonda (On Golden Pond)

5. Joan Hackett (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: Yes, you're reading that right.  For the first (and perhaps only?) time, we are giving all four of the OVP acting statues to the same film, a movie that wasn't able to win Best Picture.  Unlike the other three acting categories, though, Stapleton doesn't have a lot of nearby options that would be respectable choices to beat her.  She nails this part, giving her Emma Goldman an electricity that makes you understand her importance in every scene she's in.  Dillon, McGovern, & Fonda all have their moments, and are roughly on-par (without Stapleton this would've been a more competitive field), but Stapleton being there makes it easy.

Adapted Screenplay

1. The French Lieutenant's Woman

2. On Golden Pond

3. Prince of the City

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: A particularly weak lineup that isn't entirely Oscar's fault (virtually all of the best films of 1981 were original ideas, unimaginable today), for me it's a contest between the first two, as I thought the screenplays on the remaining pictures were a yawn.  I'm going to give it to The French Lieutenant's Woman, though.  While On Golden Pond had far more quotable lines ("you're my knight in shining armor..." being a classic speech), I think that it doesn't tread deeply enough in the relationship between real-life father-and-daughter Hank & Jane, and I was totally sold on the gimmick of The French Lieutenant's Woman being both a story within a story, something that wasn't in the John Fowles' novel.

Original Screenplay

1. Reds

2. Atlantic City

3. Chariots of Fire

4. Arthur

5. Absence of Malice

The Lowdown: On the flip side, while this isn't that great of a lineup, it at least has one terrific script in the bunch.  Reds is phenomenal, and rises above the cost of an epic (i.e. that the screenplay is regularly the weakest part of it) by giving us a genuine, enthralling love story between two people who can't seem to live without each other (even if they might have to).  Atlantic City has a lovely gimmick, and Chariots of Fire is moving (and Arthur, specifically the parts with Gielgud, can be funny), but none of them can compete with Reds, the one triumph in this field (that should've included Raiders of the Lost Ark).

Foreign Language Film

1. Mephisto (Hungary)

2. Muddy River (Japan)

3. The Boat is Full (Switzerland)

4. Man of Iron (Poland)

5. Three Brothers (Italy)

The Lowdown: One of those years where the Foreign Language Film (now the International Feature Film) category features movies that were only cited for this prize, and nowhere else, so this is your only chance to speak about any of the contenders.  The best of this bunch are Mephisto, a spin on the Faust concept (literally...the main character is an actor best known for playing the devil), and Muddy River, a moving look at friendship across income levels through the eyes of a child.  I'm going with Mephisto, because I think it's grander and has a better central performance from Klaus Marie Brandeur (it also won the Oscar), but Muddy River is not far off and really worth your time if you've never heard of it.

Original Score

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Chariots of Fire

3. On Golden Pond

4. Ragtime

5. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: Honestly, in a normal year this would be a slam dunk for something like On Golden Pond, a superb score that can barely muster a bronze here.  Raiders and Chariots are two of the most iconic film scores for a reason, and it's hard to argue with either of them (fun fact: I played "Hymne" by Vangelis for a piano recital when I was in middle school and still have the sheet music for it, even though I don't even have a piano).  I'm going to go with Raiders because I have more of an emotional connection to it, and because I think it's most consistent throughout the actual movie, but this is a coin toss race.

Original Song

1. "Endless Love" (Endless Love)

2. "For Your Eyes Only" (For Your Eyes Only)

3. "Arthur's Theme" (Arthur)

4. "The First Time It Happens" (The Great Muppet Caper)

5. "One More Hour" (Ragtime)

The Lowdown: If you look just at the movie titles here, I'm definitely not picking the best films of the bunch.  Bette Midler quite famously did a send-up of how bad the movies were in this lineup when she presented it (check it out if you haven't seen it...it was the funniest moment in an otherwise pretty tepid ceremony, comically speaking), and both of the Top 2 got the worst of it.  But I don't really connect with Christopher Cross, and I think "Endless Love" is both a moving little ballad, and one that fits the saccharine movie it's housing, just a bit better than the also good "For Your Eyes Only."  Had "Hey a Movie" gotten in from The Great Muppet Caper, we'd be having a reranking here as I always love the Muppets onscreen.

Sound

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. Pennies from Heaven

4. Outland

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: We are once again pitting Raiders vs. Reds, and once again Raiders is coming out on top.  It's just hard to argue with the play on the Saturday morning adventure serial, but now in the mold of a giant movie blockbuster.  Reds is subtler with its sound work, and would make a fine win as well...particularly the crowd scenes feel authentic, melded with the music, but still have a grand aura.  Pennies from Heaven, the token musical that always shows up for Sound...is fine.

Art Direction

1. Heaven's Gate

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Reds

4. The French Lieutenant's Woman

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: The best lineup of the bunch, there is not a single bad nominee in this group, and any of them would work as a winner.  I loved the shifts in time being played with in French Lieutenant's Woman, the over-abundance of sets in Ragtime (you understand why this became a musical), the book-laden interiors of Reds, and the continental jumping of Raiders.  But if I have to pick a winner, it needs to be Heaven's Gate, a really grand movie that was (at the time) one of the most famous flops ever made, but it looks spectacular, and I love the shifting stages & devotion to the western on display.

Cinematography

1. Reds

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Excalibur

4. On Golden Pond

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: For the first (and only) time in this article, you will see me ever so slightly favor Reds over Raiders.  Despite loving them both, this is the only Oscar contest that I feel Beatty's film exceeds.  I love the camerawork in Raiders (that rolling boulder...come on now, it's iconic for a reason), but I can't help but feel that the use of temperature (you can practically feel the warmth & cold emanating off of the screen in Reds), plus the famous train scene, are impossible to deny.  Kudos also to Excalibur, which has the feel of a shoe-string budget but still gives us glorious looks at Nicol Williamson & Helen Mirren in their entrancing witchiness.

Costume

1. Reds

2. The French Lieutenant's Woman

3. Ragtime

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Chariots of Fire

The Lowdown: With Indy's fedora left off the dais, it's a contest between the period work of Reds and the period work of The French Lieutenant's Woman (don't look at me like that-I have at least one contemporary film on the list currently for the My Ballot...it's Oscar that never goes there).  Of the two, I go with Reds because I think it is more consistent overall.  There's more care put into French Lieutenant's when it comes to the period stuff than the modern scenes, and Ragtime behind it doesn't break the mold in the way that the of-the-people looks in Reds achieve.

Film Editing

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. The French Lieutenant's Woman

4. Chariots of Fire

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: Again, another Raiders & Reds contest (our final one), with everyone else just getting the scraps.  I think the editing exhibits why these two tower above.  Raiders is fast-paced, effortlessly so in a way that makes every scene feel timeless (which, after nearly 45 years of existence, it really is), while Reds gets a slow-burn, us investing continually as the movie finds its own romance.  The timelessness wins it for Raiders, though (kudos also to French Lieuentant's for working so well with the time jumps).

Makeup

1. An American Werewolf in London

2. Heartbeeps

The Lowdown: We have a pair of two-wide races to complete this year's Oscar's, starting with Makeup (for the record, both of these categories I'll go five-wide when I pick my personal choices).  This was the first year of the Best Makeup category, and they did something that would become commonplace at the Oscars: nominating Rick Baker (the maestro behind An American in Werewolf) and giving the title of "Oscar-nominated" to a truly heinous movie.  There are few films as bad as Heartbeeps, but what's worse is the makeup in it is bizarrely lazy, particularly when you had much better options nominated in 1981 (it's just Bernadette Peters & Andy Kaufman covered in a plastic sheen).  Conversely, An American Werewolf is one of the best achievements of Rick Baker's career, so an easy call for him to take this.

Visual Effects

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: A second category that is only two-wide, we have two films competing against each other in another lopsided victory where I definitely go with Oscar's choice.  At this point, anything George Lucas or Steven Spielberg were creating was foundational to the future of blockbuster cinema, and Raiders is a genius use of practical and special effects, particularly the face-melting scene when they open the Ark.  Dragonslayer, though, unlike Heartbeeps is a genuinely quality product and earned this spot (and will likely make my My Ballot as well for its great use of the imposing dragon in the picture).

Past Oscar Viewing Projects: 1931-32, 1948, 1957, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

OVP: Sound Editing (1999)

OVP: Best Sound Editing (1999)

The Nominees Were...

Ren Klyce & Richard Hymns, Fight Club

Dane A. Davis, The Matrix

Bet Burt & Tom Bellfort, Star Wars: Episode 1: The Phantom Menace

My Thoughts: With the My Ballot awards (where I pick my own nominations at the end of each season of the OVP), I try not to totally telegraph whom I'm going to honor in each category, so there's at least some suspense.  But given that I always do a five-wide field (and thus there's two names you haven't heard yet), I will admit-Oscar's is my exact lineup if I have three films submitted.  We've done this before...a couple of the Animated Feature races for sure...I want to say I did it in one five-wide race but can't think of it off-hand...but it's rare.  So know going in that (unless I see something in the next two weeks before I finalize the My Ballot, which given the films I have left feels unlikely as none are particularly sound effects-driven), you're looking at your medalists.

But what order are the medalists?  That's the real question.  I mean, you've first off got to hand to it to The Matrix.  The film lives and dies off of its sound effects.  The movie is not only a series of data screens and action-sequences, but it's also taking place largely underground, so the gears and chairs of this sewer-like set design work in the sound editors' favor.  We also see a lot of really well-done scenes in the rain, which normally movies will struggle with, trying to find a way to get the pounding of the water against pavement behind dialogue and other action, but in this case it's all precise-you hear everything without feeling like you're having to forget other things.  Really strong stuff.

The Phantom Menace has less on-screen realness than The Matrix, but it also lives-and-dies off of its sound effects.  Think of a scene like when they "activate the droids."  We get a series of preparations for battle, with robots clinking & clanking and shields going up.  These are all unique, specific sounds.  Star Wars does this better than virtually any other franchise (a lightsaber being turned on is a noise you could identify if you were in a coma), and that shows in what they're doing in Phantom Menace, adding a new aural vocabulary to the pictures as it comes for a new generation.

Fight Club is not reinventing the wheel or adding a new franchise of noises to moviegoers' memories, but it is really upping the ante of noise, particularly in its fight sequences.  David Fincher does a great job with making his movies sound amazing, and that's true here.  Think of the scene where Edward Norton is shooting Brad Pitt, and the bullet not only goes through the back of the van, but also through the front.  The crackling, moving sound gives you a sense of the power of the bullet (something you don't get in a lot of movies), and also the seriousness of this escalation in the picture.  It's really something the way the editors stay on that level the whole picture.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Golden Reel Awards split their categories between live-action & animated.  Animated gave their trophy to The Iron Giant (all of those robot noises, makes complete sense) atop Perfect Blue, Pokemon: The First Movie, Princess Mononoke, South Park: Bigger, Longer, & Uncut, Tarzan, The King and I, and Toy Story 2, while The Matrix won Live-Action atop End of Days, Fight Club, Inspector Gadget, Sleepy Hollow, Star Wars: The Phantom Menace, The Green Mile, The Mummy, & Three Kings.  1999 is another year with a bake-off, so we know that the fourth place was either Any Given Sunday, The Green Mile, The Mummy, or Three Kings, and given both made it for Mixing, I would assume the contest is between The Green Mile or The Mummy...my money is on The Mummy, though I picked that for fourth in VFX so I might be overestimating its Oscar strength at this point.

Films I Would Have Nominated: In a three-wide field, this is exactly what I pick.  You'll have to wait for the My Ballot before I give you my 4th & 5th.

Oscar’s Choice: The Matrix continued to pound George Lucas into the ground on this one.

My Choice: And in this case, George had it coming.  Both films are really incredible, but the detailing in The Matrix and the way it creates its own language of noise is something else.  I'm not going to deny it the top spot, giving Phantom Menace the silver and Fight Club the bronze.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Is everyone on Team Matrix with this one, or does someone want to go with the Naboo (or Tyler Durden)?  Is this maybe the best Sound Editing lineup the Oscars ever assembled?  And was it The Green Mile or The Mummy in fourth place?  Share your thoughts below in the comments!

Also in 1999: Original Score, Original Song, Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume, Film Editing, Visual Effects, Makeup, Previously, in 1999

Past Best Sound Editing Contests: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019

OVP: Visual Effects (1999)

OVP: Best Visual Effects (1999)

The Nominees Were...

John Gaeta, Janek Sirrs, Steve Courtley, & Jon Thum, The Matrix

John Knoll, Dennis Muren, Scott Squires, & Rob Coleman, Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace

John Dykstra, Jerome Chen, Henry F. Anderson III, & Eric Allard, Stuart Little

My Thoughts: In 1999, the Visual Effects category was still in its "influx" years where it generally got 3 nominations, and that was the case in 1999.  The category, for me, features not just one of the tougher competitions of 1999, but in the history of the category.  Two of these films do very different things with the concept of visual effects, but they also inspired a generation of young filmmakers, one big, one hip, and they'd both be hugely influential on the future of the movies (including their own franchises).

The Matrix cost half as much as the first of the George Lucas sequels (to be fair, it also earned half as much...both of these movies were mammoth hits), and it's not groundbreaking in the way that Phantom Menace is.  What it does do, though, is take its effects with a signature flare.  Borrowing from the John Woo action films, the movie's stunt coordination combined with a signature use of green for much of the actual CGI really works.  This became iconic for a variety of reasons, but mostly because they made each action sequence increasingly more intense and fantastic, a glowing crescendo until the final face-off.

The Matrix is more stylish, but it's hard not to marvel at the sheer magnitude of The Phantom Menace.  The movie, with over 2000 individual effects shots, is a wonder to behold.  Growing from Lucas' original trilogy, they give us high-intensity lightsaber duels, and actual cities spun from the background with the melding of matte painting and CGI coming together in a really impressive combination.  The film also features Jar Jar Binks, which while the most polarizing (and offensive) character in the Star Wars catalog, he also is a really spectacular example of CGI (Dobby, Gollum, and Caesar that followed would not be possible without Jar Jar).

Stuart Little also features a major character that is completely drawn from animation, and while the film itself is not in the same league visually as the other two, that should count for something.  Stuart's fur is the real calling card here.  A few years before Monsters Inc would break ground for VFX, this film was doing similar work on a similar caliber.  I don't love the way that they handle the non-title characters, particularly the way the cats are handled (their speaking patterns are a bit cartoonish), but I totally get what Oscar was attempting here.

Other Precursor Contenders: We are in the era before the Visual Effects Society, so our only precursor to look at is BAFTA, which was five-wide, but also had one 1998 title.  They gave the statue to The Matrix against The Mummy, Sleepy Hollow, The Phantom Menace, and A Bug's Life, which was eligible for Oscar the previous year.  The Oscar shortlist in 1999 was The Mummy, Sleepy Hollow, The World is Not Enough, and Wild Wild West, and given that it made it for Sound (and was the kind of blockbuster that normally made a list like this), I have to assume that The Mummy was the fourth place finisher.

Films I Would Have Nominated: It certainly would've made my list.  The use of sand in this film, with the mummy's face coming out of the the desert floor, is really something, combined with the growing evolution of the title character.  What could've been cheesy was in fact a really well-crafted picture.

Oscar’s Choice: Oscar will frequently go for the biggest and the gaudiest...but what he really wants is to be cool.  And in 1999, there was nothing cooler than The Matrix, which ended up taking this statue over Star Wars.

My Choice: No one has ever accused me of being cool, and when it comes down to it-I was more impressed by what Phantom Menace did than what The Matrix did, even if both of them will make my ballot at the end of this season.  I'll give it to George Lucas, therefore, over Neo (Stuart Little gets the bronze).

And those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Are you going to stand behind me with Darth Vader's origins or do you want to take the red pill with Keanu?  Do you ever marvel at races like this, that feel like they're preordained now but were actually quite competitive at the time?  And why do you think that The Mummy couldn't make the cut here (I'm pulling out the "horror bias" card myself)?  Share below!

Also in 1999: Makeup, Previously, in 1999

Past Best Visual Effects Contests: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023