Thursday, June 21, 2012

The Oscar Project #54: Chariots of Fire (1981)



For a few very brief moments, I started to believe I was going to enjoy Chariots of Fire. The opening scene is its most iconic, the often parodied sequence where you see guys running in slow motion while the famous theme song by Vangelis plays. If you’re not familiar with the original—and I didn’t know this is where that trope started either—you’ve likely seen similar sequences in films such as Mr. Mom. Everybody’s seen Mr. Mom, right?

Anyway, in case you’re not familiar with this film, and I think there’s a very high probability of that, it’s a true story about two British Olympic runners. Eric Liddell (played by Ian Charleson, who we’ll see again next year) is a devout Christian who devotes all of his achievements to advancing his religious beliefs, even going so far as refusing to run a heat that’s scheduled to be held on a Sunday. Harold Abrahams (played by Ben Cross) is Jewish, and he is attempting to use his fame to reduce anti-Semitic prejudices.

About the only person involved in this film that people might have heard of is Ian Holm. He’s Liddell’s trainer, but he’s better known for playing Bilbo Baggins in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And I guess some people may know John Gielgud, who we will also see again next year.

For the most part, both the cast and the crew are anonymous. I had never even heard of the director, Hugh Hudson. That’s not necessarily bad—Slumdog Millionaire didn’t have any stars in it either—but when the movie has so little else to offer, it’s a little disappointing. 

I was hoping for something like this.
I don’t want to trot out the dreaded “boring” word for this movie, but it was difficult to get very invested in the story. There’s just so little at stake; an Olympic medal is important, of course, but it’s not like their lives would be tremendously different without them. I suppose that’s usually the case in sports movies, but at least most of the time there’s an underdog story or something to make me care a little more. These guys weren’t even really underdogs.

The pace picks up a little bit in the second half of the film, but it’s not enough to overcome the slow start. The score was basically the only saving grace for me. Those were some crunchy jams. I can’t say this with certainty, but I’m pretty sure it’s the first time a synthesizer appeared in the score of a Best Picture winner. Even if it sounded totally out of place in a 1920s period piece, it was still enjoyable.

I don’t know exactly what I was looking for from this movie. Rather than having one glaring flaw, it had many different moderate flaws and very few strengths. I didn’t hate it, but there were so few positives that I think it ended up being one of the least enjoyable Best Pictures I’ve watched so far. And I swear that has nothing to do with beating out Raiders of the Lost Ark.

If they could have come up with a way to incorporate actual chariots or actual fire, the movie would have been much improved. Talk about false advertising. At least next year’s movie delivers exactly what it promises. I’d be pretty upset if there were no actual Gandhis in Gandhi.

No comments:

Post a Comment