Skip to main content

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy
(1989)

(SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocative.

Of course, the situation had come full circle by the time the Academy recognised Lee as Best Director, with Green Book having the cheek to take the top prize. Lee’s movie that year was the overrated – invariably the case with a Lee joint – BlackKklansman. The award came in tandem with a generally bilious response to the idea that a picture as retrograde as Green Book – retrograde in fashioning a race-relations tale of yesteryear, set yesteryear, and touching on far too many familiar, insufficiently progressive tropes and devices for the liking of many of the loudest detracting voices – should be recognised by an awards body that evidently wasn’t nearly woke enough, within the limited definitions of woke (ie, fail to meet the prescribed standards, and get yourself denounced and vilified, if not cancelled).

There are definite similarities between Driving Miss Daisy and Green Book – among them a Best Picture win without even a Best Director nomination – but the latter is also a much more engrossing, dramatically engaged and compelling piece. Driving Miss Daisy is dead set on a path of easy-going, observational charm that may have delighted many but certainly got on my nerves at the time; I still find it far too obvious, smug even, in its through line, despite the kudos it received for understatement and subtle readings beneath the amiable-adversarial interplay.

Director Bruce Beresford and screenwriter Alfred Uhry are at pains to point out that, for all Miss Daisy’s thawing, she remains a tetchy, irascible yet loveable old racist. Because the picture avoids grandstanding, the central relationship – between Miss Daisy and chauffeur Hoke Colburn (Morgan Freeman) – is very amenable, in a serf/master boundaries kind of way, something underlined by the ever-so aspirant-with-a-touch-of-whimsical-quirk Hans Zimmer score that will make your teeth hurt. The picture offers only so much in the way of lessons, but in the context of the journey of its characters, that’s considered enough. Everyone is encouraged to come away suffused with a warm glow, as Beresford and Uhry, adapting his 1987 play, offer sops (the common ground of persecution) and cultural signposts (I don’t for a moment buy that Miss Daisy would be keen to go along to see Martin Luther King, but it makes for a clear Forrest Gump-esque marker of the era we’ve reached by that point).

Freeman had a double whammy in 1989 (a triple, if you count Lean on Me), with Hoke Colburn here and John Rawlins in Glory; while there were several prior tips (Street Smart’s Oscar nom, Clean and Sober), this was the year that furnished his overnight elder statesman gravitas (Hoke begins the film seven years older than Freeman was and ends it about the age he is now). His performance is fine, obviously, in that way all Freeman’s performances are; he does rather overdo the bad knees, as if he’s been taking notes from Clive Dunn on how to perform an old boy. The real problem is that, in the way a Freeman role is wont to, it reserves Hoke maximum dignity and wisdom; he’s all long-suffering, wry superiority (and seemingly entirely lacking a family of his own, until we learn he has a granddaughter in a reference at the end); he’s both a benign force of noble insight and a cypher who exists purely to reflect Miss Daisy’s learning curve.

Pauline Kael might have been expected to tear the stuffing out of Driving Miss Daisy, but she was reticently generous. As she put it of Hoke, “The black man is made upright, considerate, humane – he’s made perfect – so that nothing will disturb our appreciation of the gentle, bittersweet reverie we’re watching”. And yet, while she considered Uhry had written an “ingratiating play about race relations” replete with “virtually all manipulative bits”, Beresford “gives them a light, airy texture”. She noted of the picture’s better observational side, “It’s a time when a man like Hoke goes on weighing his words to the end of his days”. However, I’m unsure there’s a way to do that that doesn’t become the antithesis of everything Spike Lee wants to see in a movie broaching the subject of race in America. The argument is that the Freeman character’s performative obeisance is a get-along manoeuvre, and so the picture has much more depth and range than might appear, but you can feel the soft-purring engine of a movie too pleased with itself to be supplying that substantively. Which is why it arrives at a point where kindly Hoke is feeding Miss Daisy pie in a retirement home.

Collette Maude in Time Out called Driving Miss DaisyFar too cosy to serve as effective social or political metaphor; better to regard it as a solid ensemble piece”. Embracing the latter can stave off the former for so long, though. James Park, in the final Film Yearbook (it’s a shame the annual publication lasted only a decade), couldn’t disguise his lack of goodwill towards “a nice enough little movie”. Of the title character, he appraised “the film allows the audience to celebrate her journey to relatively non-racist enlightenment and the capacity we all have to change, while also looking back with some nostalgia at a world where different ethnic groups stayed firmly within their communities, and the races were kept as separate as the classes and the religious denominations”. It is a better time, a more peaceful time, for all that Hoke intrudes upon it with the memory of a lynching (although, that only comes up in conversation when things began to change, during the increasingly nasty and violent 1960s).

As Anthony Holden reported it in The Secret History of The Academy Awards, the frontrunners that year were Driving Miss Daisy and Born on the Fourth of July, the latter gradually losing ground thanks to Oliver Stone and Ron Kovic’s wearisome awards-circuit politicking. Born on the Fourth of July was a picture reminding voters of lots of bad things, from friendly fire, to misplaced patriotism, to grim sex, grim disability and yelling “Big fucking erect penis!” at your mother. Driving Miss Daisy was an antidote, an infusion of much gentler, halcyon days of nice clean cars, noble black servants and warmly insistent Zimmer-framed scores; suddenly the winning ticket was one of niceness, as the movie’s producer Richard Zanuck observed: “The news is that there are people out there who want more than rapes and car chases and violence”.

Added to which, it was an admirably modest affair, “the year’s fiscal Cinderella giving the voters a perennially welcome opportunity to vote for a well-acted exponent of liberal moral values over a violent, blood-stained epic”. Also in its favour: the Academy loves to push an envelope if it’s of the sentimental kind, hence Tandy winning Best Actress at 81, the oldest win in that category, accompanied by many a remark of Miss Daisy that “My mother/ grandmother is like her”. It even elicited light-hearted ribbing (“the film which apparently directed itself” host Billy Crystal suggested, referring to the lack of a Best Director nod).

A brief mention of Dan Aykroyd’s performance, which finds him effortlessly segueing from broad comedy to reliable character acting. He’s good in a part that veers from subtlety to overegging (a bit like the movie as a whole), and includes the most winning description of Daisy (“You’re a doodle, mama”). It’s also quite possible the praise he received laid the seeds for transgressions to come, however, since the relatively light makeup work on aging Dan would be eclipsed by the disastrous full bloom of Nothing but Trouble a few years later.

Were the Academy crazy to give the Best Picture Oscar to Driving Miss Daisy? Probably no more than usual in their choices, although they particularly laid themselves open that year, such that Lee is inextricably wrapped up in the picture’s legacy. I’m reluctant to go to bat for Spike, as he’s one of the most overrated of “revered” Hollywood directors, but Do the Right Thing is easily his best movie (not robbed for Best Original Screenplay, though; the movie’s definitely more than the sum of such parts).

As The New York Times' Vincent Canby saw it, Lee missed out on additional Oscar exposure because “Do the Right Thing won’t play the game. It talks back. . . Do the Right Thing doesn’t call attention to progress, it asks for more. Now”. Which suggests, had Stone had been holding forth from the parapet with a megaphone at the time of Platoon, it might have been in for the same fate as Born on the Fourth of July; it’s easy to put Oscar off, unless they feel duty bound to virtue signal.

Lee later had the temerity to wag the finger when discussing the limited recognition received by the deeply average Selma. Did you know, he advised, that Do the Right Thing is being “taught in film schools all across the world”? That’s right. And “Nobody’s discussing Driving Miss mother fuckin’ Daisy”. That’s right, and nobody will be discussing Da 5 Bloods either. Or Oldboy. Driving Miss Daisy winning isn’t especially more egregious than Titanic or A Beautiful Mind taking home the top prize. It’s a certain kind of pat, inoffensive (except to Spike) moviemaking that hits an awards sweet spot from time to time.

What I do find interesting is that Driving Miss Daisy’s the last PG (US) offering to date to win Best Picture. That’s a far more lasting takeaway, I suspect, than commonplace undeserved statuettes. The likelihood of three PG nominees in the current environment, when there are up to ten vacancies, seems unlikely enough, let alone if there were a mere five, as per 1989; it should go without saying that either of the other two would have been much more deserving winners.



Popular posts from this blog

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

I’m just the balloon man.

Copshop (2021) (SPOILERS) A consistent problem with Joe Carnahan’s oeuvre is that, no matter how confidently his movies begin, or how strong his premise, or how adept his direction or compelling the performances he extracts, he ends up blowing it. He blows it with Copshop , a ’70s-inspired variant on Assault on Precinct 13 that is pretty damn good during the first hour, before devolving into his standard mode of sado-nihilistic mayhem.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

When we have been subtle, then can I kill him?

The Avengers 6.16. Legacy of Death There’s scarcely any crediting the Terry Nation of Noon-Doomsday as the same Terry Nation that wrote this, let alone the Terry Nation churning out a no-frills Dalek story a season for the latter stages of the Jon Pertwee era. Of course, Nation had started out as a comedy writer (for Hancock), and it may be that the kick Brian Clemens gave him up the pants in reaction to the quality of Noon-Doomsday loosened a whole load of gags. Admittedly, a lot of them are well worn, but they come so thick and fast in Legacy of Death , accompanied by an assuredly giddy pace from director Don Chaffey (of Ray Harryhausen’s Jason and the Argonauts ) and a fine ensemble of supporting players, that it would be churlish to complain.

Tippy-toe! Tippy-toe!

Seinfeld 2.7: The Phone Message The Premise George and Jerry both have dates on the same night. Neither goes quite as planned, and in George’s case it results in him leaving an abusive message on his girlfriend’s answerphone. The only solution is to steal the tape before she plays it. Observational Further evidence of the gaping chasm between George and Jerry’s approaches to the world. George neurotically attacks his problems and makes them worse, while Jerry shrugs and lets them go. It’s nice to see the latter’s anal qualities announcing themselves, however; he’s so bothered that his girlfriend likes a terrible TV advert that he’s mostly relieved when she breaks things off (“ To me the dialogue rings true ”). Neither Gretchen German (as Donna, Jerry’s date) nor Tory Polone (as Carol, George’s) make a huge impression, but German has more screen time and better dialogue. The main attraction is Jerry’s reactions, which include trying to impress her with hi