*** SPOILER *** SPOILER *** SPOILER *** SPOILER ***
I have just seen “Oscar” again. I saw it originally in the theatre and enjoyed it immensely, However, I believe I do understand why it is rated so low.
First off, “Oscar” is what used to be called a madcap comedy, and no madcap comedy has done well since the thirties.
Secondly, “Oscar” has neither a hero or anti hero, nor is there a single main character who represents the viewpoint of the audience.
'Snaps' is a gangster, and if we are to understand that innuendo about being out of town on Valentine’s Day, he is a murderer. His henchmen are variously wisecracking, threatening, or dim, but all are armed to the teeth.
‘Snaps’ daughter, Lisa, although full grown, is still a whiny child, willing to marry any man who will get her out from under her father’s thumb, to where there is more scope for her talent to have her own way.
Dr. Poole lives with his mother, yet resents her possessiveness, and is willing to marry an unknown woman (except that she is a gangster’s daughter) for sufficient financial backing to further his career.
"Snaps" wife ‘Sofia’ is both jealous of her husband’s attentions and willing to consign her daughter to any man who will marry her presumably pregnant daughter to save the family name of her well-know crime boss husband.
‘Snaps’ other unknown daughter starts out with her young man by lying about her identity, then seeks to have a stranger back up her lie, until said young man commits himself to marriage.
And of course, her young man is, at first, an embezzler, but later becomes an outright thief.
The bankers are crooked, the cops are show boaters, and the media accommodating to both cops and crooks.
Even their original working class maid uses her position to snag herself a rich banker fiancé.
Thus stated, I find ‘Oscar’ not that dissimilar from Billy Wilder’s 1961 film, “One, Two, Three,” which sent up communists, capitalists, the Berlin Wall, Coca Colonialism, while mixing harsh interrogation methods with hit parade music, upward mobilization with a men’s room attendant and getting strudel at the office with an executive wife.
The one thing that further harmed “One, Two, Three,” from which “Oscar” did not suffer, was that the former came out during a particularly tense period during the Cold War.
“One, Two, Three” eventually overcame its disadvantages to become a precursor to the great Cold War masterpieces that followed.
‘Oscar’ did not suffer from such political opposition. At least no one felt compelled to apologize for its existence at a foreign film festival, as was the case with "One, Two, Three." Nor was such opposition required to sully its reputation.
“Oscar” is a good, entertaining comedy, with a sightly dark script, uniformly excellent performances, and split second comedic direction, but it is no masterpiece.
Give "Oscar" another forty years, and it too may outlast its detractors.
reply
share
Livana_Faolan
10 years ago
Even their original working class maid uses her position to snag herself a rich banker fiancé.
How did she "use her position" to "snag herself a rich banker fiancé"? They met the day he "called on" Lisa. So because Nora was working that day, that means that she used her position to snag herself a rich husband? I'm sorry. But I disagree with your assessment.
And who said that Bruce Underwood was a banker? I must have missed that part.
reply
share