I think an important element left out of the film description is Conrad was a suicide survivor who had just returned home after 4 months in a psychiatric hospital. Hutton brilliantly portrays the character as a guy clinging to his sanity by the tips of his fingers. I would quibble the movie is not melodramatic - it certainly is dramatic given the grave subject matter, but lots of nuanced acting kept it melodrama-free. Not related to the review, I find it strange Hutton was nominated for (and won) best actor in a supporting role. The entire narrative of the story revolved around his character's recovery and he was the one with the most screen time.
From what I heard, it was a conscious decision to have Hutton be nominated for best supporting actor as that way he'd most likely win the trophy. As much as I'd argue that Ordinary People is a better film than Raging Bull, trying to beat out De Niro for an oscar is nigh impossible.
You could definitely argue Timothy Hutton as lead but was more an ensemble amongst the 3 leads. Made sense to put him in supporting as he competition was not as strong and if there was view Donald Sutherland was to be nominated for lead (which he should have RIP) they would not compete against one another and split the vote.
I saw this movie in 1980 in the theater. Still my favorite movie. Real story telling and narrative - great acting, not overdone. Still holds up all these years later.
The mother son dynamic is what's so central to this film. The mother's favorite son dies and her surviving son just reminds her of what she misses. Beth tries a couple of times to connect with Connie, but as soon as her late son is mentioned, she goes cold. She can't even discuss the subject except in the most general terms, but a meaningful conversation is not possible. Ordinary People is just as melodramatic and overwrought as Raging Bull or Manchester by the Sea. I don't consider Ordinary People's win over Raging Bull as egregious. DeNiro deservingly won Best Actor. Scorsese was robbed in the 1990's with Dances with Wolves beat Goodfellas - that is a far better example of Oscar BS. That upset has aged like bread. Of the Best Picture winners from each year in the '80's, where does Ordinary People stand? I'm not fond of the biopic wins (Gandhi and Chariots of Fire), but The Last Emperor fascinates me.
It is interesting that Mary Tyler Moore said she saw her character as a victim too but we don't see that as easily. She is trapped by what she thinks a mother is supposed to be and cannot break out of her role. She fires maids because the don't clean well and Conrad got so much blood in the grout. The psychiatrist gets criticized as being unreal but the movie might run 5 hours if you went along with how it is supposed to work. When I watch the film I see the same thing veterans coming back from war with a lot. Conrad has "Survivor's guilt". Buck was the better swimmer but somehow Conrad survives. He knows the Bucky was Beth's favorites so it hurts him that Buck died and he survived and he feels that is wrong. Conrad stayed with the boat. Veterans seem to have this same issue, " my friend John was next to me and he was shot and not me." Personally I hated "Raging Bull". The main character was a jerk and a bully.
I have this film listed as one of my Top Four on Letterbxed. I think it has to do more with when I saw this film, rather the Film itself. If that makes sense. It hit me hard, and has stayed with me ever since.
I was never one to pay that much attention to the Oscars, so I don't remember this film winning over "Raging Bull", which is definitely a tragedy. The thing I remember most about "Ordinary People" when it came out, and what all the Hollywood noise about it was, was that it was not only Robert Redford's directorial debut, but also the first time people seeing Mary Tyler Moore in a dramatic role, since the public had only ever seen her as a comedic actress in the likes of the Dick Van Dike Show, and the Mary Tyler Moore Show. Critics gave her high praise for her performance in this movie. Judd Hirsch also played against character in this movie (most known for his comedic role in the TV show "Taxi"), and this was also Timothy Hutton's debut film as well (who was only 19 at that time). There were a lot of firsts in this movie. I didn't get to see this movie in the theater (it was rated "R", so I wouldn't have been able to get into the theater without an adult at that time), but I did get to see it once it hit the pay-movie-channels. I remember being very moved by the movie, especially by Hutton's performance. I was impressed with Moore's cold performance as well. I think after Moore's praise in this movie there ended up being a small trend of other comedic actresses coming out and playing dramatic roles, but the only one that comes directly to my mind right now is Carol Burnett in the movie "Four Seasons".
I learned of this channel from your appearances/review of Tim Heidecker's Beatles stuff/Office Hours......and have been a fan ever since. Hoping we get a review of the On Cinema Oscar Special from you at some point this week. Keep up the great work.....also, would love to see a mini-class from you at some point on how the layman can watch film more critically or what it's like watching a film with your education/background and what you're looking for on a second viewing, versus a first, etc. Thanks.
I am pumped for the on cinema special more than the actual oscars. Thanks for watching it is good to hear that people are checking it out. The mini class idea is genius I will totally do something with that soon. Check back soon
Great review as always friend. I’ll definitely be watching this soon. I have a good recommendation that I think will fit your tastes if you haven’t already seen it. Girlfriends by Claudia Weill. It’s on criterion in the UK so I assume it is over there. In the bonus features she said she got a lot of praise saying she was the ‘female Woody Allen’. It’s one of them low budget indie films that I think you’d enjoy. It could probably do with an extra bit of spotlight cause i think it was probably super important for women filmmakers etc.
Yeah I have not seen Girlfriends yet but I have been reading about it since Criterion released it. I love me a low budget film and I am always looking for great female filmmakers to inspire my students. When I took film it was mostly dudes in class now it is 50/50 which is perfect.
It's funny you said you had issues with this because it beat Raging Bull because I have had issues with this movie because it beat Elephant Man lol. I didn't know this movie made that many enemies.
Yeah, whenever Scorsese loses I get mad and hate the other nominees. Both the Elephant Man and Raging Bull are much better films to Ordinary people, which I thought was very good. Raging Bull is one of the best EVER IMO.
Personally I didn’t think any of those movies were good. Ordinary People was the better one. However I did not like it because I did not like the actors as I thought they were uninteresting. The story line is great though
@@JoeLaRocca Saying that Elephant Man and Raging Bull are MUCH better films than "Ordinary People" is enough for me to never watch your channel or trust your opinion again.
It seemed like it but that’s not how I saw it. We weren’t seeing what actually happened. what we were seeing is a flashback from Conrad’s perspective so of course she was gushing over Bucky like a schoolgirl and ignoring Conrad.
Oscar Predictions coming later today...Stay tuned. Streaming issues solved.
I think an important element left out of the film description is Conrad was a suicide survivor who had just returned home after 4 months in a psychiatric hospital. Hutton brilliantly portrays the character as a guy clinging to his sanity by the tips of his fingers. I would quibble the movie is not melodramatic - it certainly is dramatic given the grave subject matter, but lots of nuanced acting kept it melodrama-free. Not related to the review, I find it strange Hutton was nominated for (and won) best actor in a supporting role. The entire narrative of the story revolved around his character's recovery and he was the one with the most screen time.
Good point. This was the first time I watched this film. I would say lots of different things if I reviewed it today.
From what I heard, it was a conscious decision to have Hutton be nominated for best supporting actor as that way he'd most likely win the trophy. As much as I'd argue that Ordinary People is a better film than Raging Bull, trying to beat out De Niro for an oscar is nigh impossible.
You could definitely argue Timothy Hutton as lead but was more an ensemble amongst the 3 leads. Made sense to put him in supporting as he competition was not as strong and if there was view Donald Sutherland was to be nominated for lead (which he should have RIP) they would not compete against one another and split the vote.
Nice note of Con being in the same league as Holden. Made my day, thanks!
🙏
From way down in Southern Australia we loved your review!
I saw this movie in 1980 in the theater. Still my favorite movie. Real story telling and narrative - great acting, not overdone. Still holds up all these years later.
O
The mother son dynamic is what's so central to this film. The mother's favorite son dies and her surviving son just reminds her of what she misses. Beth tries a couple of times to connect with Connie, but as soon as her late son is mentioned, she goes cold. She can't even discuss the subject except in the most general terms, but a meaningful conversation is not possible. Ordinary People is just as melodramatic and overwrought as Raging Bull or Manchester by the Sea.
I don't consider Ordinary People's win over Raging Bull as egregious. DeNiro deservingly won Best Actor. Scorsese was robbed in the 1990's with Dances with Wolves beat Goodfellas - that is a far better example of Oscar BS. That upset has aged like bread.
Of the Best Picture winners from each year in the '80's, where does Ordinary People stand? I'm not fond of the biopic wins (Gandhi and Chariots of Fire), but The Last Emperor fascinates me.
I like Amadeus
Deserved ALL the Oscars and Accolades (Timothy BOTTOMS?)
Eh
@@martinpascoe5904 Hutton not Bottoms
It is interesting that Mary Tyler Moore said she saw her character as a victim too but we don't see that as easily. She is trapped by what she thinks a mother is supposed to be and cannot break out of her role. She fires maids because the don't clean well and Conrad got so much blood in the grout. The psychiatrist gets criticized as being unreal but the movie might run 5 hours if you went along with how it is supposed to work. When I watch the film I see the same thing veterans coming back from war with a lot. Conrad has "Survivor's guilt". Buck was the better swimmer but somehow Conrad survives. He knows the Bucky was Beth's favorites so it hurts him that Buck died and he survived and he feels that is wrong. Conrad stayed with the boat. Veterans seem to have this same issue, " my friend John was next to me and he was shot and not me." Personally I hated "Raging Bull". The main character was a jerk and a bully.
Ok
agreed
I tried reading the script. Got forty pages in and gave up. Pretty boring actually.
I have this film listed as one of my Top Four on Letterbxed. I think it has to do more with when I saw this film, rather the Film itself. If that makes sense. It hit me hard, and has stayed with me ever since.
I was never one to pay that much attention to the Oscars, so I don't remember this film winning over "Raging Bull", which is definitely a tragedy.
The thing I remember most about "Ordinary People" when it came out, and what all the Hollywood noise about it was, was that it was not only Robert Redford's directorial debut, but also the first time people seeing Mary Tyler Moore in a dramatic role, since the public had only ever seen her as a comedic actress in the likes of the Dick Van Dike Show, and the Mary Tyler Moore Show. Critics gave her high praise for her performance in this movie. Judd Hirsch also played against character in this movie (most known for his comedic role in the TV show "Taxi"), and this was also Timothy Hutton's debut film as well (who was only 19 at that time). There were a lot of firsts in this movie.
I didn't get to see this movie in the theater (it was rated "R", so I wouldn't have been able to get into the theater without an adult at that time), but I did get to see it once it hit the pay-movie-channels. I remember being very moved by the movie, especially by Hutton's performance. I was impressed with Moore's cold performance as well.
I think after Moore's praise in this movie there ended up being a small trend of other comedic actresses coming out and playing dramatic roles, but the only one that comes directly to my mind right now is Carol Burnett in the movie "Four Seasons".
i cant imagine paying to see this at the movies,i kinda thought maybe it was on cinemax ,showtime or hbo.
That is a very well-written and articulate comment. I'm i 100% agreement, but even if I weren't I'd still still find your observations astute.
@@deejayjacklovesyou1 Thank you for your compliment, much appreciated
@@macavitymacavityi second deejayjacklovesyou1’s praise of your excellent post 🤗
I learned of this channel from your appearances/review of Tim Heidecker's Beatles stuff/Office Hours......and have been a fan ever since. Hoping we get a review of the On Cinema Oscar Special from you at some point this week.
Keep up the great work.....also, would love to see a mini-class from you at some point on how the layman can watch film more critically or what it's like watching a film with your education/background and what you're looking for on a second viewing, versus a first, etc.
Thanks.
I am pumped for the on cinema special more than the actual oscars. Thanks for watching it is good to hear that people are checking it out. The mini class idea is genius I will totally do something with that soon. Check back soon
The movie still holds up.
Yes
American Beauty was very very similar to this (check the Mother roles) but with added Black humour
American Beauty is also not good
@@JoeLaRocca hey all respect but i think they are both Award winning classic movies
Great review as always friend. I’ll definitely be watching this soon. I have a good recommendation that I think will fit your tastes if you haven’t already seen it. Girlfriends by Claudia Weill. It’s on criterion in the UK so I assume it is over there. In the bonus features she said she got a lot of praise saying she was the ‘female Woody Allen’. It’s one of them low budget indie films that I think you’d enjoy. It could probably do with an extra bit of spotlight cause i think it was probably super important for women filmmakers etc.
Yeah I have not seen Girlfriends yet but I have been reading about it since Criterion released it. I love me a low budget film and I am always looking for great female filmmakers to inspire my students. When I took film it was mostly dudes in class now it is 50/50 which is perfect.
@@JoeLaRocca yeah I like to also support women filmmakers. Especially cause I have friends who often don’t know of many.
It's funny you said you had issues with this because it beat Raging Bull because I have had issues with this movie because it beat Elephant Man lol. I didn't know this movie made that many enemies.
Yeah, whenever Scorsese loses I get mad and hate the other nominees. Both the Elephant Man and Raging Bull are much better films to Ordinary people, which I thought was very good. Raging Bull is one of the best EVER IMO.
@@JoeLaRocca I saw Ordinary People but I can't remember a frame to be honest. I'm not saying it's bad or anything it just didn't stick with me.
Personally I didn’t think any of those movies were good. Ordinary People was the better one. However I did not like it because I did not like the actors as I thought they were uninteresting. The story line is great though
@@JoeLaRocca Saying that Elephant Man and Raging Bull are MUCH better films than "Ordinary People" is enough for me to never watch your channel or trust your opinion again.
@@anaximander66Probably cause you don't care about relationship dynamics, or you're actually Helen Keller lol
seems like the mom had a weird crush on the ded kid 😲
That’s one angle
It seemed like it but that’s not how I saw it. We weren’t seeing what actually happened. what we were seeing is a flashback from Conrad’s perspective so of course she was gushing over Bucky like a schoolgirl and ignoring Conrad.
You might want to get that checked out, seems like projection on your part.