"
system\nclassify the user's feedback by responding with only a single number: 1 for positive or 0 for negative
\n
user\nA noted cinematic phenomenon of the late eighties and early nineties was the number of Oscars which went to actors playing characters who were either physically or mentally handicapped. The first was Marlee Matlin's award for \"Children of a Lesser God\" in 1986, and the next ten years were to see another \"Best Actress\" award (Holly Hunter for \"The Piano\" in 1994) and no fewer than five \"Best Actor\" awards (Dustin Hoffman in 1988 for \"Rain Man\", Daniel Day-Lewis in 1989 for \"My Left Foot\", Al Pacino in 1992 for \"Scent of a Woman\", Tom Hanks in 1994 for \"Forrest Gump\" and Geoffrey Rush in 1996 for \"Shine\") for portrayals of the disabled. Matlin, who played a deaf woman, is herself deaf, but all the others are able-bodied.
This phenomenon aroused some adverse comment at the time, with suggestions being made that these awards were given more for political correctness than for the quality of the acting. When Jodie Foster failed to win \"Best Actress\" for \"Nell\" in 1994 some people saw this as evidence of a backlash against this sort of portrayal. My view, however, is that the majority of these awards were well deserved. I thought the 1992 award should have gone to either Clint Eastwood or Robert Downey rather than Pacino, but apart from that the only one with which I disagreed would have been Hanks', and that was because I preferred Nigel Hawthorne's performance in \"The Madness of King George\". In that film, of course, Hawthorne played a character who was mentally ill.
\"My Left Foot\" was based upon the autobiography of the Irish writer and painter Christy Brown. Brown was born in 1931, one of the thirteen children of a working-class Dublin family. He was born with cerebral palsy and was at first wrongly thought to be mentally handicapped as well. He was for a long time incapable of deliberate movement or speech, but eventually discovered that he could control the movements of one part of his body, his left foot (hence the title). He learned to write and draw by holding a piece of chalk between his toes, and went on to become a painter and a published novelist and poet.
Life in working-class Dublin in the thirties and forties could be hard, and the city Jim Sheridan (himself a Dubliner) shows us here is in many ways a grim, grey, cheerless place, very different from our normal idea of the \"Emerald Isle\". (Sheridan and Day-Lewis were later to collaborate on another film with an Irish theme, \"In the Name of the Father\"). Against this, however, must be set the cheerfulness and spirit of its people, especially the Brown family. Much of Christy's success was due to the support he received from his parents, who refused to allow him to be institutionalised and always believed in the intelligence hidden beneath a crippled exterior, and from his siblings. We see how his brothers used to wheel him round in a specially-made cart and how they helped their bricklayer father to build Christy a room of his own in their back yard.
The film could easily have slid into sentimentality and ended up as just another heart-warming \"triumph over adversity\" movie. That it does not is due to a number of factors, principally the magnificent acting. In the course of his career, Day-Lewis has given a number of fine performances, but this, together with the recent \"There Will Be Blood\", is his best. He is never less than 100% convincing as Christie; his tortured, jerky movements and strained attempts at speech persuade us that we really are watching a disabled person, even though, intellectually, we are well aware that Day-Lewis is able-bodied. The other performances which stand out are from Fiona Shaw as his mentor Dr Eileen Cole, from Hugh O'Conor as the young Christy and from Brenda Fricker as Christy's mother (which won her the \"Best Supporting Actress\" award).
The other reason why the film escapes sentimentality is that it does not try to sentimentalise its main character. Christy Brown had a difficult life, but he could also be difficult to live with, and the film gives us a \"warts and all\" portrait. He was a heavy drinker, given to foul language and prone to outbursts of rage. He could also be selfish and manipulative of those around him, and the film shows us all these aspects of his character. Of course, it also shows us the positive aspects- his courage, his determination and his wicked sense of humour. Day-Lewis's acting is not just physically convincing, in that it persuades us to believe in his character's disability, but also emotionally and intellectually convincing, in that it brings out all these different facets of Christy's character. His Oscar was won in the teeth of some very strong opposition from the likes of Robin Williams and Kenneth Branagh, but it was well deserved. 8/10
\n
assistant\n1
\n"