I actually had written a very long and very awesome post here already that I was very proud of, but like an idiot I accidentally deleted the whole thing right before I finished it. Suffice to say I was beyond pissed at myself. And it unfortunately cooled my zeal to write again for awhile since I knew it would be really difficult to re-write everything I had already spent a good deal of time on and capture exactly what I was thinking after watching these movies. So in saying all that, I don't think this post will be my best unfortunately and I do apologize for that.
When I did finally come to this group, I was beyond excited since I had already seen 4 of the 5 films and loved them all. Knowing I'd get to watch them all over again and write good things instead of criticism really had me pumped to do this one. Micheal Shannon's inclusion was the wild card for me. I wasn't sure what to expect out of his performance but was hoping he would make it a perfect 5 for 5 in great nominations. I definitely already know that Ledger's performance will be my favorite, though. I think I will try a more direct approach that's less flowery than I how normally write since I don't want to try to re-write word for word what I already wrote.
2008 Best Supporting Actor
Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
I just want to say, this is the quintessential Joker ever for me, in any medium. I've read in some places that people feel this was a sympathy award for Ledger, but I frankly feel that is pretty insulting to the performance he made. It's an instant classic and is nothing short of brilliant, captivating, gripping, memorable, and downright mesmerizing. When the Joker is on screen, you can't look away because you don't want to miss a second of his twisted and demented actions, even if you've seen the film 20 times. That's how great Ledger's performance is. It goes way beyond just a comic book character and even further beyond being just another caricature of a zany, kooky Joker. It's real, it's gritty, it's powerful. He's an amoral psychopath that seems like he has a plan to plague Gotham and hound the Batman but you soon realize he really has no plan and essentially makes things up as he goes along. He is not concerned about money or power per se, more about just causing mayhem and chaos in a world that is there for the Joker to bend to his will. The Joker comes off in a very controlled crazy way and there's many scenes where Ledger expertly teeters on the edge of sanity/insanity. In one scene the Joker can play either side of this line and it never feels too over-the-top or uncontrolled. Even the movements of the Joker factor into how creepy and psychotic he can be. The way Ledger moves quickly when he walks, smacks his lips when he's annoyed, the sometimes rhythmic cadence of his speech, the intensity of someone determined to bring the Batman to his level...all make for one of the greatest performances of all time.
Josh Brolin - Milk
Brolin does a great job in working under the confines of his character. From the beginning when we first meet Brolin's character, we instantly get the feeling we won't like him as the film progresses. The audience is able to see through his thinly veiled good guy persona and see the bubbling animosity underneath. He's a fearful individual who feels he's being demeaned which really sets him off and pushes him towards the edge and possibly over. Brolin has very few scenes in which to transform from family man to cold blooded killer but he does a great job in selling us the abrupt change in personality. The viewer never feels comfortable with Dan White on screen which is a testament to the script and Brolin's acting ability. It's an arresting performance of a chilling character.
Robert Downey, Jr. - Tropic Thunder
Good for the Academy in recognizing a comedic role in having more than just the ability to make us laugh. This is what is at the heart of Downey's portrayal of an Australian method actor who churns out Oscars that actually undergoes a skin pigmentation to play the role of a black Vietnam War soldier. There is no doubt that Downey can easily make us laugh in this movie with his great one-liners and over-the-top accent. But he also succeeds in making this role more than just a caricature of blacks and gives is some pretty remarkable depth. He lampoons not only those actors who submerge themselves into the roles they get in hopes of awards but also the hypocrisy of non-minorities receiving roles meant for minorities. Downey also treats the racial aspect of the role with some very deft handling by having Kirk Lazarus come off very sincere in playing a black man and trying to avoid stereotyping himself too much. Of course, we also laugh hard when he sometimes fails to realize how far he has or hasn't gone in his method acting, too. What was so great about this performance for me was that Downey really avoided making the role offensive or even come off like a white guy trying to be black and it totally worked.
Philip Seymour Hoffman - Doubt
I'm amazed that this film was able to garner 4 acting nominations while not being nominated for Best Picture. A great reason why I love the decision to increase the nominees for that category. Hoffman plays this role of a Catholic priest perfectly. It's such a joy to watch him match wits against Streep in this film that lives up to it's name. As much as we doubt Hoffman's innocence every time Streep's character seems to think he is guilty of corrupting the only black kid in the school and acting inappropriately, possibly sexually, with him, we also doubt whether or not we believe Streep when Hoffman and the two cross paths multiple times. Hoffman is able to portray his character as the beloved priest that is only helping a disturbed young boy and mentoring him after hours. We never really know which side to believe, the loved priest who is looking to modernize his parish or the smarmy, quick tempered, power monger who preys on the young boys. This is all due to how effortlessly Hoffman can change from one persona to the next which leaves the audience unsure of what is truly going on in this church. The believability of Hoffman in this role speaks to his acting prowess.
Michael Shannon - Revolutionary Road
I had no idea what to expect from Shannon in this role as I didn't know much about him or what he was capable of besides his awesome work in Boardwalk Empire. I'll admit I was sorta expecting to be letdown but am glad to state that wasn't the case. This is a powerful performance that blew me away because Shannon steals the two short scenes he's in (maybe 10 minutes total in the film) and really saves the movie from itself. And this is pretty incredible since DiCaprio, Winslet, and Kathy Bates were all in the scenes with Shannon. I loved this role because it really grounds the two main characters in reality as Shannon's just released from a psychiatric hospital character delivers the caustic truth and is able to sense all the lies and BS that's floating around and call it all out without caring about pretenses or decorum. He's a kind of controlled crazy that is very refreshing. You can tell he's still somewhat normal but is able to use his "illness" as a way to say whatever he wants, which in turn makes everyone else seem crazy for trying to lead normal lives while hiding all their demons. A masterful performance that kept this move from caving in under it's own self importance.
I am really surprised that the Academy got this group so damn right. Every performance is amazing and Ledger absolutely earned his posthumous win. It was actually only the second posthumous award ever presented and the first in the Supporting Actor category. It was also fantastic to see the Academy reward a comedic performance since I know those have been few and far between in the later years of the Oscars. I would have been happy to see Downey win if Ledger's Joker hadn't been such an instant classic. Shannon's performance really surprised the hell out of me in how much I actually liked it. I thought it would easily be 5th out of the 5 but felt it was powerful enough to be right in the middle of them. Brolin and Hoffman could have easily won this award if they had been nominated in any other year, which says a lot about how strong this group really was. This is the reason I decided to start this blog; to find these amazing groups and see how often the Academy really got things right.
Oscar Winner: Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
My Winner: Heath Ledger - The Dark Knight
Robert Downey, Jr.
Michael Shannon
Philip Seymour Hoffman
Josh Brolin
Friday, December 9, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Supporting Actress 2008
I am back! And hopefully writing these reviews with some regularity now. Playoff hockey is gone (but a new season has arrived) and my infatuation with Netflix has since waned. This year's crop of supporting actresses only gave me one movie to watch that I haven't seen which means I pretty much know what my order of liking these roles will be (and that is somewhat anti-climactic for me). Hopefully I don't have too much rust to knock off while writing these. Enjoy!
2008 Best Supporting Actress
Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona
I must say I expected a lot more out of this performance. It was decent, sure, but I'm not sold on it being Oscar worthy. Cruz's character does breathe some life into this incredibly cliche and stale movie but I also felt her character suffered from being built from a very worn out mold. She was the only thing that actually felt real and authentic about this film due to the fiery passion she exudes while onscreen. But like every other character in this movie, she is a cookie cutter representation of what Allen thinks of, in this case, a Spanish woman is. Meaning she is loud, emotional, violent, fiery, and irrational. This does help break up the monotony of the movie at times and Cruz deftly portrays her character without it seeming too much like a cliche. I just don't think even Cruz's best can elevate this role to anything more than a decent portrayal of a terrible character.
Amy Adams - Doubt
This is the type of role that suits Adams perfectly and I feel she is at her best in these innocent, almost precocious, performances. In Doubt, she does a great job of doing what is required of her character. Her role is essentially to be the go-between for Streep and Hoffman's characters. It is almost like Adams' character is just like the audience: being preyed on and plied by the other two characters so that she'll believe their version of events surrounding the boy and his troubles. For this reason, I feel Adams becomes mostly a blank canvas on which anyone to paint what they want (including the director) and getting the audience to feel a certain way thus making her performance hit without any real effect. Adams does well with what she is given but ultimately cannot elevate it into something other than a vessel to move scenes along.
Viola Davis - Doubt
I think Davis' performance really encapsulates what Doubt is all about. In her very brief role, she is able to further make the audience doubt not only whether or not her son is being abused by the priest, but if it is even a good thing to try and punish the priest which would surely bring to light the boy's actions in a negative way. It makes one wonder if Davis is a good mother protecting her son or a careless mother more concerned about not getting involved in any kind of drama at the school. At first, I wasn't exactly wowed by this performance but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to capture the movie's point. Davis conveys a lot of different emotions in her very short scene and all of them while remaining very collected and deliberate in her words. It's a powerful performance that really takes the movie to another level.
Taraji P. Henson - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
This nomination felt like it rode the Benjamin Button wave in making its way on this list, since that movie had the most nominations this year. When I was trying to remember anything interesting or memorable about this role before I re-watched it, I honestly could not remember anything about it besides she was the one who raised Brad Pitt's character. Henson does a decent enough job of portraying the caring mother figure, but it just never stood out past the supporting role it is. She makes the relationship between Pitt and herself seem very genuine but I feel that any other actress could have produced the same result. And I'm not so sure one of the other supporting actresses in this movie (Swinton, Blanchett, etc.) couldn't have easily taken her place here.
Marisa Tomei - The Wrestler
One thing is obvious about this film from the start, Mickey Rourke gives an amazing and powerful performance as an aging pro wrestler. Marisa Tomei's character, however, really helps to humanize the larger-than-life Randy "The Ram" Robinson persona. Her character is somewhat vulnerable herself as an aging stripper and Randy mistakes her trying to make a buck for actual friendliness. Tomei displays such a depth to this character when she agrees to help him buy a gift for his estranged daughter and they end up having a good time together. When Tomei's character realizes she is letting a client get close to her and that she is letting her own personal guard down, she takes off. The next meeting is tempestuous at best and it is clear she is conflicted inside about being a stripper and a friend to Randy. Tomei really balances playing Rourke's emotional outlet with maintaining her need to make money very delicately and is what makes this a strong performance.
This was a very interesting group to me. The performances all seemed to be of the same sort of caliber, so to speak, as nothing really stood head and shoulders above the rest. Viola Davis' performance really shocked me because on my first watch, I was really perturbed to find out such a short role was nominated and thought it had to be one of those Oscar token nominations given to someone for their past body of work. So I think re-watching these films and doing this blog has really helped me to see things a different way than I'm used to and it's pretty awesome to be able to say that. I like to think I don't pretend to get things or not get things just because it's the trendy thing to do and I definitely don't try to be "deep" with my choices in hopes of someone somewhere thinking I'm really smart or hip. I just really enjoyed her performance as much as that surprised me. Honestly, the other four nominations could easily be arranged in any order and I wouldn't fight too hard for a performance to go either way. I knew what to expect already from Tomei, Adams, and Henson and was somewhat annoyed that Cruz wasn't as amazing as I thought (and was led to believe by many Woody Allen lovers that that hide as film critics) she was going to be in a Woody Allen movie, which was my first by the way. Another one of the things I can continue to look forward to as I work backwards is finally seeing movies and directors I've heard about for ages but have never seen. Anyway, that was way longer than I intended but I'm definitely glad to be back writing and excited for such a great Supporting Actor group to come!
Oscar Winner: Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona
My Winner: Viola Davis - Doubt
Marisa Tomei
Amy Adams
Penelope Cruz
Taraji P. Henson
2008 Best Supporting Actress
Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona
I must say I expected a lot more out of this performance. It was decent, sure, but I'm not sold on it being Oscar worthy. Cruz's character does breathe some life into this incredibly cliche and stale movie but I also felt her character suffered from being built from a very worn out mold. She was the only thing that actually felt real and authentic about this film due to the fiery passion she exudes while onscreen. But like every other character in this movie, she is a cookie cutter representation of what Allen thinks of, in this case, a Spanish woman is. Meaning she is loud, emotional, violent, fiery, and irrational. This does help break up the monotony of the movie at times and Cruz deftly portrays her character without it seeming too much like a cliche. I just don't think even Cruz's best can elevate this role to anything more than a decent portrayal of a terrible character.
Amy Adams - Doubt
This is the type of role that suits Adams perfectly and I feel she is at her best in these innocent, almost precocious, performances. In Doubt, she does a great job of doing what is required of her character. Her role is essentially to be the go-between for Streep and Hoffman's characters. It is almost like Adams' character is just like the audience: being preyed on and plied by the other two characters so that she'll believe their version of events surrounding the boy and his troubles. For this reason, I feel Adams becomes mostly a blank canvas on which anyone to paint what they want (including the director) and getting the audience to feel a certain way thus making her performance hit without any real effect. Adams does well with what she is given but ultimately cannot elevate it into something other than a vessel to move scenes along.
Viola Davis - Doubt
I think Davis' performance really encapsulates what Doubt is all about. In her very brief role, she is able to further make the audience doubt not only whether or not her son is being abused by the priest, but if it is even a good thing to try and punish the priest which would surely bring to light the boy's actions in a negative way. It makes one wonder if Davis is a good mother protecting her son or a careless mother more concerned about not getting involved in any kind of drama at the school. At first, I wasn't exactly wowed by this performance but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to capture the movie's point. Davis conveys a lot of different emotions in her very short scene and all of them while remaining very collected and deliberate in her words. It's a powerful performance that really takes the movie to another level.
Taraji P. Henson - The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
This nomination felt like it rode the Benjamin Button wave in making its way on this list, since that movie had the most nominations this year. When I was trying to remember anything interesting or memorable about this role before I re-watched it, I honestly could not remember anything about it besides she was the one who raised Brad Pitt's character. Henson does a decent enough job of portraying the caring mother figure, but it just never stood out past the supporting role it is. She makes the relationship between Pitt and herself seem very genuine but I feel that any other actress could have produced the same result. And I'm not so sure one of the other supporting actresses in this movie (Swinton, Blanchett, etc.) couldn't have easily taken her place here.
Marisa Tomei - The Wrestler
One thing is obvious about this film from the start, Mickey Rourke gives an amazing and powerful performance as an aging pro wrestler. Marisa Tomei's character, however, really helps to humanize the larger-than-life Randy "The Ram" Robinson persona. Her character is somewhat vulnerable herself as an aging stripper and Randy mistakes her trying to make a buck for actual friendliness. Tomei displays such a depth to this character when she agrees to help him buy a gift for his estranged daughter and they end up having a good time together. When Tomei's character realizes she is letting a client get close to her and that she is letting her own personal guard down, she takes off. The next meeting is tempestuous at best and it is clear she is conflicted inside about being a stripper and a friend to Randy. Tomei really balances playing Rourke's emotional outlet with maintaining her need to make money very delicately and is what makes this a strong performance.
This was a very interesting group to me. The performances all seemed to be of the same sort of caliber, so to speak, as nothing really stood head and shoulders above the rest. Viola Davis' performance really shocked me because on my first watch, I was really perturbed to find out such a short role was nominated and thought it had to be one of those Oscar token nominations given to someone for their past body of work. So I think re-watching these films and doing this blog has really helped me to see things a different way than I'm used to and it's pretty awesome to be able to say that. I like to think I don't pretend to get things or not get things just because it's the trendy thing to do and I definitely don't try to be "deep" with my choices in hopes of someone somewhere thinking I'm really smart or hip. I just really enjoyed her performance as much as that surprised me. Honestly, the other four nominations could easily be arranged in any order and I wouldn't fight too hard for a performance to go either way. I knew what to expect already from Tomei, Adams, and Henson and was somewhat annoyed that Cruz wasn't as amazing as I thought (and was led to believe by many Woody Allen lovers that that hide as film critics) she was going to be in a Woody Allen movie, which was my first by the way. Another one of the things I can continue to look forward to as I work backwards is finally seeing movies and directors I've heard about for ages but have never seen. Anyway, that was way longer than I intended but I'm definitely glad to be back writing and excited for such a great Supporting Actor group to come!
Oscar Winner: Penelope Cruz - Vicky Cristina Barcelona
My Winner: Viola Davis - Doubt
Marisa Tomei
Amy Adams
Penelope Cruz
Taraji P. Henson
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Best Picture 2009
Playoff hockey has been keeping me from watching and writing as often as I should so bear with me for a bit, I definitely get back on track here soon. Sadly, this is the last of the 10 Best Picture nominee groups I'll do for a very long time. I am glad they opened up this category to allow for other films that wouldn't ordinarily get nominated because there are some really good ones lately. Now on to the movies!
2009 Best Picture
The Hurt Locker
I like this movie for an Oscar win. This movie is almost like a TV show or play with its different episodes/acts. I think that kind of vignette format works really well here. It captures the different things that the EOD unit can go through and deal with, without getting bogged down in telling a story with one or two events. It allows everything about the movie to stay fresh and you don't get worn down by the constant tension. The movie is a thriller and the edge-of-your-seat tension is heavy but done in such a way that you can almost feel the sand fly by you when a bomb goes off - it's that real. My issue with this film is the plausibility of some of the events that go on. For a civilian that hasn't experienced the military life, I'm sure the movie comes off as a strong one and wholly believable, but I've been there and experienced the craziness firsthand and the believability has to be suspended for me to really enjoy it. When the main guys turn into expert snipers or Renner's character goes off base alone to find any info about a little boy's murderers, it's just too ludicrous for me to even try to get past. It dampens what is otherwise a very good movie.
Avatar
I can't believe that there were people that were very vocal about this movie actually winning Best Picture, let alone being nominated. It deservedly won some technical awards and is a landmark film for special effects, but it's a borderline terrible movie when you get past the aesthetic. And to be honest, the big blue Na'vi still look a bit stupid and out of place in a live action movie. The story borrows heavily from many other movies and I'd compare it as an updated, better looking version of Fern Gully. The story itself is nothing new or compelling, the characters are all of the stock variety, there's no tension because everything is spelled out for you, you're never in doubt of what's going to happen next, and the political messages throughout the movie are grating to anyone with half a brain. Good special effects does not forgive bad characters and storytelling.
The Blind Side
I think this would have been better served as a movie of the week or a Lifetime movie because that's about as much substance as this movie has. While the actual inspiration for the story is compelling, The Blind Side manages to botch it by pandering to a white, suburban, middle-class audience. How this was even nominated is beyond my comprehension. It praises Bullock's character as saving the young, virtually homeless, large black kid all the while ignoring and treating him like a second-class citizen in a movie that's supposed to showcase his overcoming a rough life. The movie teeters on the brink of devolving into a sappy, cloyingly saccharine pap fest and Bullock's performance is a big reason why. It's just not a movie I can ever see myself watching again even if it's on whatever station I left my TV on.
District 9
This is one of the best recent sci-fi movies in a long time. It's certainly way better than Avatar and signals an independent sci-fi movement with movies such as Moon and Monsters. I love how the movie is built around the faux-documentary style which gives it a realism that serves the movie so well. The effects are real looking and the story is one that can and should resonate with the regular viewer. It's one of discrimination and the parallels to the apartheid are obvious and though some critics felt this part of the story was heavy handed, I think they are wrong because it really let the viewer bring their own thoughts and feelings into the movie. Wikus is portrayed brilliantly as the innocent man that turns into an alien and we can identify with him which engrosses us entirely in the film. And his growing relationship with the aliens as he begins to change is incredibly compelling, especially with the xenophobia as the backdrop to the film. An outstanding piece of science fiction cinema.
An Education
What I didn't like about this movie was the way all the adults acted completely unlike adults seemingly to make Carey Mulligan's character Jenny look way more mature and grown up than she really was. I think it severely hurt the movie because the viewer is unable to fully give themselves to the story presented. Jenny does well in school and is trying to get into Oxford and her dad keeps pushing her to study for the entrance tests but then when she meets a much older man and he visits the home and charms the family, the dad easily okays that she give up school and marry him. Many times I wanted the adults to be more than empty characters for Jenny to interact with but was routinely letdown. The movie really lacked drama where there should have been some and undercut the drama that was there by too neatly wrapping up the ending and basically saying she did a foolish thing but that in the end it was no big deal. Mulligan's performance was good but the rest of the movie left me wanting, no, begging for more.
Inglourious Basterds
Tarantino can't really do much wrong in making his movies and this one is no exception. It's phenomenal and such a wild, fun experience to watch. I love that the foreign speaking parts all go to foreign actors because it gives the film some authenticity and makes for some much stronger scenes and acting. The story is fantastic in each sense of the word and the alternate history idea is one that's fresh and rarely done. The characters are memorable and excellent, although I question casting his buddy Eli Roth as the Bear Jew since it was easily the weakest character and performance in the movie. There's not much else to say besides this is a really cool movie that everyone should see.
Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
The acting from the two main characters really helped push this movie to a higher level, no pun intended. I think without those two, it wouldn't have received as much attention and praise as it did. The story is your basic sort of empowerment story: girl is constantly put down by her own mother and made to do everything for her and the mom resents her when she starts doing well in school and eventually breaks free of her tyrannical reign and becomes her own person. There are times when the movie underwhelms as during the school scenes when we feel as if we've already seen this done a million times before. The real compelling story is between Precious and her mother and the movie is fun to watch at these times. There is also these weird daydream scenes that Precious imagines that really feel out of place in the movie with the way they are shot and look. I can understand what the director was going for but I think it fails and detracts from the overall pace of the movie.
A Serious Man
On the first watch, I hated it. I felt the movie really had no point, suffered from any real drama, and was overall pretty boring to watch. On my second viewing for this blog, I loved it! This movie is a total grower and probably does need multiple viewings to "get it" unfortunately. Obviously, I don't think this is a movie for everyone. The Coen Brothers have crafted an incredibly subtle movie. I love subtle humor a lot and for whatever reason I must not have been paying as close attention as I should on my first viewing. But with the second, I thought it was hilarious in such a reserved and understated way. Nothing hits you over the head and says laugh; it's bleak, dark, weird humor. The movie is ultimately about a Jewish man from Minnesota's life crumbling around him leading him to question his faith. Most of the other characters seem very one-sided but it works for me because the movie is about how the main character reacts and deals with the issues these characters present. This is a wonderful movie that I don't think everyone will like.
Up
Sometimes I wish Pixar would reign in the sappy moments in its movies a bit. The sappy scene in the beginning where Karl and his wife grow old seems very forced and sudden and as I said in my Toy Story 3 review, I don't like being told to feel a certain way especially right from the start! I understand that it sets up the basic premise of the movie since his wife wanted to go on a trip to South America but I feel it could have been done in a different manner that didn't yank on the heartstrings so hard and still remain poignant. There are plenty of times they do it right as the story progresses. Otherwise, it's a fantastical story that is quite funny at times and visually fun to watch. The relationship between Karl and the boy is fun to watch develop as they teach each other about life, which is really something when Karl is pretty old. Up has a great mix of adventure, humor, drama, and mystery.
Up in the Air
This movie had some great acting, good characters, and a decent story. Clooney again charms the pants off the viewer but the movie feels both like it's missing something and trying too hard at the same time. It's able to capture the zeitgeist of the economic collapse and the massive job loss that happened really well. But as we follow the unlikely likable Clooney through the movie, we get hit over the head with these out of place documentary like interviews with real people that totally kills the flow and feel of the movie. And as we start to root on the romance between Clooney and Farmiga, we get THAT ripped out from under us in a way that made me angry. It was clearly done to get Clooney's character to "change" his outlook on life, but it felt so contrived and preyed on the audience's feelings that it brought the movie down with it. I wish the movie would have stuck to either being a comedy or drama because the mixing of the two at times didn't quite work and undercut the movie. With all my griping, though, it's still a decent movie worth a watch.
I love that this year was a pretty historic year for Best Picture nominees. First winning female director, first black director nominated, animated feature, sci-fi nominated again, and a Tarantino film. The expansion to 10 nominees was the best thing the Academy could have done for the sagging Oscar ceremonies. It gets people to watch movies they may not have initially seen and gets them tuning in to see movies they are rooting for. It's brilliant and I'm glad they decided to expand. I'm sad that I have to go back to just 5 nominees in 2008 knowing that movies such as The Dark Knight missed out on what would have been easy nominations. I like the choice of The Hurt Locker for the win and I'm especially glad they didn't reward that huge mess Avatar. I chose District 9 because it's an instant classic sci-fi movie to me and it blew me away in theaters and was still amazing on subsequent watches. I'm glad this year is finally ending because school and NHL playoffs has severely disrupted my reviewing process. But fear not, as I will get back into my groove soon enough. Also....please leave comments!
Oscar Winner: The Hurt Locker
My Winner: District 9
Inglourious Basterds
The Hurt Locker
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air
Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
An Education
Avatar
The Blind Side
2009 Best Picture
The Hurt Locker
I like this movie for an Oscar win. This movie is almost like a TV show or play with its different episodes/acts. I think that kind of vignette format works really well here. It captures the different things that the EOD unit can go through and deal with, without getting bogged down in telling a story with one or two events. It allows everything about the movie to stay fresh and you don't get worn down by the constant tension. The movie is a thriller and the edge-of-your-seat tension is heavy but done in such a way that you can almost feel the sand fly by you when a bomb goes off - it's that real. My issue with this film is the plausibility of some of the events that go on. For a civilian that hasn't experienced the military life, I'm sure the movie comes off as a strong one and wholly believable, but I've been there and experienced the craziness firsthand and the believability has to be suspended for me to really enjoy it. When the main guys turn into expert snipers or Renner's character goes off base alone to find any info about a little boy's murderers, it's just too ludicrous for me to even try to get past. It dampens what is otherwise a very good movie.
Avatar
I can't believe that there were people that were very vocal about this movie actually winning Best Picture, let alone being nominated. It deservedly won some technical awards and is a landmark film for special effects, but it's a borderline terrible movie when you get past the aesthetic. And to be honest, the big blue Na'vi still look a bit stupid and out of place in a live action movie. The story borrows heavily from many other movies and I'd compare it as an updated, better looking version of Fern Gully. The story itself is nothing new or compelling, the characters are all of the stock variety, there's no tension because everything is spelled out for you, you're never in doubt of what's going to happen next, and the political messages throughout the movie are grating to anyone with half a brain. Good special effects does not forgive bad characters and storytelling.
The Blind Side
I think this would have been better served as a movie of the week or a Lifetime movie because that's about as much substance as this movie has. While the actual inspiration for the story is compelling, The Blind Side manages to botch it by pandering to a white, suburban, middle-class audience. How this was even nominated is beyond my comprehension. It praises Bullock's character as saving the young, virtually homeless, large black kid all the while ignoring and treating him like a second-class citizen in a movie that's supposed to showcase his overcoming a rough life. The movie teeters on the brink of devolving into a sappy, cloyingly saccharine pap fest and Bullock's performance is a big reason why. It's just not a movie I can ever see myself watching again even if it's on whatever station I left my TV on.
District 9
This is one of the best recent sci-fi movies in a long time. It's certainly way better than Avatar and signals an independent sci-fi movement with movies such as Moon and Monsters. I love how the movie is built around the faux-documentary style which gives it a realism that serves the movie so well. The effects are real looking and the story is one that can and should resonate with the regular viewer. It's one of discrimination and the parallels to the apartheid are obvious and though some critics felt this part of the story was heavy handed, I think they are wrong because it really let the viewer bring their own thoughts and feelings into the movie. Wikus is portrayed brilliantly as the innocent man that turns into an alien and we can identify with him which engrosses us entirely in the film. And his growing relationship with the aliens as he begins to change is incredibly compelling, especially with the xenophobia as the backdrop to the film. An outstanding piece of science fiction cinema.
An Education
What I didn't like about this movie was the way all the adults acted completely unlike adults seemingly to make Carey Mulligan's character Jenny look way more mature and grown up than she really was. I think it severely hurt the movie because the viewer is unable to fully give themselves to the story presented. Jenny does well in school and is trying to get into Oxford and her dad keeps pushing her to study for the entrance tests but then when she meets a much older man and he visits the home and charms the family, the dad easily okays that she give up school and marry him. Many times I wanted the adults to be more than empty characters for Jenny to interact with but was routinely letdown. The movie really lacked drama where there should have been some and undercut the drama that was there by too neatly wrapping up the ending and basically saying she did a foolish thing but that in the end it was no big deal. Mulligan's performance was good but the rest of the movie left me wanting, no, begging for more.
Inglourious Basterds
Tarantino can't really do much wrong in making his movies and this one is no exception. It's phenomenal and such a wild, fun experience to watch. I love that the foreign speaking parts all go to foreign actors because it gives the film some authenticity and makes for some much stronger scenes and acting. The story is fantastic in each sense of the word and the alternate history idea is one that's fresh and rarely done. The characters are memorable and excellent, although I question casting his buddy Eli Roth as the Bear Jew since it was easily the weakest character and performance in the movie. There's not much else to say besides this is a really cool movie that everyone should see.
Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
The acting from the two main characters really helped push this movie to a higher level, no pun intended. I think without those two, it wouldn't have received as much attention and praise as it did. The story is your basic sort of empowerment story: girl is constantly put down by her own mother and made to do everything for her and the mom resents her when she starts doing well in school and eventually breaks free of her tyrannical reign and becomes her own person. There are times when the movie underwhelms as during the school scenes when we feel as if we've already seen this done a million times before. The real compelling story is between Precious and her mother and the movie is fun to watch at these times. There is also these weird daydream scenes that Precious imagines that really feel out of place in the movie with the way they are shot and look. I can understand what the director was going for but I think it fails and detracts from the overall pace of the movie.
A Serious Man
On the first watch, I hated it. I felt the movie really had no point, suffered from any real drama, and was overall pretty boring to watch. On my second viewing for this blog, I loved it! This movie is a total grower and probably does need multiple viewings to "get it" unfortunately. Obviously, I don't think this is a movie for everyone. The Coen Brothers have crafted an incredibly subtle movie. I love subtle humor a lot and for whatever reason I must not have been paying as close attention as I should on my first viewing. But with the second, I thought it was hilarious in such a reserved and understated way. Nothing hits you over the head and says laugh; it's bleak, dark, weird humor. The movie is ultimately about a Jewish man from Minnesota's life crumbling around him leading him to question his faith. Most of the other characters seem very one-sided but it works for me because the movie is about how the main character reacts and deals with the issues these characters present. This is a wonderful movie that I don't think everyone will like.
Up
Sometimes I wish Pixar would reign in the sappy moments in its movies a bit. The sappy scene in the beginning where Karl and his wife grow old seems very forced and sudden and as I said in my Toy Story 3 review, I don't like being told to feel a certain way especially right from the start! I understand that it sets up the basic premise of the movie since his wife wanted to go on a trip to South America but I feel it could have been done in a different manner that didn't yank on the heartstrings so hard and still remain poignant. There are plenty of times they do it right as the story progresses. Otherwise, it's a fantastical story that is quite funny at times and visually fun to watch. The relationship between Karl and the boy is fun to watch develop as they teach each other about life, which is really something when Karl is pretty old. Up has a great mix of adventure, humor, drama, and mystery.
Up in the Air
This movie had some great acting, good characters, and a decent story. Clooney again charms the pants off the viewer but the movie feels both like it's missing something and trying too hard at the same time. It's able to capture the zeitgeist of the economic collapse and the massive job loss that happened really well. But as we follow the unlikely likable Clooney through the movie, we get hit over the head with these out of place documentary like interviews with real people that totally kills the flow and feel of the movie. And as we start to root on the romance between Clooney and Farmiga, we get THAT ripped out from under us in a way that made me angry. It was clearly done to get Clooney's character to "change" his outlook on life, but it felt so contrived and preyed on the audience's feelings that it brought the movie down with it. I wish the movie would have stuck to either being a comedy or drama because the mixing of the two at times didn't quite work and undercut the movie. With all my griping, though, it's still a decent movie worth a watch.
I love that this year was a pretty historic year for Best Picture nominees. First winning female director, first black director nominated, animated feature, sci-fi nominated again, and a Tarantino film. The expansion to 10 nominees was the best thing the Academy could have done for the sagging Oscar ceremonies. It gets people to watch movies they may not have initially seen and gets them tuning in to see movies they are rooting for. It's brilliant and I'm glad they decided to expand. I'm sad that I have to go back to just 5 nominees in 2008 knowing that movies such as The Dark Knight missed out on what would have been easy nominations. I like the choice of The Hurt Locker for the win and I'm especially glad they didn't reward that huge mess Avatar. I chose District 9 because it's an instant classic sci-fi movie to me and it blew me away in theaters and was still amazing on subsequent watches. I'm glad this year is finally ending because school and NHL playoffs has severely disrupted my reviewing process. But fear not, as I will get back into my groove soon enough. Also....please leave comments!
Oscar Winner: The Hurt Locker
My Winner: District 9
Inglourious Basterds
The Hurt Locker
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air
Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
An Education
Avatar
The Blind Side
Monday, April 18, 2011
Leading Actor 2009
By name alone, this is a really strong group. I have a feeling I'm not going to dislike any of the performances. The Wild Card in the group is Colin Firth since I don't really know too much about that movie. Very interested in reviewing these performances.
2009 Best Actor
Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
Some might just go ahead and write this win off as the Academy doing what they do best and rewarding a lifetime of work rather than the single performance. But, honestly, I can see why Bridges received his first Oscar for this role. He is completely believable as Bad Blake and if someone told me he actually was a country singer, it wouldn't be much of a shock. He can sing (and from what I've read has a CD coming out or is out) and has that weathered look of someone who has spent his life on the road with too much smoke, booze, and women. He desperately wants a family before his time is up but only when it's convenient for him, which makes it a rollercoaster ride of emotion. Bridges smoothly operates the ride without causing us to want to vomit. It's not overdone and you can really feel for him as he tries to figure out his mix match of emotions and problems. Watching him sort them all out is where we can see why he won. Interesting to note that Robert Duvall (who is great in this film) plays a friend of Bridges, won his only Oscar for a 1983 movie, Tender Mercies, that has essentially the same exact premise.
George Clooney - Up in the Air
How can you not like Clooney? This is a perfect George Clooney role and he definitely excels in it and drives this movie. He plays Ryan Bingham, a man who travels the country firing people for bosses who don't want to and who enjoys his almost 300 days a year spent traveling and living in hotels. He meets his match at work when a young woman comes up with a way to fire people over the Internet meaning less travel and in his love life when a woman challenges his ideas on no commitment. This role really becomes an extension of Clooney in the slick, suave, and sophisticated ways his character goes about his job and daily life. The character and Clooney are extremely charming and you really buy into the idea that he is content living his life sheltered from regular relationships and start to believe that way of life might not be so bad. But when the two women enter his life, you see his aversion to change and facing a life where he is grown up and settled down. The audience's attitude shifts with Clooney's and is a testament to his charm and acting ability that even though we're supposed to kinda not like his character we end up fully behind whatever decisions he makes. It does work against him at the end, however, when his transformation into a better person isn't much of a transformation at all. He's still doing many of the same things he was before, so his becoming a nicer, better person rings a bit hollow.
Colin Firth - A Single Man
There wasn't a whole lot in this role that really grabbed my attention. The movie overall is kinda boring and I don't think Firth's character does all that much to make it any more compelling. The director relies way too much on close-ups of Firth looking sad or melancholy, and while I understand that is part of the theme of the film, it comes off as a bit much. And while Firth may be a good actor, it takes more than seeing him glum for me to like his performance. Firth's character is a gay, British professor in Southern California whose partner has died recently and he is now putting in motion plans for suicide but throughout the day he meets random people and remembers random memories that make life seem better. On paper it's a great idea but the execution of the character leaves a lot to be desired for me. It's an alright performance but there just needs to be something more to it, it needs a soul to come alive and endear itself to the viewer. I think what holds it back is that it remains on the same level throughout the film and it's nothing that memorable to begin with.
Morgan Freeman - Invictus
I think Freeman does a good job in playing the part of Nelson Mandela. Much like Meryl Streep's Julia Child character, this role isn't just imitation. Yes, Freeman has the look down, has the slow vocal delivery down, the way Mandela walks and waves down, everything about the look and feel of Mandela down. But like Streep, Freeman is able to insert parts of himself into the role so that it becomes a combination of Morgan Freeman and Nelson Mandela and not just a flat out imitation. Unfortunately, the script leaves a lot to be desired from the character and some of the blame can be shifted to Freeman. Every time Mandela speaks, it's as if it were written specifically to be played as an introduction to Freeman at the Oscars and nothing more. It's all too important every time and the speaking in soundbites really detracts from the overall power of the performance and the film. Maybe Freeman saw this as his chance at an Oscar and decided to forgo subtlety in favor of the grandiose approach. The character is nonetheless believable and likable even if the world and problems within that world are too easily solved with no real tension.
Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker
As a character, Renner is pretty fantastic in this film. When we first meet him, we wonder if we're actually going to like him as he seems like an ass. But he commands our respect and attention every time he's on screen after his introduction. He's disarmingly calm when it comes to his dangerous job and this imbues in him a badass quality which serves Renner well. You realize his dedication and attention to detail allow him to be a little more reckless but you also start to wonder if Renner wasn't in the Army would he maybe be a sociopath in the real world. It's a very fine line and the mix of compassion and rage he shows makes for a very compelling performance. As the movie progresses, we get to experience his private moments of pain that seemingly shape his persona when out doing his job. It's a good performance that does more than the usual stereotyping of soldiers, which is a nice breath of fresh air.
This is a very strong group. The one that doesn't really do much for me is Colin Firth's role, but all the others are worthy of their nominations. The win for Bridges is probably overdue at this point if you look at his body of work, but I think it was well deserved. I had trouble choosing between Bridges and Renner for my winner since both created very memorable characters. I chose Renner because I'm a little biased for good Iraq/Afghanistan movies but really you could call it a tie. Glad to see a strong group after the mediocre Actress one.
Oscar Winner: Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
My Winner: Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker
Jeff Bridges
George Clooney
Morgan Freeman
Colin Firth
2009 Best Actor
Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
Some might just go ahead and write this win off as the Academy doing what they do best and rewarding a lifetime of work rather than the single performance. But, honestly, I can see why Bridges received his first Oscar for this role. He is completely believable as Bad Blake and if someone told me he actually was a country singer, it wouldn't be much of a shock. He can sing (and from what I've read has a CD coming out or is out) and has that weathered look of someone who has spent his life on the road with too much smoke, booze, and women. He desperately wants a family before his time is up but only when it's convenient for him, which makes it a rollercoaster ride of emotion. Bridges smoothly operates the ride without causing us to want to vomit. It's not overdone and you can really feel for him as he tries to figure out his mix match of emotions and problems. Watching him sort them all out is where we can see why he won. Interesting to note that Robert Duvall (who is great in this film) plays a friend of Bridges, won his only Oscar for a 1983 movie, Tender Mercies, that has essentially the same exact premise.
George Clooney - Up in the Air
How can you not like Clooney? This is a perfect George Clooney role and he definitely excels in it and drives this movie. He plays Ryan Bingham, a man who travels the country firing people for bosses who don't want to and who enjoys his almost 300 days a year spent traveling and living in hotels. He meets his match at work when a young woman comes up with a way to fire people over the Internet meaning less travel and in his love life when a woman challenges his ideas on no commitment. This role really becomes an extension of Clooney in the slick, suave, and sophisticated ways his character goes about his job and daily life. The character and Clooney are extremely charming and you really buy into the idea that he is content living his life sheltered from regular relationships and start to believe that way of life might not be so bad. But when the two women enter his life, you see his aversion to change and facing a life where he is grown up and settled down. The audience's attitude shifts with Clooney's and is a testament to his charm and acting ability that even though we're supposed to kinda not like his character we end up fully behind whatever decisions he makes. It does work against him at the end, however, when his transformation into a better person isn't much of a transformation at all. He's still doing many of the same things he was before, so his becoming a nicer, better person rings a bit hollow.
Colin Firth - A Single Man
There wasn't a whole lot in this role that really grabbed my attention. The movie overall is kinda boring and I don't think Firth's character does all that much to make it any more compelling. The director relies way too much on close-ups of Firth looking sad or melancholy, and while I understand that is part of the theme of the film, it comes off as a bit much. And while Firth may be a good actor, it takes more than seeing him glum for me to like his performance. Firth's character is a gay, British professor in Southern California whose partner has died recently and he is now putting in motion plans for suicide but throughout the day he meets random people and remembers random memories that make life seem better. On paper it's a great idea but the execution of the character leaves a lot to be desired for me. It's an alright performance but there just needs to be something more to it, it needs a soul to come alive and endear itself to the viewer. I think what holds it back is that it remains on the same level throughout the film and it's nothing that memorable to begin with.
Morgan Freeman - Invictus
I think Freeman does a good job in playing the part of Nelson Mandela. Much like Meryl Streep's Julia Child character, this role isn't just imitation. Yes, Freeman has the look down, has the slow vocal delivery down, the way Mandela walks and waves down, everything about the look and feel of Mandela down. But like Streep, Freeman is able to insert parts of himself into the role so that it becomes a combination of Morgan Freeman and Nelson Mandela and not just a flat out imitation. Unfortunately, the script leaves a lot to be desired from the character and some of the blame can be shifted to Freeman. Every time Mandela speaks, it's as if it were written specifically to be played as an introduction to Freeman at the Oscars and nothing more. It's all too important every time and the speaking in soundbites really detracts from the overall power of the performance and the film. Maybe Freeman saw this as his chance at an Oscar and decided to forgo subtlety in favor of the grandiose approach. The character is nonetheless believable and likable even if the world and problems within that world are too easily solved with no real tension.
Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker
As a character, Renner is pretty fantastic in this film. When we first meet him, we wonder if we're actually going to like him as he seems like an ass. But he commands our respect and attention every time he's on screen after his introduction. He's disarmingly calm when it comes to his dangerous job and this imbues in him a badass quality which serves Renner well. You realize his dedication and attention to detail allow him to be a little more reckless but you also start to wonder if Renner wasn't in the Army would he maybe be a sociopath in the real world. It's a very fine line and the mix of compassion and rage he shows makes for a very compelling performance. As the movie progresses, we get to experience his private moments of pain that seemingly shape his persona when out doing his job. It's a good performance that does more than the usual stereotyping of soldiers, which is a nice breath of fresh air.
This is a very strong group. The one that doesn't really do much for me is Colin Firth's role, but all the others are worthy of their nominations. The win for Bridges is probably overdue at this point if you look at his body of work, but I think it was well deserved. I had trouble choosing between Bridges and Renner for my winner since both created very memorable characters. I chose Renner because I'm a little biased for good Iraq/Afghanistan movies but really you could call it a tie. Glad to see a strong group after the mediocre Actress one.
Oscar Winner: Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
My Winner: Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker
Jeff Bridges
George Clooney
Morgan Freeman
Colin Firth
Monday, April 11, 2011
Leading Actress 2009
It's been taking a bit longer for me to watch and review movies than I initially thought, but some of that is due to being busy. Once I watch a few and get in the groove I start knocking out the categories pretty quickly. Bear with me. Part of doing the most recent years first allows me to automatically know which movies/performances I think are going to be tough to make it through. I'm excited for when I start getting into years I don't exactly know much about the movies/performances so I keep a fresh perspective.
2009 Best Actress
Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
Ugh, how did Sandra Bullock win an Oscar? Seriously. I honestly do not understand the love and accolades she got for this role. Her southern accent is terrible, the acting is better suited for a TV movie, and her character is too perfect and can seemingly do no wrong. The performance suffers in that it feels like Bullock merely played dress up and acted in cliches. When she's interacting with her high society friends, she doesn't even pretend that she likes them and it's hard to imagine they are actually friends. It's as if there's a big neon sign over her head that says "Hate these ladies!" There's no subtlety (and by now you should know I LOVE subtlety in my acting haha) and Bullock just lumbers through the movie and we're only left with the impression that her character is so badass, strong, and independent that there's no room for anything else. Which is why this win boggles my mind. It teeters on the brink of being a Lifetime movie performance and a caricature of sorts, truly a misstep for the Academy.
Helen Mirren - The Last Station
"I don't understand why this performance was nominated. Again, all I can think of is that the Academy is rewarding her past (this is her 4th nomination)..." I wrote this about Annette Bening in the following year's Best Actress category and it could honestly be said of Mirren in this performance as well. In the beginning of this film, Mirren's character was feisty and boisterously voicing her unfavorable opinion of her husband's (Leo Tolstoy) political movement/ideology. I really thought she was going to continue being the voice of reason and the opposing force in this movie but sadly her character fell victim to a terrible script and lost its way. Mirren eventually lacks any direction and becomes a farce as Tolstoy's wife. She cries a lot, rolls around on the ground, and basically becomes such a melodramatic and unlikable character that the movie overall loses any impact it possibly could have had. The fact that Mirren felt no need to take the character in the obvious direction of the strong, matronly way she initially was going in solidifies this as an undeserved nomination.
Carey Mulligan - An Education
Mulligan is clearly a good actress and I hope to see her in better movies down the line. In An Education, she plays a young, naive schoolgirl who thinks she's smarter and more mature than she really is. She becomes enamored with and seduced by an older man before realizing that life isn't quite that easy. I left out some of the details so as not to ruin the film, but the actual plot is pretty preposterous and certainly doesn't allow Mulligan to give as good of a performance as she could. Her character is one of the saving graces of the film, however, with her layered and compelling performance. Throughout the film, you believe that Mulligan is actually 16 (she was 22) and you become emotionally involved in her character when you see the moments she remains a giggling schoolgirl followed by trying to remain the worldly mature adult she thinks she is. These different sides of hers would be hard to balance and remain believable on both levels but Mulligan is able to transition between the two without losing any sort of grasp on her character. It's unfortunate that the other characters in the movie are more or less one-sided so that Mulligan appears more mature, because it would have been much more compelling if Mulligan faced her anxieties of the future instead of being coddled by the supposed grown ups around her. Despite all of this, Mulligan is able to pull off a good performance in an otherwise disappointing movie.
Gabourey Sidibe - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
At first, I was worried about where this performance would go and if it would go anywhere. The character of Precious initially comes off as one without any real emotion or seemingly any real personality. Everything is delivered deadpan and her demeanor is one of pure moroseness. Part of me wondered if there was any actual acting going on because I could easily see Sidibe being this downtrodden, depressed, gloomy girl (even though that's not the case at all since she has a bubbly personality in real life) and it certainly didn't seem like any real acting was taking place. But as the film went on, it was quite evident that there was a lot more to Precious and Sidibe was giving us glimpses of the true character hidden beneath that stony exterior. When she finally stands up to her mother or when she's opening up to her teacher and classmates about her life, we really get to see why Sidibe was nominated and it's fun to watch.
Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia
There's an old debate about whether imitation is acting or not. To me, it is because whether it's good or bad that just means it's good or bad acting. Streep is the darling of the Academy (this being her 16th! nomination) but unlike some others, most of her roles are deservedly nominated. In this film, Streep offers more than just an imitation, she embodies Julia and infuses the character with her own soul to create a mix that is distinctly her own version of the culinary icon. She nails the look, the voice, the body movements and even the flippant, buoyant personality. She plays the few serious moments well without being too serious, which is how you'd think Julia Child would react. The character of Julia Child is something that would be easy to overdo and I think if the character were in the hands of someone else that's probably what we would have seen, but Streep is able to effectively balance the inherent loudness and ebullience of the character with relative ease. That's what makes this performance so much fun to watch.
I can't really say that this is a strong group by any means, especially with Bullock winning. I think that the Academy got it wrong again and this will be one of those performances we look back on in a few years and wonder why it won. Streep was Streep and you can't say much about her besides that. She's consistently good. Sidibe and Mulligan gave good performances, although I don't think we'll see Sidibe challenge for another award again. Mirren and Bullock were in some terrible movies and gave some very lackluster performances on top of it. Makes 2010 look even better, in my opinion.
Oscar Winner: Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
My Winner: Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia
Carey Mulligan
Gabourey Sidibe
Helen Mirren
Sandra Bullock
2009 Best Actress
Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
Ugh, how did Sandra Bullock win an Oscar? Seriously. I honestly do not understand the love and accolades she got for this role. Her southern accent is terrible, the acting is better suited for a TV movie, and her character is too perfect and can seemingly do no wrong. The performance suffers in that it feels like Bullock merely played dress up and acted in cliches. When she's interacting with her high society friends, she doesn't even pretend that she likes them and it's hard to imagine they are actually friends. It's as if there's a big neon sign over her head that says "Hate these ladies!" There's no subtlety (and by now you should know I LOVE subtlety in my acting haha) and Bullock just lumbers through the movie and we're only left with the impression that her character is so badass, strong, and independent that there's no room for anything else. Which is why this win boggles my mind. It teeters on the brink of being a Lifetime movie performance and a caricature of sorts, truly a misstep for the Academy.
Helen Mirren - The Last Station
"I don't understand why this performance was nominated. Again, all I can think of is that the Academy is rewarding her past (this is her 4th nomination)..." I wrote this about Annette Bening in the following year's Best Actress category and it could honestly be said of Mirren in this performance as well. In the beginning of this film, Mirren's character was feisty and boisterously voicing her unfavorable opinion of her husband's (Leo Tolstoy) political movement/ideology. I really thought she was going to continue being the voice of reason and the opposing force in this movie but sadly her character fell victim to a terrible script and lost its way. Mirren eventually lacks any direction and becomes a farce as Tolstoy's wife. She cries a lot, rolls around on the ground, and basically becomes such a melodramatic and unlikable character that the movie overall loses any impact it possibly could have had. The fact that Mirren felt no need to take the character in the obvious direction of the strong, matronly way she initially was going in solidifies this as an undeserved nomination.
Carey Mulligan - An Education
Mulligan is clearly a good actress and I hope to see her in better movies down the line. In An Education, she plays a young, naive schoolgirl who thinks she's smarter and more mature than she really is. She becomes enamored with and seduced by an older man before realizing that life isn't quite that easy. I left out some of the details so as not to ruin the film, but the actual plot is pretty preposterous and certainly doesn't allow Mulligan to give as good of a performance as she could. Her character is one of the saving graces of the film, however, with her layered and compelling performance. Throughout the film, you believe that Mulligan is actually 16 (she was 22) and you become emotionally involved in her character when you see the moments she remains a giggling schoolgirl followed by trying to remain the worldly mature adult she thinks she is. These different sides of hers would be hard to balance and remain believable on both levels but Mulligan is able to transition between the two without losing any sort of grasp on her character. It's unfortunate that the other characters in the movie are more or less one-sided so that Mulligan appears more mature, because it would have been much more compelling if Mulligan faced her anxieties of the future instead of being coddled by the supposed grown ups around her. Despite all of this, Mulligan is able to pull off a good performance in an otherwise disappointing movie.
Gabourey Sidibe - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
At first, I was worried about where this performance would go and if it would go anywhere. The character of Precious initially comes off as one without any real emotion or seemingly any real personality. Everything is delivered deadpan and her demeanor is one of pure moroseness. Part of me wondered if there was any actual acting going on because I could easily see Sidibe being this downtrodden, depressed, gloomy girl (even though that's not the case at all since she has a bubbly personality in real life) and it certainly didn't seem like any real acting was taking place. But as the film went on, it was quite evident that there was a lot more to Precious and Sidibe was giving us glimpses of the true character hidden beneath that stony exterior. When she finally stands up to her mother or when she's opening up to her teacher and classmates about her life, we really get to see why Sidibe was nominated and it's fun to watch.
Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia
There's an old debate about whether imitation is acting or not. To me, it is because whether it's good or bad that just means it's good or bad acting. Streep is the darling of the Academy (this being her 16th! nomination) but unlike some others, most of her roles are deservedly nominated. In this film, Streep offers more than just an imitation, she embodies Julia and infuses the character with her own soul to create a mix that is distinctly her own version of the culinary icon. She nails the look, the voice, the body movements and even the flippant, buoyant personality. She plays the few serious moments well without being too serious, which is how you'd think Julia Child would react. The character of Julia Child is something that would be easy to overdo and I think if the character were in the hands of someone else that's probably what we would have seen, but Streep is able to effectively balance the inherent loudness and ebullience of the character with relative ease. That's what makes this performance so much fun to watch.
I can't really say that this is a strong group by any means, especially with Bullock winning. I think that the Academy got it wrong again and this will be one of those performances we look back on in a few years and wonder why it won. Streep was Streep and you can't say much about her besides that. She's consistently good. Sidibe and Mulligan gave good performances, although I don't think we'll see Sidibe challenge for another award again. Mirren and Bullock were in some terrible movies and gave some very lackluster performances on top of it. Makes 2010 look even better, in my opinion.
Oscar Winner: Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
My Winner: Meryl Streep - Julie & Julia
Carey Mulligan
Gabourey Sidibe
Helen Mirren
Sandra Bullock
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Supporting Actor 2009
I'll keep an open mind when watching the three movies I haven't already seen but I am pretty sure I already know what my favorite is going to be. (Yes, I write this intro before I review the movies to keep it interesting!) The thing with reviewing the performances is that while I can totally hate a movie the one redeeming factor could be a stellar performance in it. I think that keeps reviewing these performances to be rewarding since it's like finding diamonds in the rough.
2009 Best Supporting Actor
Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Right from the beginning you can see why this performance won the Oscar. It's absolutely brilliant and will be one of the most highly regarded characters in film for decades to come. And that's not some hyperbolic bullshit either. Waltz plays the character of Colonel Hans Landa with a gleeful evil, he's an astute detective that revels in toying with his victims. His face and mannerisms and the way he delivers his lines are so expressive and so memorable that he completely owns the character and is easily the best part of this movie. And it's another great movie from Tarantino with many memorable characters of which Waltz is in a league of his own. There's a mixture of disgust and awe and complete, intense interest at what Waltz is going to do next. In the beginning he's slick and conniving and witty and gains our respect. The next time he's a purely evil Nazi that turns on the charm to get his information. And then he is intuitive and hilarious and evil all at the same time. Waltz does a magnificent job balancing all the different nuances expected of him.
Matt Damon - Invictus
This is a Matt Damon role: a quiet, unassuming guy that becomes a leader/winner/better person. He excels at these roles and does a good job as the captain of the South African rugby team here. Even if the film is a bit too straightforward and neat in showing the nation coming together, Damon plays the role with an intense sense of duty to his country and it comes off as being very genuine. It just doesn't come off as anything extraordinary or special. Inspirational, yes, but it follows the long line of cliche sports movie heroes we've seen many times before.
Woody Harrelson - The Messenger
Even if Harrelson's character doesn't wear his beret correctly, he does a good job as the Casualty Notification Officer delivering bad news in The Messenger. I liked this performance because the character seems completely human, faults and all, much like regular Army officers that I've known. There's no superhuman, Army robot, killing machine here, just a man who values his job and what it entails. There's no bravado, no loud overdone performance. You really believe in the character and can identify Harrelson with someone you know/knew in the military. That's why the performance works for me because Harrelson comes off as human and not someone's idea of what a soldier is which hurts another movie from this year that I'll get into later.
Christopher Plummer - The Last Station
Let's just say this movie was not very good and go from there. The script does no one any favors in this movie and the story suffers dramatically from it. So in saying that, I don't know what Plummer could have done to make this a memorable performance. I really don't know how he and Helen Mirren were nominated for this poor film. There's just not much going on for Plummer's Tolstoy other than walking around looking content or dying. I guess you can say he does both well, but that's about all he does in this film. There's no subtleties or nuances, no layers, no emotional depth. Everything is superficial and, well, frankly boring. It's as if he put on some Russian-y clothes and was filmed doing so. Much of the fault for such a boring character (and movie) goes to the director, but a veteran actor like Plummer should be able to do something more than this.
Stanley Tucci - The Lovely Bones
Surprisingly, Tucci's first nomination comes in this terribly directed movie. Tucci does a superb job as the creepy serial killer, which is a testament to his acting ability. I've seen him in too many Meryl Streep movies and seeing him play something that goes against those types brings a little fresh air to my overall view of him. There's not much else to say about this performance besides it's completely believable. You can imagine this man living next door to you and never thinking anything of it and certainly not thinking he's a little girl serial killer. He plays the character with such an understated, quiet, repressed evil that it adds an extra layer of creepiness and really adds to the character, making him difficult to stomach. An interesting nomination on the Academy's part.
This was an alright group buoyed by Waltz's amazing performance. The rest of the men all gave some pretty average to good performances and it surprises me that some of these were in fact nominated. I again agree with the Academy and I'm not sure how anyone could not agree with them. I'm also wondering if I should lower my standards for these supporting awards since I've been wanting to be wowed by not just the winners but the other nominees as well and have so far been wholly underwhelmed. I have a feeling that will continue as I go back in time. Not saying I don't enjoy watching these films, though, because I definitely do. Even the bad ones. Really you can flip Damon and Tucci and Harrelson and I'd have no problem.
Oscar Winner: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
My Winner: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Woody Harrelson
Stanley Tucci
Matt Damon
Christopher Plummer
2009 Best Supporting Actor
Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Right from the beginning you can see why this performance won the Oscar. It's absolutely brilliant and will be one of the most highly regarded characters in film for decades to come. And that's not some hyperbolic bullshit either. Waltz plays the character of Colonel Hans Landa with a gleeful evil, he's an astute detective that revels in toying with his victims. His face and mannerisms and the way he delivers his lines are so expressive and so memorable that he completely owns the character and is easily the best part of this movie. And it's another great movie from Tarantino with many memorable characters of which Waltz is in a league of his own. There's a mixture of disgust and awe and complete, intense interest at what Waltz is going to do next. In the beginning he's slick and conniving and witty and gains our respect. The next time he's a purely evil Nazi that turns on the charm to get his information. And then he is intuitive and hilarious and evil all at the same time. Waltz does a magnificent job balancing all the different nuances expected of him.
Matt Damon - Invictus
This is a Matt Damon role: a quiet, unassuming guy that becomes a leader/winner/better person. He excels at these roles and does a good job as the captain of the South African rugby team here. Even if the film is a bit too straightforward and neat in showing the nation coming together, Damon plays the role with an intense sense of duty to his country and it comes off as being very genuine. It just doesn't come off as anything extraordinary or special. Inspirational, yes, but it follows the long line of cliche sports movie heroes we've seen many times before.
Woody Harrelson - The Messenger
Even if Harrelson's character doesn't wear his beret correctly, he does a good job as the Casualty Notification Officer delivering bad news in The Messenger. I liked this performance because the character seems completely human, faults and all, much like regular Army officers that I've known. There's no superhuman, Army robot, killing machine here, just a man who values his job and what it entails. There's no bravado, no loud overdone performance. You really believe in the character and can identify Harrelson with someone you know/knew in the military. That's why the performance works for me because Harrelson comes off as human and not someone's idea of what a soldier is which hurts another movie from this year that I'll get into later.
Christopher Plummer - The Last Station
Let's just say this movie was not very good and go from there. The script does no one any favors in this movie and the story suffers dramatically from it. So in saying that, I don't know what Plummer could have done to make this a memorable performance. I really don't know how he and Helen Mirren were nominated for this poor film. There's just not much going on for Plummer's Tolstoy other than walking around looking content or dying. I guess you can say he does both well, but that's about all he does in this film. There's no subtleties or nuances, no layers, no emotional depth. Everything is superficial and, well, frankly boring. It's as if he put on some Russian-y clothes and was filmed doing so. Much of the fault for such a boring character (and movie) goes to the director, but a veteran actor like Plummer should be able to do something more than this.
Stanley Tucci - The Lovely Bones
Surprisingly, Tucci's first nomination comes in this terribly directed movie. Tucci does a superb job as the creepy serial killer, which is a testament to his acting ability. I've seen him in too many Meryl Streep movies and seeing him play something that goes against those types brings a little fresh air to my overall view of him. There's not much else to say about this performance besides it's completely believable. You can imagine this man living next door to you and never thinking anything of it and certainly not thinking he's a little girl serial killer. He plays the character with such an understated, quiet, repressed evil that it adds an extra layer of creepiness and really adds to the character, making him difficult to stomach. An interesting nomination on the Academy's part.
This was an alright group buoyed by Waltz's amazing performance. The rest of the men all gave some pretty average to good performances and it surprises me that some of these were in fact nominated. I again agree with the Academy and I'm not sure how anyone could not agree with them. I'm also wondering if I should lower my standards for these supporting awards since I've been wanting to be wowed by not just the winners but the other nominees as well and have so far been wholly underwhelmed. I have a feeling that will continue as I go back in time. Not saying I don't enjoy watching these films, though, because I definitely do. Even the bad ones. Really you can flip Damon and Tucci and Harrelson and I'd have no problem.
Oscar Winner: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
My Winner: Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
Woody Harrelson
Stanley Tucci
Matt Damon
Christopher Plummer
Monday, April 4, 2011
Supporting Actress 2009
Feels good to finally be done with 2010 (well, besides Javier Bardem's movie I can't find) since I've been watching those movies since Jan/Feb and thinking about what to write for the blog entries since then, too. On to new movies I haven't seen yet which will hopefully be a nice breath of fresh air.
2009 Best Supporting Actress
Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
Mo'Nique is an evil, terrible person in this movie. She owns the character of Mary Lee Johnston and delivers a completely unlikeable performance which is far from a bad thing. She is seething with contempt and hostility at her daughter Precious for seemingly just being born. Any time she puts on a demeanor of niceness, it's only to keep her welfare checks coming or the social workers at bay, and that demeanor looks like it's ready to fall off at any moment. She lashes out at her daughter to deflect away any sense of vulnerability and we witness a mother who is unwilling to change because she blames her daughter for everything wrong in her life. My one complaint is that the performance feels too one-note. Mo'Nique plays evil well but there's not much depth to the character. We get a small peak at the end of the movie when she begins to let down her guard a bit, but then we realize it's not a breakthrough so much as it is another ploy to get her money.
Penelope Cruz - Nine
Not gonna lie, I saw this movie in theaters and enjoyed its aesthetic and some of the songs but will admit it's not that good of a movie. I wonder if Cruz's win the previous year and the Weinstein factor in an otherwise weak group led to this nomination. Cruz is basically eye candy as the woman Daniel Day-Lewis is having an affair with. The character seems more like a caricature than anything else and doesn't do anything to help the movie from looking and feeling like one big joke. The movie seems made to win Oscars and not much else and Cruz's role reflects this idea perfectly. All style, with no substance.
Vera Farmiga - Up in the Air
This performance isn't all that exceptional or powerful, it's sort of basic and run-of-the-mill. Farmiga produces a decent enough performance as George Clooney's love interest but ultimately she lacks any real oomph. I think a lot of that is due in part to the director/writer of the movie. As the viewer, we enjoy her character as a fit for Clooney and root on their blossoming romance only to have all of that interest in the character suddenly and unceremoniously pulled out from under us when we find out she isn't who she says she is. That scene really seems like it's there to provide some jarring, serious moment to get Clooney's character to change but it comes off utterly ridiculous and the movie suffers from that point on. There's just nothing really special about Farmiga's role here, though she does try to match Clooney's charm and almost comes close. Being able to keep up with Clooney doesn't really make the performance any more compelling than it already isn't.
Maggie Gyllenhaal - Crazy Heart
Honestly, I had to watch his again because I could not remember a thing about her performance. Watching it a second time, I really think she was miscast. The romance between her and Bridges isn't believable and her Southern accent is pretty bad. At first, there is a wariness for Gyllenhaal's character in going for a relationship with Bad Blake and she does a good job in showing her hesitation in beginning the romance but gives in to her loneliness and need for a fatherly figure for her child. But the actual relationship part and the tribulations that come after just fall flat and seemed rushed to move the plot along. Why is this young aspiring journalist falling for an old, usually drunk, chain smoking country singer? There's no real chemistry or believability and that is due in large part to Gyllenhaal.
Anna Kendrick - Up in the Air
At first, Kendrick annoyed me a bit in this movie. Her character was just this insufferable, know it all, corporate do-gooder in the beginning and coupling that with Kendrick making the performance look like she was acting, well, I thought I was going to hate this one. But luckily her performance got better and better and added some depth which was much needed. She plays feisty yet vulnerable, self-assured yet doubting her life choices, independent yet still needing people and these can play out in the same scenes with minimal effort. I was glad I was wrong with my initial thoughts because I enjoyed whatever scenes she was in and thought she was a perfect foil to Clooney in this movie. I wish at times she acted with more power (not saying louder or overdone) and had been able to steal the movie away from Clooney, which I thought she was easily capable of doing.
Not a very strong group at all in my opinion. I'm satisfied with Mo'Nique winning because she gives such a searing performance, one that I think will be looked at fondly in years to come. I give the same performance the edge over Anna Kendrick, which I also liked. From there I feel there's a drop off into the more average to below average range and I know that there were probably more deserving actresses out there. I have a feeling this category is going to be the one I least want to watch and review. Hopefully I am proven wrong in the coming reviews.
Oscar Winner: Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
My Winner: Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
Anna Kendrick
Vera Farmiga
Maggie Gyllenhaal
Penelope Cruz
2009 Best Supporting Actress
Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
Mo'Nique is an evil, terrible person in this movie. She owns the character of Mary Lee Johnston and delivers a completely unlikeable performance which is far from a bad thing. She is seething with contempt and hostility at her daughter Precious for seemingly just being born. Any time she puts on a demeanor of niceness, it's only to keep her welfare checks coming or the social workers at bay, and that demeanor looks like it's ready to fall off at any moment. She lashes out at her daughter to deflect away any sense of vulnerability and we witness a mother who is unwilling to change because she blames her daughter for everything wrong in her life. My one complaint is that the performance feels too one-note. Mo'Nique plays evil well but there's not much depth to the character. We get a small peak at the end of the movie when she begins to let down her guard a bit, but then we realize it's not a breakthrough so much as it is another ploy to get her money.
Penelope Cruz - Nine
Not gonna lie, I saw this movie in theaters and enjoyed its aesthetic and some of the songs but will admit it's not that good of a movie. I wonder if Cruz's win the previous year and the Weinstein factor in an otherwise weak group led to this nomination. Cruz is basically eye candy as the woman Daniel Day-Lewis is having an affair with. The character seems more like a caricature than anything else and doesn't do anything to help the movie from looking and feeling like one big joke. The movie seems made to win Oscars and not much else and Cruz's role reflects this idea perfectly. All style, with no substance.
Vera Farmiga - Up in the Air
This performance isn't all that exceptional or powerful, it's sort of basic and run-of-the-mill. Farmiga produces a decent enough performance as George Clooney's love interest but ultimately she lacks any real oomph. I think a lot of that is due in part to the director/writer of the movie. As the viewer, we enjoy her character as a fit for Clooney and root on their blossoming romance only to have all of that interest in the character suddenly and unceremoniously pulled out from under us when we find out she isn't who she says she is. That scene really seems like it's there to provide some jarring, serious moment to get Clooney's character to change but it comes off utterly ridiculous and the movie suffers from that point on. There's just nothing really special about Farmiga's role here, though she does try to match Clooney's charm and almost comes close. Being able to keep up with Clooney doesn't really make the performance any more compelling than it already isn't.
Maggie Gyllenhaal - Crazy Heart
Honestly, I had to watch his again because I could not remember a thing about her performance. Watching it a second time, I really think she was miscast. The romance between her and Bridges isn't believable and her Southern accent is pretty bad. At first, there is a wariness for Gyllenhaal's character in going for a relationship with Bad Blake and she does a good job in showing her hesitation in beginning the romance but gives in to her loneliness and need for a fatherly figure for her child. But the actual relationship part and the tribulations that come after just fall flat and seemed rushed to move the plot along. Why is this young aspiring journalist falling for an old, usually drunk, chain smoking country singer? There's no real chemistry or believability and that is due in large part to Gyllenhaal.
Anna Kendrick - Up in the Air
At first, Kendrick annoyed me a bit in this movie. Her character was just this insufferable, know it all, corporate do-gooder in the beginning and coupling that with Kendrick making the performance look like she was acting, well, I thought I was going to hate this one. But luckily her performance got better and better and added some depth which was much needed. She plays feisty yet vulnerable, self-assured yet doubting her life choices, independent yet still needing people and these can play out in the same scenes with minimal effort. I was glad I was wrong with my initial thoughts because I enjoyed whatever scenes she was in and thought she was a perfect foil to Clooney in this movie. I wish at times she acted with more power (not saying louder or overdone) and had been able to steal the movie away from Clooney, which I thought she was easily capable of doing.
Not a very strong group at all in my opinion. I'm satisfied with Mo'Nique winning because she gives such a searing performance, one that I think will be looked at fondly in years to come. I give the same performance the edge over Anna Kendrick, which I also liked. From there I feel there's a drop off into the more average to below average range and I know that there were probably more deserving actresses out there. I have a feeling this category is going to be the one I least want to watch and review. Hopefully I am proven wrong in the coming reviews.
Oscar Winner: Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
My Winner: Mo'Nique - Precious: Based on the Novel "Push" by Sapphire
Anna Kendrick
Vera Farmiga
Maggie Gyllenhaal
Penelope Cruz
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Best Picture 2010
This will be a long post since I don't really want to split it up into two parts. Luckily, only the next one will be 10 movies until we get down into the 1930s, but that's a long way away.
2010 Best Picture
The King's Speech
This is Oscar bait at its finest. A movie that is overly sentimental for the sole sake of being sentimental. The movie tries hard to distance itself emotionally from the viewer only to come back at points and really hit the viewer over the head with insincere tosh. I actually enjoyed the historical aspects of the film and Firth is deserving of his Oscar but the movie is too complacent and formulaic about a royal family I'm not emotionally engineered to. The relationship between Bertie and Lionel doesn't feel realistic and we are left with a movie that plays it safe knowing it just needs to satiate the appetite of the Academy voters since that is its sole purpose. While it's not as terrible as I make it seem, it irritates me that this movie could have been so much more than a glorified puff piece on British royalty nostalgia and more of a serious film with an important message to say.
Black Swan
The movie demands more than Portman is able to give. As I said in my review of her, she is quite capable as the White Swan but suffers as the Black Swan. The movie itself is similar in that it tries to be more than it really is. There have been numerous retellings of the Swan Lake ballet in film and many try to come up with some new take on an old story. Black Swan fails at saying or showing anything different and therefore lacks the real emotional punch it's going for. The actual dancing is a treat to watch and Mila Kunis' character is perfect. And not to say this is a terrible movie or anything, I just feel like the Black Swan scenes could have been handled better and acted better and that ultimately leaves this film lacking.
The Fighter
This movie has such a compelling story and superb actors, there's really no doubt it deserves to be a Best Picture nominee. The tale of two brothers who are boxers, one washed up and the other trying to make it, offers up a great combination of drama and sports movie. The struggles between the family members and the struggle of Bale's character to overcome his addiction are riveting to watch and really cement this movie as a must watch. At times the characters can come off as being a bit over the top in their performances but I think this really adds to the realism of this outgoing and loud family we are being shown. What does annoy me is the usual boxing match trope you find in lots of boxing movies, whoever we are rooting for gets wailed on for a few rounds before finding some sort of energy to knock the other guy out. In a movie that is so good with its dramatic elements, the failure of the sports side to be truly innovative and buck cliches leaves a little to be desired. With that said it is still one of my favorites of the year.
Inception
Christopher Nolan's dream within a dream within a dream idea is dazzling if a little lacking in depth and emotion. The sights and sounds of the special effects are great fun to witness and really makes you feel immersed in the different worlds/dreams presented. There's definitely no dull parts visually and I hesitate to say there were any in the story either. A lot of critics complained that the story was confusing and complicated and while I don't exactly disagree (it wasn't hard to follow, though), its strength comes in making the viewer challenge what they see and think. It also comes across heavy-handed with lots of expository dialogue telling us what's going on and feels loaded down with its own weight of seriousness. But taking the movie at face value and realizing that it's just really a cool movie with a unique idea, one realizes that you don't need to be attached emotionally and can simply watch from afar....as if watching a dream.
The Kids Are All Right
Ugh, I don't see why this was a movie worthy of an Oscar nomination. I like that the expansion from 5 movies to 10 allows for movies that wouldn't normally be nominated to get a chance. But this shouldn't have been one of those movies. It's episodic and at times feels like a TV movie (or heck even a show). The lesbian angle can only carry it so far and the acting for the most part isn't as good as others would lead you to believe. The story, and especially the relationships, rang hollow and under served the characters badly. I did like some of the subtle humor throughout the movie as well as Mark Ruffalo's performance, even if it could have been better. But overall, this just isn't a movie I liked.
127 Hours
I think this just an OK movie. It's got a very interesting subject, but I don't think Danny Boyle (director) is able to put it all together in a way that fits the subject. The movie to me has a weird look to it, almost like it's overexposed. While I don't claim to know all that much about cinematography, the look of this film grates on me. It has a TV movie feel at times to me and while Franco does all he can to save it from becoming just that, there's not much for him to work with. I don't think the flashbacks are really compelling enough and Franco isn't able to carry the film on his own. For what should be a very inspiring and gut-wrenching tale, it lacks the tension, emotion and depth needed to be more than just an exercise in directing for Boyle.
The Social Network
The more I think about this film the more I love it. My initial reaction after watching this remarkable film was that it was good but forgettable. Except that after I dismissed it, the movie kept creeping back into my mind and I kept thinking about the characters, the music, the story, the dialogue. I love Jesse Eisenberg's condescending, anti-social portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg and the emotion (or lack thereof) and subtlety with which he acts is amazing, brilliant, and perfect. The dialogue is so rapid-fire and so very obviously of Aaron Sorkin's mind and is a perfect fit for a movie that digs into this generations cultural psyche. I love that you can see Zuckerberg's inability to connect with people essentially form the idea of Facebook as a way to connect with people on your own terms. The supporting characters are fantastic, the minimalist music sets the tone wonderfully, and the direction is so spot on I fail to see why this movie didn't win Best Picture.
Toy Story 3
I'm not sure if this was a stand alone movie, that it would get as much love and an Oscar nom like it has. It's a decent little end to the trilogy and got its obvious Best Animated Feature Oscar (over the more deserving How To Train Your Dragon). Like the other movies in the Toy Story arc, it likes to tug on the heartstrings, although I feel that's when the movie is at its worse. Pixar loves to add in the sappy moments but instead of letting things develop on their own, they often force you in to an emotion under the guise that it makes for a more touching film. That's a big pet peeve in movies for me. Let me form my own emotions and feelings towards characters and scenes and stop force feeding me what you think I should be feeling. I think TS3 is waaay better than 2, but not nearly as good as 1 and the prior movies probably make people react to this movie differently than if the others hadn't existed. Meaning, the nostalgia for the Toy Story franchise makes this movie better than it really is. I feel this nomination was more of a nod to the Toy Story franchise than to how good of a film this one really is.
True Grit
I love that the Coens are never the same from movie to movie. Their more faithful adaptation of the book has some wonderful acting, if at times a bit stilted, and beautiful cinematography. Although the landscape looks great on film, the action sequences are a bit lacking and the movie as a whole is kinda dull. There's no real sense of danger or tension or anything that might keep the viewer on the edge of their seat. And once we meet Hailee Steinfeld's father's killer, we are pretty underwhelmed and a little aggravated that we invested the time in going along with finding this weak man who was built up as someone much stronger and more intimidating. But that's probably more of a failure of the book than the movie so I give the Coens the benefit of the doubt. It's still an enjoyable film and the Coens are great at creating memorable characters as they have here.
Winter's Bone
About a 17-year-old girl trying to figure out where her father is so he can go to court so the family he's left won't get evicted in the Missouri Ozarks. It's a nice slice of life look at poor red necks essentially and there's only a few moments when the story doesn't work. As I said in my acting reviews for this movie, there are times when the script lets down Jennifer Lawrence's character but those are few and the acting in this movie is one of its better qualities. The tone and pacing of this movie are done well and there's never a time when I was wishing for the next scene to hurry up and arrive. But other than Lawrence's performance, the movie fails to really stick with you after you've finished watching it and after you've seen it once there's no real reason to come back to it. Nice to see the Academy reward an indie film that was released in the summer with a nod here.
I feel the Academy got it wrong this year. It took the Oscar bait and rewarded mediocrity instead of going with a movie that I feel will be looked at in years to come as a classic and generational movie in The Social Network. Overall, I'd say this year seems a little lacking in movies that should really be nominated for Best Picture. I hope that next year will be strong like 2009 was. And so that completes my first full year of reviews, which feels good. The writing has gotten a bit easier as I've gone along and hopefully it stops taking me hours to write these things!
Oscar Winner: The King's Speech
My Winner: The Social Network
The Fighter
Inception
True Grit
Winter's Bone
The King's Speech
127 Hours
Black Swan
Toy Story 3
The Kids Are All Right
2010 Best Picture
The King's Speech
This is Oscar bait at its finest. A movie that is overly sentimental for the sole sake of being sentimental. The movie tries hard to distance itself emotionally from the viewer only to come back at points and really hit the viewer over the head with insincere tosh. I actually enjoyed the historical aspects of the film and Firth is deserving of his Oscar but the movie is too complacent and formulaic about a royal family I'm not emotionally engineered to. The relationship between Bertie and Lionel doesn't feel realistic and we are left with a movie that plays it safe knowing it just needs to satiate the appetite of the Academy voters since that is its sole purpose. While it's not as terrible as I make it seem, it irritates me that this movie could have been so much more than a glorified puff piece on British royalty nostalgia and more of a serious film with an important message to say.
Black Swan
The movie demands more than Portman is able to give. As I said in my review of her, she is quite capable as the White Swan but suffers as the Black Swan. The movie itself is similar in that it tries to be more than it really is. There have been numerous retellings of the Swan Lake ballet in film and many try to come up with some new take on an old story. Black Swan fails at saying or showing anything different and therefore lacks the real emotional punch it's going for. The actual dancing is a treat to watch and Mila Kunis' character is perfect. And not to say this is a terrible movie or anything, I just feel like the Black Swan scenes could have been handled better and acted better and that ultimately leaves this film lacking.
The Fighter
This movie has such a compelling story and superb actors, there's really no doubt it deserves to be a Best Picture nominee. The tale of two brothers who are boxers, one washed up and the other trying to make it, offers up a great combination of drama and sports movie. The struggles between the family members and the struggle of Bale's character to overcome his addiction are riveting to watch and really cement this movie as a must watch. At times the characters can come off as being a bit over the top in their performances but I think this really adds to the realism of this outgoing and loud family we are being shown. What does annoy me is the usual boxing match trope you find in lots of boxing movies, whoever we are rooting for gets wailed on for a few rounds before finding some sort of energy to knock the other guy out. In a movie that is so good with its dramatic elements, the failure of the sports side to be truly innovative and buck cliches leaves a little to be desired. With that said it is still one of my favorites of the year.
Inception
Christopher Nolan's dream within a dream within a dream idea is dazzling if a little lacking in depth and emotion. The sights and sounds of the special effects are great fun to witness and really makes you feel immersed in the different worlds/dreams presented. There's definitely no dull parts visually and I hesitate to say there were any in the story either. A lot of critics complained that the story was confusing and complicated and while I don't exactly disagree (it wasn't hard to follow, though), its strength comes in making the viewer challenge what they see and think. It also comes across heavy-handed with lots of expository dialogue telling us what's going on and feels loaded down with its own weight of seriousness. But taking the movie at face value and realizing that it's just really a cool movie with a unique idea, one realizes that you don't need to be attached emotionally and can simply watch from afar....as if watching a dream.
The Kids Are All Right
Ugh, I don't see why this was a movie worthy of an Oscar nomination. I like that the expansion from 5 movies to 10 allows for movies that wouldn't normally be nominated to get a chance. But this shouldn't have been one of those movies. It's episodic and at times feels like a TV movie (or heck even a show). The lesbian angle can only carry it so far and the acting for the most part isn't as good as others would lead you to believe. The story, and especially the relationships, rang hollow and under served the characters badly. I did like some of the subtle humor throughout the movie as well as Mark Ruffalo's performance, even if it could have been better. But overall, this just isn't a movie I liked.
127 Hours
I think this just an OK movie. It's got a very interesting subject, but I don't think Danny Boyle (director) is able to put it all together in a way that fits the subject. The movie to me has a weird look to it, almost like it's overexposed. While I don't claim to know all that much about cinematography, the look of this film grates on me. It has a TV movie feel at times to me and while Franco does all he can to save it from becoming just that, there's not much for him to work with. I don't think the flashbacks are really compelling enough and Franco isn't able to carry the film on his own. For what should be a very inspiring and gut-wrenching tale, it lacks the tension, emotion and depth needed to be more than just an exercise in directing for Boyle.
The Social Network
The more I think about this film the more I love it. My initial reaction after watching this remarkable film was that it was good but forgettable. Except that after I dismissed it, the movie kept creeping back into my mind and I kept thinking about the characters, the music, the story, the dialogue. I love Jesse Eisenberg's condescending, anti-social portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg and the emotion (or lack thereof) and subtlety with which he acts is amazing, brilliant, and perfect. The dialogue is so rapid-fire and so very obviously of Aaron Sorkin's mind and is a perfect fit for a movie that digs into this generations cultural psyche. I love that you can see Zuckerberg's inability to connect with people essentially form the idea of Facebook as a way to connect with people on your own terms. The supporting characters are fantastic, the minimalist music sets the tone wonderfully, and the direction is so spot on I fail to see why this movie didn't win Best Picture.
Toy Story 3
I'm not sure if this was a stand alone movie, that it would get as much love and an Oscar nom like it has. It's a decent little end to the trilogy and got its obvious Best Animated Feature Oscar (over the more deserving How To Train Your Dragon). Like the other movies in the Toy Story arc, it likes to tug on the heartstrings, although I feel that's when the movie is at its worse. Pixar loves to add in the sappy moments but instead of letting things develop on their own, they often force you in to an emotion under the guise that it makes for a more touching film. That's a big pet peeve in movies for me. Let me form my own emotions and feelings towards characters and scenes and stop force feeding me what you think I should be feeling. I think TS3 is waaay better than 2, but not nearly as good as 1 and the prior movies probably make people react to this movie differently than if the others hadn't existed. Meaning, the nostalgia for the Toy Story franchise makes this movie better than it really is. I feel this nomination was more of a nod to the Toy Story franchise than to how good of a film this one really is.
True Grit
I love that the Coens are never the same from movie to movie. Their more faithful adaptation of the book has some wonderful acting, if at times a bit stilted, and beautiful cinematography. Although the landscape looks great on film, the action sequences are a bit lacking and the movie as a whole is kinda dull. There's no real sense of danger or tension or anything that might keep the viewer on the edge of their seat. And once we meet Hailee Steinfeld's father's killer, we are pretty underwhelmed and a little aggravated that we invested the time in going along with finding this weak man who was built up as someone much stronger and more intimidating. But that's probably more of a failure of the book than the movie so I give the Coens the benefit of the doubt. It's still an enjoyable film and the Coens are great at creating memorable characters as they have here.
Winter's Bone
About a 17-year-old girl trying to figure out where her father is so he can go to court so the family he's left won't get evicted in the Missouri Ozarks. It's a nice slice of life look at poor red necks essentially and there's only a few moments when the story doesn't work. As I said in my acting reviews for this movie, there are times when the script lets down Jennifer Lawrence's character but those are few and the acting in this movie is one of its better qualities. The tone and pacing of this movie are done well and there's never a time when I was wishing for the next scene to hurry up and arrive. But other than Lawrence's performance, the movie fails to really stick with you after you've finished watching it and after you've seen it once there's no real reason to come back to it. Nice to see the Academy reward an indie film that was released in the summer with a nod here.
I feel the Academy got it wrong this year. It took the Oscar bait and rewarded mediocrity instead of going with a movie that I feel will be looked at in years to come as a classic and generational movie in The Social Network. Overall, I'd say this year seems a little lacking in movies that should really be nominated for Best Picture. I hope that next year will be strong like 2009 was. And so that completes my first full year of reviews, which feels good. The writing has gotten a bit easier as I've gone along and hopefully it stops taking me hours to write these things!
Oscar Winner: The King's Speech
My Winner: The Social Network
The Fighter
Inception
True Grit
Winter's Bone
The King's Speech
127 Hours
Black Swan
Toy Story 3
The Kids Are All Right
Monday, March 28, 2011
Leading Actor 2010
The final acting group of 2010. The best for last? We'll see.
2010 Best Actor
Colin Firth - The King's Speech
I like Colin Firth. He's personable, easily likeable, and charming. In this underwhelming Oscar-bait film, he's all of those things. As the stuttering Duke of York and eventual King George VI, Firth's character tries many different remedies and doctors to get rid of his impediment. Firth portrays the stuttering in a very real manner and not in a comical way as some have before him. While the stuttering is essentially the main point of the film, his relationship with Geoffrey Rush's character is a big part of it as well. As I've already gone over Rush's performance, I believe Firth offers up the better of the two and by a wide margin. You really believe his reluctance at first in dealing with Rush, his trepidation in becoming King, and his acceptance of his duty to his country, family and self. His performance is delicate and nuanced and not over the top like Rush and this makes him the best part of The King's Speech.
Javier Bardem - Biutiful
[May 26, 2012] The film has been likened to a poem and it certainly has a visual flair. It's intense and Bardem rises and exceeds what is expected of him. He plays Uxbal, a facilitator of illegal activity in Spain who after being diagnosed with terminal cancer his life and world crumbles to pieces. This is the performance Bardem can hang his hat on, one that defines his entire career. Where his role in No Country... was a classic villain that will be remembered forever, this depressing, exposed, vulnerable piece is what acting is all about. Rightfully earning him a Spanish Oscar (or Goya as it is), Bardem delivers a knockout, powerhouse performance that cements his place as one of the best actors around today. As his death becomes inevitable, Bardem transitions from being a quiet, stoic, strong man in the beginning to one who questions if what he is doing is the right thing, especially as a father. It's a tremendous display of acting ability and I can't wait to see what else he does.
Jeff Bridges - True Grit
In his sixth Oscar nomination, Bridges plays Rooster Cogburn, a U.S. Marshall hired by a little girl to find her father's killer. It's a little similar to his winning performance the previous year in that he plays a sort of washed up, alcoholic old man with a twang. You can tell the Coens loved listening to him talk as the dialogue he has is admittedly fun to hear as it's almost tinged with tobacco. The performance seems effortless as their isn't a whole lot for Bridges' character to do but lead Steinfeld's character around and occasionally shoot people. I have yet to see John Wayne's winning performance for this same character but something tells me Bridges' version is the better of the two. Bridges immerses himself in the role and you can't think he is anything but perfect for it. I do think that Bridges could have been better, at times it feels lazy and whenever Steinfeld is on screen with him she usually steals the scene. Maybe that's just a veteran actor giving a newcomer the chance to shine, though. Overall, a good enough performance that will be remembered as one of his best.
Jesse Eisenberg- The Social Network
The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. The same can be said for Eisenberg's role as Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook. A lot of the credit can go to Aaron Sorkin's great script, but without Eisenberg's ability to create such a memorable character from it, it would go nowhere. His mile-a-minute delivery of the lines go very well with his intense work ethic and usual disregard for what anyone else has to say. He's obviously not a people person and his sarcasm can be too much for most people to recognize. Eisenberg plays this version of Zuckerberg perfectly and is completely believable. He always looks like he's lost in thought or writing code in his head when he's not talking to someone and his demeanor and look fit the character so well. I don't think Eisenberg ever smiles in the movie and these little nuances of the character make the performance such a treat to watch.
James Franco - 127 Hours
This movie captures Franco as well as any of the stoner movies he's in, if you ask me. He just seems like the character he portrays. In that regard, it's almost too easy of a performance and I'm not sure it's much of a stretch for him. I will say that he does a great job of carrying the movie since he occupies most of its screen time and that can be very difficult to do. I can't help but not feel for Aron Ralston's predicament since he brought it upon himself. But it is interesting to watch the range of emotions that Franco goes through while he is trapped. I think it suffers from the direction and the way the film is shot, though, and Franco isn't able to overcome that to make this a truly great performance. It's decent but there is only so much he can do with what he is given. Definitely a better performance than his Oscar hosting job, though!
It's always fun when you look at the nominees of these acting groups and see interesting things like four of the five having their first name start with a J. In future groups there will be two or three with the same first name and other oddities which I'll of course point out. This was a strong group and I'm glad when I get to watch them all (or in this case most of them) and not hate any of them. I do think Firth winning is fine as the academy doesn't really reward roles like Eisenberg's kind of villain/anti-hero mash up. Franco and Bridges are kind of middle of the road for me but deserving. I just think Eisenberg creates and embodies a memorable character while Firth acts as the King of England, so the choice is an easy one for me. It is a bit more difficult to rank these as I'm sure I could find reasons to flip flop Bridges and Franco and who knows when I throw Bardem into the mix. [And when I do throw him into the mix he definitely could be my winner for this year. I place him a hair under Eisenberg but with the realization that in 2 months Bardem's performance may jump into that top spot for me.]
Oscar Winner: Colin Firth - The King's Speech
My Winner: Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network
Javier Bardem
Colin Firth
Jeff Bridges
James Franco
2010 Best Actor
Colin Firth - The King's Speech
I like Colin Firth. He's personable, easily likeable, and charming. In this underwhelming Oscar-bait film, he's all of those things. As the stuttering Duke of York and eventual King George VI, Firth's character tries many different remedies and doctors to get rid of his impediment. Firth portrays the stuttering in a very real manner and not in a comical way as some have before him. While the stuttering is essentially the main point of the film, his relationship with Geoffrey Rush's character is a big part of it as well. As I've already gone over Rush's performance, I believe Firth offers up the better of the two and by a wide margin. You really believe his reluctance at first in dealing with Rush, his trepidation in becoming King, and his acceptance of his duty to his country, family and self. His performance is delicate and nuanced and not over the top like Rush and this makes him the best part of The King's Speech.
Javier Bardem - Biutiful
[May 26, 2012] The film has been likened to a poem and it certainly has a visual flair. It's intense and Bardem rises and exceeds what is expected of him. He plays Uxbal, a facilitator of illegal activity in Spain who after being diagnosed with terminal cancer his life and world crumbles to pieces. This is the performance Bardem can hang his hat on, one that defines his entire career. Where his role in No Country... was a classic villain that will be remembered forever, this depressing, exposed, vulnerable piece is what acting is all about. Rightfully earning him a Spanish Oscar (or Goya as it is), Bardem delivers a knockout, powerhouse performance that cements his place as one of the best actors around today. As his death becomes inevitable, Bardem transitions from being a quiet, stoic, strong man in the beginning to one who questions if what he is doing is the right thing, especially as a father. It's a tremendous display of acting ability and I can't wait to see what else he does.
Jeff Bridges - True Grit
In his sixth Oscar nomination, Bridges plays Rooster Cogburn, a U.S. Marshall hired by a little girl to find her father's killer. It's a little similar to his winning performance the previous year in that he plays a sort of washed up, alcoholic old man with a twang. You can tell the Coens loved listening to him talk as the dialogue he has is admittedly fun to hear as it's almost tinged with tobacco. The performance seems effortless as their isn't a whole lot for Bridges' character to do but lead Steinfeld's character around and occasionally shoot people. I have yet to see John Wayne's winning performance for this same character but something tells me Bridges' version is the better of the two. Bridges immerses himself in the role and you can't think he is anything but perfect for it. I do think that Bridges could have been better, at times it feels lazy and whenever Steinfeld is on screen with him she usually steals the scene. Maybe that's just a veteran actor giving a newcomer the chance to shine, though. Overall, a good enough performance that will be remembered as one of his best.
Jesse Eisenberg- The Social Network
The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. The same can be said for Eisenberg's role as Mark Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook. A lot of the credit can go to Aaron Sorkin's great script, but without Eisenberg's ability to create such a memorable character from it, it would go nowhere. His mile-a-minute delivery of the lines go very well with his intense work ethic and usual disregard for what anyone else has to say. He's obviously not a people person and his sarcasm can be too much for most people to recognize. Eisenberg plays this version of Zuckerberg perfectly and is completely believable. He always looks like he's lost in thought or writing code in his head when he's not talking to someone and his demeanor and look fit the character so well. I don't think Eisenberg ever smiles in the movie and these little nuances of the character make the performance such a treat to watch.
James Franco - 127 Hours
This movie captures Franco as well as any of the stoner movies he's in, if you ask me. He just seems like the character he portrays. In that regard, it's almost too easy of a performance and I'm not sure it's much of a stretch for him. I will say that he does a great job of carrying the movie since he occupies most of its screen time and that can be very difficult to do. I can't help but not feel for Aron Ralston's predicament since he brought it upon himself. But it is interesting to watch the range of emotions that Franco goes through while he is trapped. I think it suffers from the direction and the way the film is shot, though, and Franco isn't able to overcome that to make this a truly great performance. It's decent but there is only so much he can do with what he is given. Definitely a better performance than his Oscar hosting job, though!
It's always fun when you look at the nominees of these acting groups and see interesting things like four of the five having their first name start with a J. In future groups there will be two or three with the same first name and other oddities which I'll of course point out. This was a strong group and I'm glad when I get to watch them all (or in this case most of them) and not hate any of them. I do think Firth winning is fine as the academy doesn't really reward roles like Eisenberg's kind of villain/anti-hero mash up. Franco and Bridges are kind of middle of the road for me but deserving. I just think Eisenberg creates and embodies a memorable character while Firth acts as the King of England, so the choice is an easy one for me. It is a bit more difficult to rank these as I'm sure I could find reasons to flip flop Bridges and Franco and who knows when I throw Bardem into the mix. [And when I do throw him into the mix he definitely could be my winner for this year. I place him a hair under Eisenberg but with the realization that in 2 months Bardem's performance may jump into that top spot for me.]
Oscar Winner: Colin Firth - The King's Speech
My Winner: Jesse Eisenberg - The Social Network
Javier Bardem
Colin Firth
Jeff Bridges
James Franco
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Leading Actress 2010
Now I get into the major awards.
2010 Best Actress
Natalie Portman - Black Swan
This award was basically known at the beginning of the awards season and there was little wonder about it come Oscar night. In Portman's second Oscar nomination, she plays Nina, a fragile ballerina chosen for the lead in Swan Lake. Portman is limited by her acting ability in this movie in my opinion. She ably plays the role of the White Swan and outside of the play the fragile, childish Nina. This performance is what Portman is known in her career for and she's honed her acting ability for this type of character, So when this movie works, it's no wonder it works when she is playing the White Swan. When Portman needs to transform from the puerile and immature White Swan/Nina into the sexual, tempting, and wildly refined Black Swan, she fails. And she fails because Portman isn't capable of giving a believable performance of changing from one to the other. The Black Swan still feels awkward and the performance as a whole is unbalanced. Though the point the director seems to be going for is that Nina is becoming more unbalanced as she loses control of her inhibitions and embraces the dark side of the Black Swan, Portman is unable to sell it as a real breakdown and therefore her Black Swan comes off feeling vapid.
Annette Bening - The Kids Are All Right
I don't understand why this performance was nominated. Again, all I can think of is that the Academy is rewarding her past (this is her 4th nomination) and wanted to seem with the times for nominating a lesbian character. I didn't like this movie very much and Bening's performance comes off as very pedestrian. The lesbian couple come off as a statement that yes! gays can have normal lives and be just like normal people, too! The character lacks any real depth, though Bening does try, and it feels more like a caricature than anything else. The hurt when her partner cheats on her with a man doesn't feel real and she all too quickly forgives her after a rather insipid speech claiming she was sorry as if she had stated she hated her cooking or something instead. The entire movie was a letdown for me and Bening did nothing to try and change that fact in her performance.
Nicole Kidman - Rabbit Hole
I'll say that I didn't hate this performance. I fully expected something that wasn't deserving because the Academy loves going back to the well for nominations (Kidman's third nomination). Kidman's character is very interesting, if a little weird to me, but I think that's the point since it shows her conflicting outside persona/inside turmoil. She plays a mother who has recently lost a son to a car accident but on the outside carries a tough demeanor that tries to show she's not as hurt as she really is. You can tell there is a lot going on inside of her head and the conflict of trying to get over her loss but not wanting to forget is compelling. My problem is that the two sides of Kidman's character don't seem to be that major of a conflict to begin with. The two ultimately stay separate and their is no real revelation on how they can coexist, they are presented and she and her husband simply move on. Their is no payoff for investing in caring about Kidman's character.
Jennifer Lawrence - Winter's Bone
A first time nominee, I really enjoyed Lawrence's performance in this film. She plays Ree, a teen shouldering too much responsibility with a sick mother and an absent father with two younger siblings to take care of in the backwoods of Missouri. She really shines when she's doing the mundane task of teaching her siblings how to survive either skinning squirrels or watching her cook supper. She faces her problems head on and with a resolve that no doubt comes from growing up quicker than she wanted and dealing with the rough life of rural Missouri. At times the script makes her come off a lot tougher or grown up than she really is or should be and Lawrence has trouble at these points of making it seem real. But other times when you get the faint glimpses of Ree cracking under the weight of her responsibilities or see her breakdown at the end of the movie, you feel moved by her actions and completely convinced in her character. For a newer actress, this is remarkable and I'm interested in where she goes from here.
Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
This was my favorite performance of the year. The movie is depressing and heartbreaking and Williams' character Cindy is phenomenal. In the beginning I was glad that she was rescued in a way from a bad relationship by Ryan Gosling's character and I was taken by the romance between the two. The story weaves it's way between the two falling in love and the aftermath of them after things have grown stale. The juxtaposition of Williams' innocence and enthusiasm in the beginning and her animosity and lack of caring at the end speak to the wonderful ability and ease of her acting. She's at her best when the two try to rekindle the passion and love they had during a stay at a seedy motel but the spark fails to ignite and you can see the hesitation she has but also the longing for what once was clashing inside of her. Her second Oscar nomination should have been her first Oscar win, in my opinion.
Not as strong as the Supporting Actress group, but Williams and Lawrence are really good so it almost balances out. I can understand the win by Portman because the Academy likes to reward performances everyone seems to love, but I'm not so sure that in 10 years or 20 years we'll look back and say that she gave the best performance out of this group. Maybe I'm wrong in thinking that but only time will tell. I am interested in what Portman, Lawrence, Williams all do from this point on. So many actresses go downhill after being nominated and especially after winning so it will definitely be interesting to watch.
Oscar Winner: Natalie Portman - Black Swan
My Winner: Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
Jennifer Lawrence
Natalie Portman
Nicole Kidman
Annette Bening
2010 Best Actress
Natalie Portman - Black Swan
This award was basically known at the beginning of the awards season and there was little wonder about it come Oscar night. In Portman's second Oscar nomination, she plays Nina, a fragile ballerina chosen for the lead in Swan Lake. Portman is limited by her acting ability in this movie in my opinion. She ably plays the role of the White Swan and outside of the play the fragile, childish Nina. This performance is what Portman is known in her career for and she's honed her acting ability for this type of character, So when this movie works, it's no wonder it works when she is playing the White Swan. When Portman needs to transform from the puerile and immature White Swan/Nina into the sexual, tempting, and wildly refined Black Swan, she fails. And she fails because Portman isn't capable of giving a believable performance of changing from one to the other. The Black Swan still feels awkward and the performance as a whole is unbalanced. Though the point the director seems to be going for is that Nina is becoming more unbalanced as she loses control of her inhibitions and embraces the dark side of the Black Swan, Portman is unable to sell it as a real breakdown and therefore her Black Swan comes off feeling vapid.
Annette Bening - The Kids Are All Right
I don't understand why this performance was nominated. Again, all I can think of is that the Academy is rewarding her past (this is her 4th nomination) and wanted to seem with the times for nominating a lesbian character. I didn't like this movie very much and Bening's performance comes off as very pedestrian. The lesbian couple come off as a statement that yes! gays can have normal lives and be just like normal people, too! The character lacks any real depth, though Bening does try, and it feels more like a caricature than anything else. The hurt when her partner cheats on her with a man doesn't feel real and she all too quickly forgives her after a rather insipid speech claiming she was sorry as if she had stated she hated her cooking or something instead. The entire movie was a letdown for me and Bening did nothing to try and change that fact in her performance.
Nicole Kidman - Rabbit Hole
I'll say that I didn't hate this performance. I fully expected something that wasn't deserving because the Academy loves going back to the well for nominations (Kidman's third nomination). Kidman's character is very interesting, if a little weird to me, but I think that's the point since it shows her conflicting outside persona/inside turmoil. She plays a mother who has recently lost a son to a car accident but on the outside carries a tough demeanor that tries to show she's not as hurt as she really is. You can tell there is a lot going on inside of her head and the conflict of trying to get over her loss but not wanting to forget is compelling. My problem is that the two sides of Kidman's character don't seem to be that major of a conflict to begin with. The two ultimately stay separate and their is no real revelation on how they can coexist, they are presented and she and her husband simply move on. Their is no payoff for investing in caring about Kidman's character.
Jennifer Lawrence - Winter's Bone
A first time nominee, I really enjoyed Lawrence's performance in this film. She plays Ree, a teen shouldering too much responsibility with a sick mother and an absent father with two younger siblings to take care of in the backwoods of Missouri. She really shines when she's doing the mundane task of teaching her siblings how to survive either skinning squirrels or watching her cook supper. She faces her problems head on and with a resolve that no doubt comes from growing up quicker than she wanted and dealing with the rough life of rural Missouri. At times the script makes her come off a lot tougher or grown up than she really is or should be and Lawrence has trouble at these points of making it seem real. But other times when you get the faint glimpses of Ree cracking under the weight of her responsibilities or see her breakdown at the end of the movie, you feel moved by her actions and completely convinced in her character. For a newer actress, this is remarkable and I'm interested in where she goes from here.
Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
This was my favorite performance of the year. The movie is depressing and heartbreaking and Williams' character Cindy is phenomenal. In the beginning I was glad that she was rescued in a way from a bad relationship by Ryan Gosling's character and I was taken by the romance between the two. The story weaves it's way between the two falling in love and the aftermath of them after things have grown stale. The juxtaposition of Williams' innocence and enthusiasm in the beginning and her animosity and lack of caring at the end speak to the wonderful ability and ease of her acting. She's at her best when the two try to rekindle the passion and love they had during a stay at a seedy motel but the spark fails to ignite and you can see the hesitation she has but also the longing for what once was clashing inside of her. Her second Oscar nomination should have been her first Oscar win, in my opinion.
Not as strong as the Supporting Actress group, but Williams and Lawrence are really good so it almost balances out. I can understand the win by Portman because the Academy likes to reward performances everyone seems to love, but I'm not so sure that in 10 years or 20 years we'll look back and say that she gave the best performance out of this group. Maybe I'm wrong in thinking that but only time will tell. I am interested in what Portman, Lawrence, Williams all do from this point on. So many actresses go downhill after being nominated and especially after winning so it will definitely be interesting to watch.
Oscar Winner: Natalie Portman - Black Swan
My Winner: Michelle Williams - Blue Valentine
Jennifer Lawrence
Natalie Portman
Nicole Kidman
Annette Bening
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Supporting Actor 2010
So the goal for the blog is to attempt at least one year per week and if I can't make that for whatever reason then I'll settle for half a year per week. This way I'm not still trying finish this thing in 2027. On to the Best Supporting Actors...
2010 Best Supporting Actor
Christian Bale - The Fighter
Hands down the easiest choice for a winner this year. To me, Bale's performance was completely believable. It was more than just weight loss and big hand movements (uh, what?) as I read from some critics. Bale nails the look, the voice, the mannerisms of a washed up boxer addicted to drugs. Bale admitted that he acted loud at times on purpose, which was many critics' problem with the performance, but the character was a loud, manic-y, boxer come drug addict and it fit perfectly. Some of my favorite scenes are so subtle like when a family member comes to get him from a crack house and he panics and tries to flee out a window dropping into a dumpster. The half drugged out and panicked look mixed with desperation was entirely believable and Bale was easily the best part of the movie for me. The transformation form the beginning of the movie where Dicky (Bale's character) is using his brother Micky to hold on to his delusions of fame to eventually becoming a proud brother glad to be helping Micky train is great fun to watch. Interestingly, this was the first time one movie took both of the supporting awards since Hannah and Her Sisters in 1986.
John Hawkes - Winter's Bone
After watching this movie and thinking back on Hawke's performance, what immediately sprang to mind for me was good but not great. That feels a little harsh because he's a terrific character actor and in this movie he fits. He's got the look of a redneck, trailer trash type and almost blends into the background like one of the other no-name actors in the movie. His portrayal of the menacing, meth addict uncle of the main character starts out with you really despising him as he fails to help her. But by the end of the movie he's undergone a change into a more sentimental and paternalistic person, which doesn't feel entirely believable and seems more the product of the script moving the story along than with his acting. Nice to see the Academy reward a decent performance from a smaller movie, too.
Jeremy Renner - The Town
I'm not exactly sure why Renner was nominated here. The only thing I can think of is that there was no other performance good enough and Renner got in based off being nominated for Best Actor the year prior. The Town is a fun crime movie to watch once you get past the lame Affleck love story part. Renner's character, Jem, is sadistic, twisted, wild and the best part of the movie but easily replaceable with any capable actor. Not to say Renner mailed it in, because he puts on a decent performance. His character just doesn't get enough attention to be able to fleshed out. Too much time is spent on Affleck and the (pretty awesome) action scenes at the expense of developing Jem into anything more than the wild, hard-ass he is. It seems the writers thought about trying to give the character some depth but everything else about the movie got in the way.
Mark Ruffalo - The Kids Are All Right
I actually liked this performance even though I thought this movie was pretty terrible. As a matter of fact, I think Ruffalo kept this movie from being completely awful. Paul, the unknowing sperm donor of a lesbian couple meets the couple's kids when they call him requesting to see him. Paul is a hip, goofy, free-loving man essentially comfortable in his life. The realization that he fathered two kids kick starts his paternal instincts as he decides to get to know his new progeny. This develops into an affair with one of the lesbian moms and Paul fools himself into thinking he's in love and wants to start a family with her. The whole thing is insincere and comes off as if he just wants to keep banging the mom and will try to convince himself in any way he can think of. It really feels as if this is the kind of thing Paul has been doing all his life, confusing love with sex. It's a believable performance (I keep harping on this but it really is the mark of a good performance to me) and the anticipation and happiness that he's a father clashes with the inner turmoil of continuing his old ways of sleeping around and being independent. At the end of the movie you can tell Paul wants to be dedicated to his new kids, he's just not good at it yet.
Geoffrey Rush - The King's Speech
I totally understand why Rush's performance was nominated. It's loud and boisterous and funny and total Oscar bait. A lot of critics expected and wanted this performance to win but I just don't understand why. It's completely unbelievable to me. I have a hard time believing that Rush would be able to act and talk the way he did with the King of England. Not to mention the two acted way too chummy for an Australian speech guy and the King. I thought the character was too slick for lack of a better word. He's super witty and convincing and basically manipulates the King to his liking. I was able to connect more with Colin Firth's character than I was with Rush's character which made the relationship between the two seem fake and insincere. Really anytime Rush was onscreen I was irritated and waiting for him to leave or hoping Firth would save the scene.
Overall, I think the Supporting Actress group was way better than the men this year. Not very many strong performances in my opinion. Although I'm glad the Academy got it right in giving Bale the much deserved win. As I go back in years, I'll be interested in seeing which of the Supporting categories has the more consistently strong nominees. My guess is the women are the weaker of the two only because I know so many women get nominated based off previous Oscar experience and with very little actual screen time.
Oscar Winner: Christian Bale - The Fighter
My Winner: Christian Bale - The Fighter
John Hawkes
Mark Ruffalo
Jeremy Renner
Geoffrey Rush
2010 Best Supporting Actor
Christian Bale - The Fighter
Hands down the easiest choice for a winner this year. To me, Bale's performance was completely believable. It was more than just weight loss and big hand movements (uh, what?) as I read from some critics. Bale nails the look, the voice, the mannerisms of a washed up boxer addicted to drugs. Bale admitted that he acted loud at times on purpose, which was many critics' problem with the performance, but the character was a loud, manic-y, boxer come drug addict and it fit perfectly. Some of my favorite scenes are so subtle like when a family member comes to get him from a crack house and he panics and tries to flee out a window dropping into a dumpster. The half drugged out and panicked look mixed with desperation was entirely believable and Bale was easily the best part of the movie for me. The transformation form the beginning of the movie where Dicky (Bale's character) is using his brother Micky to hold on to his delusions of fame to eventually becoming a proud brother glad to be helping Micky train is great fun to watch. Interestingly, this was the first time one movie took both of the supporting awards since Hannah and Her Sisters in 1986.
John Hawkes - Winter's Bone
After watching this movie and thinking back on Hawke's performance, what immediately sprang to mind for me was good but not great. That feels a little harsh because he's a terrific character actor and in this movie he fits. He's got the look of a redneck, trailer trash type and almost blends into the background like one of the other no-name actors in the movie. His portrayal of the menacing, meth addict uncle of the main character starts out with you really despising him as he fails to help her. But by the end of the movie he's undergone a change into a more sentimental and paternalistic person, which doesn't feel entirely believable and seems more the product of the script moving the story along than with his acting. Nice to see the Academy reward a decent performance from a smaller movie, too.
Jeremy Renner - The Town
I'm not exactly sure why Renner was nominated here. The only thing I can think of is that there was no other performance good enough and Renner got in based off being nominated for Best Actor the year prior. The Town is a fun crime movie to watch once you get past the lame Affleck love story part. Renner's character, Jem, is sadistic, twisted, wild and the best part of the movie but easily replaceable with any capable actor. Not to say Renner mailed it in, because he puts on a decent performance. His character just doesn't get enough attention to be able to fleshed out. Too much time is spent on Affleck and the (pretty awesome) action scenes at the expense of developing Jem into anything more than the wild, hard-ass he is. It seems the writers thought about trying to give the character some depth but everything else about the movie got in the way.
Mark Ruffalo - The Kids Are All Right
I actually liked this performance even though I thought this movie was pretty terrible. As a matter of fact, I think Ruffalo kept this movie from being completely awful. Paul, the unknowing sperm donor of a lesbian couple meets the couple's kids when they call him requesting to see him. Paul is a hip, goofy, free-loving man essentially comfortable in his life. The realization that he fathered two kids kick starts his paternal instincts as he decides to get to know his new progeny. This develops into an affair with one of the lesbian moms and Paul fools himself into thinking he's in love and wants to start a family with her. The whole thing is insincere and comes off as if he just wants to keep banging the mom and will try to convince himself in any way he can think of. It really feels as if this is the kind of thing Paul has been doing all his life, confusing love with sex. It's a believable performance (I keep harping on this but it really is the mark of a good performance to me) and the anticipation and happiness that he's a father clashes with the inner turmoil of continuing his old ways of sleeping around and being independent. At the end of the movie you can tell Paul wants to be dedicated to his new kids, he's just not good at it yet.
Geoffrey Rush - The King's Speech
I totally understand why Rush's performance was nominated. It's loud and boisterous and funny and total Oscar bait. A lot of critics expected and wanted this performance to win but I just don't understand why. It's completely unbelievable to me. I have a hard time believing that Rush would be able to act and talk the way he did with the King of England. Not to mention the two acted way too chummy for an Australian speech guy and the King. I thought the character was too slick for lack of a better word. He's super witty and convincing and basically manipulates the King to his liking. I was able to connect more with Colin Firth's character than I was with Rush's character which made the relationship between the two seem fake and insincere. Really anytime Rush was onscreen I was irritated and waiting for him to leave or hoping Firth would save the scene.
Overall, I think the Supporting Actress group was way better than the men this year. Not very many strong performances in my opinion. Although I'm glad the Academy got it right in giving Bale the much deserved win. As I go back in years, I'll be interested in seeing which of the Supporting categories has the more consistently strong nominees. My guess is the women are the weaker of the two only because I know so many women get nominated based off previous Oscar experience and with very little actual screen time.
Oscar Winner: Christian Bale - The Fighter
My Winner: Christian Bale - The Fighter
John Hawkes
Mark Ruffalo
Jeremy Renner
Geoffrey Rush
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Here We Go
Again I don't profess to be a great reviewer but I sincerely hope my opinion of these performances and movies can stir up some debate, whether on this blog or in your own mind. With that said, here we go....
2010 Best Supporting Actress
Melissa Leo - The Fighter
Melissa Leo's character in this movie is the kind that Academy voters love to nominate and reward. She uglified herself and was an overbearing, villain-like mother. I see similarities between her character and Jacki Weaver's character from Animal Kingdom, who was also nominated in this category. She is the head of the family in the same way she manages Mark Walhberg's Micky until he breaks away from her grip. The reason Melissa Leo's character works for me is that I hated her. Not that her performance was bad, but that Leo was convincing enough that I wish she would have let up on Micky. The scenes between her and Amy Adams' character are great to watch because of the barely contained contempt that often boils over whenever the two are in the same room. Leo really shines when she goes from playing the loving mother while trying to manipulate her sons to spewing bitterness when one of them or Amy Adams' character rebuffs her. In these moments you see how driven Leo's Alice is by her dreams of fame and money. This was Leo's second Oscar nomination and I'm not sure if people remember her win more for her acting or because of her crazy acceptance speech and self promoting campaign run up to the ceremony.
Amy Adams - The Fighter
This was the third Oscar nomination for Adams, as she is quickly becoming an Oscar darling (albeit a bridesmaid). When her character, Charlene, was first introduced, I wasn't sure if she would become more than just a pretty love interest for Micky. But eventually that pretty face became a sexy bitch and asserted herself as the dominant woman in Micky's life, much to the chagrin of his mother. In the end, she almost becomes like Leo's character in trying to manipulate Micky into doing what she thinks is right for him. The conflict between Leo and Adams' characters in this film was a nice subplot to watch. Both had control over him for periods of time before he decided to do things his own way. I thought Adams' departure from her usual sweet and naive roles worked really well here as she was able to pull off the tough and somewhat caustic boxer's girlfriend with relative ease. The characters of The Fighter are definitely the strong point of the film and both Leo and Adams showcase their talent here. I find it really interesting that this is the 7th time in the last 11 Best Supporting Actress groups where two nominees come from the same movie, and this is the second time for Adams.
Helena Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
I'd say this is my least favorite nominee in this group only because it feels like her performance got swept in with the other nominees from The King's Speech and her performance is just OK to me. I feel she does the job asked of her in this film ably and that's no knock on her. I just feel she was overshadowed (and rightfully so) by Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush in her portrayal as the doting, eventual Queen Mother. I did like that she appeared the most royal of all the actors in this film. She can be somewhat stuffy and walks around with the air of royalty and makes it seem natural. And she's great at expressing emotion through just her looks. So there's no doubt HBC is a great actress, I just don't find her great in this movie. Whenever she leaves the scene, I almost instantly forget about her, which speaks to how well Firth and Rush command this movie and how her real role is to shepherd Firth between major scenes. This was her second Oscar nomination and I think as much a nod to her role in the The King's Speech as it was a nod to her career so far.
Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
How's this for a debut movie? Steinfeld does a tremendous job as Mattie Ross, a 14-year-old girl looking to avenge her father's death. I still don't know how Steinfeld was nominated for Supporting instead of the lead role, since this movie is essentially all about her. At times Steinfeld feels stiff, but those times are few and far between and she really carries this film. She has the look of a Western girl who has been brought up with a father who was out leading a rough life. She's great at talking grown men into doing what she wants and getting what she wants out of them. She balances dogged determinism with her young naivete well and it blends into a tough western personality that some grown men wouldn't even have. And Steinfeld is able to pull this off in just her first movie, a credit to her and the Coen brothers.
Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
It always amazes me when I see nominations that don't have a lot of screen time. While Weaver has plenty of screen time, it feels like she's not in the film much. Short screen time is a rant for a couple of nominees coming up so I'll save that for now. In saying all this, it's not as if I dislike Weaver's role or character. Like Melissa Leo's character she's a sort of ugly, overbearing, evil mother. Janine "Smurf" Cody is the mother of a Melbourne, Australia crime family. In the beginning she's seemingly sweet and innocent and just glad to have her sons around. But as the movie goes on, the depth of her character is revealed and she becomes a sort of den mother to her sons' pride of lions, quietly moving behind the scenes and showing up when her cubs need her input. She stays mostly out of sight until she thinks her grandson is involved with the police and then wants him gone in a cold, calculated but affectionate way since it means protecting her sons. When her grandson shows back up, she welcomes him home with no ill will, though you can almost see the gears turning in her head on how to use him. Weaver plays this character perfectly, seamlessly moving from cold to sweet to creepy, sometimes achieving more than one at the same time.
So overall I'd say this is a very strong group of actresses. I think Best Supporting Actress is the hardest category for me to critique and review because the nominees can be so wildly divergent. Some nominees are only on screen for a few minutes, others carry a film, and some are weak to begin with. 2010, however, is strong and I can see the reasons each of these women were nominated. I'm OK with Melissa Leo winning, but if I were an Academy voter, I would have gone with either Adams or Steinfeld in this one. I think both of them move me more than Leo did, with the slight edge to Steinfeld for carrying True Grit.
Oscar Winner: Melissa Leo - The Fighter
My Winner: Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
Amy Adams
Melissa Leo
Jacki Weaver
Helena Bonham Carter
2010 Best Supporting Actress
Melissa Leo - The Fighter
Melissa Leo's character in this movie is the kind that Academy voters love to nominate and reward. She uglified herself and was an overbearing, villain-like mother. I see similarities between her character and Jacki Weaver's character from Animal Kingdom, who was also nominated in this category. She is the head of the family in the same way she manages Mark Walhberg's Micky until he breaks away from her grip. The reason Melissa Leo's character works for me is that I hated her. Not that her performance was bad, but that Leo was convincing enough that I wish she would have let up on Micky. The scenes between her and Amy Adams' character are great to watch because of the barely contained contempt that often boils over whenever the two are in the same room. Leo really shines when she goes from playing the loving mother while trying to manipulate her sons to spewing bitterness when one of them or Amy Adams' character rebuffs her. In these moments you see how driven Leo's Alice is by her dreams of fame and money. This was Leo's second Oscar nomination and I'm not sure if people remember her win more for her acting or because of her crazy acceptance speech and self promoting campaign run up to the ceremony.
Amy Adams - The Fighter
This was the third Oscar nomination for Adams, as she is quickly becoming an Oscar darling (albeit a bridesmaid). When her character, Charlene, was first introduced, I wasn't sure if she would become more than just a pretty love interest for Micky. But eventually that pretty face became a sexy bitch and asserted herself as the dominant woman in Micky's life, much to the chagrin of his mother. In the end, she almost becomes like Leo's character in trying to manipulate Micky into doing what she thinks is right for him. The conflict between Leo and Adams' characters in this film was a nice subplot to watch. Both had control over him for periods of time before he decided to do things his own way. I thought Adams' departure from her usual sweet and naive roles worked really well here as she was able to pull off the tough and somewhat caustic boxer's girlfriend with relative ease. The characters of The Fighter are definitely the strong point of the film and both Leo and Adams showcase their talent here. I find it really interesting that this is the 7th time in the last 11 Best Supporting Actress groups where two nominees come from the same movie, and this is the second time for Adams.
Helena Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
I'd say this is my least favorite nominee in this group only because it feels like her performance got swept in with the other nominees from The King's Speech and her performance is just OK to me. I feel she does the job asked of her in this film ably and that's no knock on her. I just feel she was overshadowed (and rightfully so) by Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush in her portrayal as the doting, eventual Queen Mother. I did like that she appeared the most royal of all the actors in this film. She can be somewhat stuffy and walks around with the air of royalty and makes it seem natural. And she's great at expressing emotion through just her looks. So there's no doubt HBC is a great actress, I just don't find her great in this movie. Whenever she leaves the scene, I almost instantly forget about her, which speaks to how well Firth and Rush command this movie and how her real role is to shepherd Firth between major scenes. This was her second Oscar nomination and I think as much a nod to her role in the The King's Speech as it was a nod to her career so far.
Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
How's this for a debut movie? Steinfeld does a tremendous job as Mattie Ross, a 14-year-old girl looking to avenge her father's death. I still don't know how Steinfeld was nominated for Supporting instead of the lead role, since this movie is essentially all about her. At times Steinfeld feels stiff, but those times are few and far between and she really carries this film. She has the look of a Western girl who has been brought up with a father who was out leading a rough life. She's great at talking grown men into doing what she wants and getting what she wants out of them. She balances dogged determinism with her young naivete well and it blends into a tough western personality that some grown men wouldn't even have. And Steinfeld is able to pull this off in just her first movie, a credit to her and the Coen brothers.
Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
It always amazes me when I see nominations that don't have a lot of screen time. While Weaver has plenty of screen time, it feels like she's not in the film much. Short screen time is a rant for a couple of nominees coming up so I'll save that for now. In saying all this, it's not as if I dislike Weaver's role or character. Like Melissa Leo's character she's a sort of ugly, overbearing, evil mother. Janine "Smurf" Cody is the mother of a Melbourne, Australia crime family. In the beginning she's seemingly sweet and innocent and just glad to have her sons around. But as the movie goes on, the depth of her character is revealed and she becomes a sort of den mother to her sons' pride of lions, quietly moving behind the scenes and showing up when her cubs need her input. She stays mostly out of sight until she thinks her grandson is involved with the police and then wants him gone in a cold, calculated but affectionate way since it means protecting her sons. When her grandson shows back up, she welcomes him home with no ill will, though you can almost see the gears turning in her head on how to use him. Weaver plays this character perfectly, seamlessly moving from cold to sweet to creepy, sometimes achieving more than one at the same time.
So overall I'd say this is a very strong group of actresses. I think Best Supporting Actress is the hardest category for me to critique and review because the nominees can be so wildly divergent. Some nominees are only on screen for a few minutes, others carry a film, and some are weak to begin with. 2010, however, is strong and I can see the reasons each of these women were nominated. I'm OK with Melissa Leo winning, but if I were an Academy voter, I would have gone with either Adams or Steinfeld in this one. I think both of them move me more than Leo did, with the slight edge to Steinfeld for carrying True Grit.
Oscar Winner: Melissa Leo - The Fighter
My Winner: Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
Amy Adams
Melissa Leo
Jacki Weaver
Helena Bonham Carter
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
An Introduction (sort of)
I feel as if I should start from the beginning. But first, some confessions. I have never taken a film class, a journalism class, or any class that could even be misconstrued as giving me some basis with which to write this blog. I just love movies and have a somewhat weird fascination with lists and award winning things (movies, books, music, etc.). I admit I'm not a strong writer and am absolutely terrible at reviewing things, at least when put on the spot. But I do hope this project will allow me to find a comfortable writing voice and carve out a reviewing niche I can call my own.
The idea of this blog is simple: review and comment on every Oscar winning and nominated film in the categories of Best Picture, Best Actor and Actress, and Best Supporting Actor and Actress. Only in the last few weeks have I realized just how massive this project will likely be. For some silly reason, I thought this would be a unique idea and had visions of book deals, movie offers, guest TV appearances! And then with my mind made up I thought to Google and see if anyone had beaten me to the punch. Sure enough there are plenty of blogs out there devoted to the Oscars with their own projects of reviewing all of a certain category or multiple categories and all done way better than anything I could ever hope to do. Looking through all these blogs by people with degrees in English, Film Studies, Psychology, and sometimes more than one of these degrees at that, almost killed this thing before it even began. How could I even pretend I had something new or interesting to bring to an already overcrowded table? That is when I was reminded that I'm doing this project for my own enjoyment first and foremost. I don't have to compete with anyone, I just have to watch movies and write what I think about them and hope someone out there actually takes the time to read even a sentence of it.
And so here I am writing.
I can trace the beginning of this blog and my love affair with movies back to the summer between 6th and 7th grades. The American Film Institute released their Top 100 Movies list in 1998 and I happened to grab a sheet with the list from a local Hollywood Video store. I went through the list and unsurprisingly had watched very few on the list, maybe around 20 or so. And that was with counting movies I'd seen large parts of like The Silence of the Lambs but not actually the entire thing. So I convinced my parents to rent two movies every few days in hopes of finishing the list that summer. The first couple movies I remember getting were Casablanca and Singin' in the Rain and honestly I have no idea why I picked those first. But I was hooked and kept watching movies and even bought a magazine that profiled all the movies which I sadly don't have anymore. Eventually the summer came to an end and I wasn't even close to finished so the list got put aside as a lot of things I took a strong interest in around that time did. The following summer I decided to watch all the James Bond movies and actually finished that project (no blogging, though). So those two events pretty much started me down the path of actually enjoying and appreciating movies instead of just watching and forgetting them. I paid attention to the Oscars here and there but didn't really get back into movies until my first deployment to Iraq. My parents sent me tons and tons of movies that I'd watch which exposed me to all kinds of documentaries, B movies, straight to DVD stinkers, indie flicks, and the regular big budget and Oscar films. This continued when I went on my deployment to Afghanistan and again watched a ridiculous amount of movies. When I got back, I didn't have much to do so I began trying to watch all of the Best Picture nominees for 2008. Some I couldn't find online so I moved on to actor and actress and watched a few going back in years. Eventually I stopped this, too, (hopefully a pattern I will break!) and got on with living but still obsessed with reading everything Oscar related. Now flash forward to only a few weeks ago and I decided to make a spreadsheet of the 5 categories I could appreciate and highlighted those movies I have seen and those I haven't.
Which leads me into explaining how this thing will work (don't worry, I'm almost done). I plan on reviewing each year starting with the most recent and working my way back. It would be great to start with the 1st awards, but seeing as some of those movies are lost or partial prints or I would have to fly to UCLA and make an appointment with the library there, I figured starting with movies I could actually watch would be best and keep me from giving up after a week. So my next post will hopefully be on one of the 5 categories from the most recent ceremony with my complete reviews of those movies/performances and comments about the selections and whatever else I can think of. I'll pick my favorite of those nominated and we'll see if I share the same view as the Academy. Comments are enthusiastically welcomed and hopefully once I've started getting some years under my belt, I can elbow my way into the overcrowded table that is the blogosphere and actually have people reading this thing.
The idea of this blog is simple: review and comment on every Oscar winning and nominated film in the categories of Best Picture, Best Actor and Actress, and Best Supporting Actor and Actress. Only in the last few weeks have I realized just how massive this project will likely be. For some silly reason, I thought this would be a unique idea and had visions of book deals, movie offers, guest TV appearances! And then with my mind made up I thought to Google and see if anyone had beaten me to the punch. Sure enough there are plenty of blogs out there devoted to the Oscars with their own projects of reviewing all of a certain category or multiple categories and all done way better than anything I could ever hope to do. Looking through all these blogs by people with degrees in English, Film Studies, Psychology, and sometimes more than one of these degrees at that, almost killed this thing before it even began. How could I even pretend I had something new or interesting to bring to an already overcrowded table? That is when I was reminded that I'm doing this project for my own enjoyment first and foremost. I don't have to compete with anyone, I just have to watch movies and write what I think about them and hope someone out there actually takes the time to read even a sentence of it.
And so here I am writing.
I can trace the beginning of this blog and my love affair with movies back to the summer between 6th and 7th grades. The American Film Institute released their Top 100 Movies list in 1998 and I happened to grab a sheet with the list from a local Hollywood Video store. I went through the list and unsurprisingly had watched very few on the list, maybe around 20 or so. And that was with counting movies I'd seen large parts of like The Silence of the Lambs but not actually the entire thing. So I convinced my parents to rent two movies every few days in hopes of finishing the list that summer. The first couple movies I remember getting were Casablanca and Singin' in the Rain and honestly I have no idea why I picked those first. But I was hooked and kept watching movies and even bought a magazine that profiled all the movies which I sadly don't have anymore. Eventually the summer came to an end and I wasn't even close to finished so the list got put aside as a lot of things I took a strong interest in around that time did. The following summer I decided to watch all the James Bond movies and actually finished that project (no blogging, though). So those two events pretty much started me down the path of actually enjoying and appreciating movies instead of just watching and forgetting them. I paid attention to the Oscars here and there but didn't really get back into movies until my first deployment to Iraq. My parents sent me tons and tons of movies that I'd watch which exposed me to all kinds of documentaries, B movies, straight to DVD stinkers, indie flicks, and the regular big budget and Oscar films. This continued when I went on my deployment to Afghanistan and again watched a ridiculous amount of movies. When I got back, I didn't have much to do so I began trying to watch all of the Best Picture nominees for 2008. Some I couldn't find online so I moved on to actor and actress and watched a few going back in years. Eventually I stopped this, too, (hopefully a pattern I will break!) and got on with living but still obsessed with reading everything Oscar related. Now flash forward to only a few weeks ago and I decided to make a spreadsheet of the 5 categories I could appreciate and highlighted those movies I have seen and those I haven't.
Which leads me into explaining how this thing will work (don't worry, I'm almost done). I plan on reviewing each year starting with the most recent and working my way back. It would be great to start with the 1st awards, but seeing as some of those movies are lost or partial prints or I would have to fly to UCLA and make an appointment with the library there, I figured starting with movies I could actually watch would be best and keep me from giving up after a week. So my next post will hopefully be on one of the 5 categories from the most recent ceremony with my complete reviews of those movies/performances and comments about the selections and whatever else I can think of. I'll pick my favorite of those nominated and we'll see if I share the same view as the Academy. Comments are enthusiastically welcomed and hopefully once I've started getting some years under my belt, I can elbow my way into the overcrowded table that is the blogosphere and actually have people reading this thing.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
ballyhoo n. -
| 1. | a clamorous and vigorous attempt to win customers or advance any cause; blatant advertising or publicity. |
| 2. | clamor or outcry. |
| 3. | a halfbeak, Hemiramphus brasiliensis, inhabiting both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. |
| Nope, this blog won't be about the fish. Just poor reviews of great movies. I really like this sentence from wikipedia: The term Ballyhoo is used to indicate that one is using any means necessary to inflate an object or idea to a status to which it does not rise. Probably a good description of what this blog will be. I imagine this project will take a very long time to complete, if I ever complete it. I'll write more on how I'll shape this blog and what kind of format can be expected later. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)