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
No comments:
Post a Comment