Supporting Actress 2004

On the surface, this year looks interesting. Some stuff I haven't seen in a long time and some performances I've never seen. I know to never get my hopes up with this group sadly, but I do hope to enjoy it.

2004 Best Supporting Actress

Cate Blanchett - The Aviator

So this is your winner and it's very clear as to why. Not only does it give the Academy the chance to reward Katherine Hepburn for a final time, but it offers something else the Academy loves: the chance to award an actor for playing another actor. That sounds derogatory but in reality is just the honest truth. One that continues into 2015. Where in other instances it might be considered the wrong choice, it's obvious that Blanchett gave the best performance of the 5 actresses nominated here. Does that mean this performance is actually Oscar worthy? Possibly. But it's difficult to actually say because I don't know what else was even possibly up for this category. That's the tough thing about going back in time without having covered the race in real time. Yes, I can offer alternatives to the last few years, but not for anything before that. I look at this group and am underwhelmed. I like Blanchett's sassy, feisty, somewhat overacted but very fun take on Hepburn. It's clear she is having fun and I imagine roles like this are a breath of fresh air because they certainly are for the audience. My issue is that this stands out because the others are so boring and so supportive. This flashes and has an Oscar moment. It's appealing. Does it make it the best, though? I don't think I'll ever actually know. I'm ok with saying it's clearly the best of the bunch. Blanchett does offer some sympathetic moments when dealing with Hughes' OCD and bizarre ways. You can tell she cares but she is destined for bigger and better and more gregarious things. She can't be shut it like Mr. Hughes. It's a good, fun piece of acting and I'm glad the Academy rewarded this instead of the others.

Laura Linney - Kinsey

This is an interesting movie to the say the least. It will depend on your views of sex whether or not you enjoy it which I would imagine tempers one's views on the characters, particularly Linney here. While Neeson's Kinsey is always, always giving lectures - meaning that's just how he talks (bad script writing?) - Linney's character is basically the conduit at times for her husband and the voice of reason at others. The early years of her character are kind of cringe inducing because Linney and Neeson affect these weird, youthful versions of their voices. It's hard to explain but you'll understand if you watch it. It's just strange and frankly, bad acting. The film does settle in eventually and we get more from Linney's character but not enough. She's the supportive wife who stands by her man through thick and thin and yeah, that's about it. There is a momentary jolt of interest when she sleeps with her husband's assistant but nothing comes from that and the movie never more than scratches the surface of that oil field. It had the potential to turn into something compelling or at least more interesting than what the rest of the movie turned out to be. It seems like a weird nomination, one of those that you wonder why and can't come up with anything good. Linney is capable in this role but not particularly astounding or anything.

Virginia Madsen - Sideways

She really is the typical Supporting nomination especially for this category. She plays the love interest for the main character and only barely gets to present herself as anything more than that. She loves wine but is working as a waitress, she's smart and commuting to school but she is underused as a legit character. She's the foil to Giamatti. Her character follows the tropes set forth by her brethren but that's not necessarily a good thing. Yes, it's supporting but we would like a lot more especially when there's a lot more hinted at. Actually smart and interesting but just little used. She's treated like any gas station wine, you grab her because she's cheap and will get you drunk but there's little nuance and substance there. She's cute and we respect her wine knowledge but it rarely feels like the character talking. Most of that jumbled mess of random thoughts was written drunkenly so I kept it in. But it's all on point. It feels like her nomination got swept up with the hype of the movie itself. Is it a performance you can see winning? No. Is it representative of the category, though? Absolutely, which is why I don't mind seeing it here. I do hate that her character disappears towards the end when Giamatti lets it slip that his friend is getting married and doesn't actually love her friend. The character feels too disposable and her "arc" so to speak is left unresolved. So as I said earlier, she really is underused and that's too bad because I was interested in her relationship with Giamatti more so than anything else in the film.

Sophie Okonedo - Hotel Rwanda

These are the kinds of nominations that I just don't understand. Is it the Academy voters' guilt about the subject matter that leads to a nom? Do they feel voting for Okonedo is a noble thing? Did this get swept up in the nominations because of Don Cheadle's tremendous performance? I can't obviously answer those questions but I definitely wonder about them. This performance is exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to the Supporting Actress category. Okonedo is perfectly fine as the supportive wife to Cheadle's character but that's about all it has going for it. There is no singular moment or scene where she rises above and shines. There is no Oscar moment. You can't even say that the sum of the parts equals anything amazing because it doesn't. It's supporting through and through but no different than any of the other supporting performances in the film. It's great that the Academy thought to put this film in the collective conscious of the general public but there's nothing here that I can point to that is truly worthy, which is unfortunate.

Natalie Portman - Closer

Of the two women in this film, Portman does the best job of bringing her character to life. She is given a much bigger role and she does an admirable job in trying to make the character work. But there are definitely times when the subject becomes too sexual. We look at Portman as this young girl and though she is asked to be a stripper and dance for Clive Owen we can't help but think, well, what the fuck! She's young so that tempers our excitement. It makes us uneasy and Owen acts like a fucking pervert the entire time which doesn't help. Portman is sexual and naive. She gets hit by a car in the opening and falls in love with Jude Law's character and they live together for 3 years but Law loves another woman. Then Portman goes back to her stripping ways and that is essentially the character arc for Miss Portman. It's kind of a travesty that that is what she gets. She is the most real in the scene where she strips for Owen. It feels real for her character. She doesn't have much else to do in the film, though, which is sad. This film could have looked at both male and female sexuality in a similar way but instead it fell into the usual tropes. And it seems robotic and like I'm repeating myself on this blog, but we could have got way more development from Portman's character! I do like that her stripper never gives in. For me, this nomination is a link between her younger years and her more mature years when she would win an Oscar.


Well this is a very easy category to pick a winner for. It's also the most typical Best Supporting Actress categories I've encountered. You've got 4 nominees that are just very supporting and not exactly standout performances. You could argue Portman being a bit different but I'll lump her in with the others. Only Blanchett actually wows us which doesn't seem too hard given what her role/character is. I did want to mention that some movies can be so hard to find the effort to watch which slows this blog down considerably. It's always easier with movies I haven't seen and that only have 1 or 2 things to write about. I sat on Hotel Rwanda for a while, though. I enjoyed it the first time I saw it way back around this time but it's something you have to be in the mood for I think. Coming home from a long day this isn't the first thing I want to watch! And so it kinda hangs over me since I don't watch other category films unless it's as part of this one. I like to finish categories and then move on. Basically I'm explaining why I have these long droughts at times, haha.

Oscar Winner: Cate Blanchett - The Aviator
My Winner:  Cate Blanchett - The Aviator
Natalie Portman
Virginia Madsen
Laura Linney
Sophie Okonedo