An interesting year with well known nominees and some controversy as to the outcome. I've got 2 I haven't seen so we will see if that sways me from the Academy's choice.
2003 Best Actor
Sean Penn - Mystic River
When I think of this performance, the first thing I think of (besides it beating out Depp and Murray) are the scenes where Penn is screaming in a Boston accent about his daughter. It's been made fun of a lot and is just so unintentionally hilarious to me. Which of course drains any emotional impact from those scenes. I don't really like Penn anyway and in this film his character isn't entirely likeable, either. You could say it's Penn just playing Penn because throughout the entire film, he plays his grieving, revenge seeking father with such an anger and seething hatred that's just below the surface. The character and film call for that persona but it's almost like you have to remind yourself it's not really asshole Penn but instead actor Penn. There are parts where the role can be a bit showy like in the aforementioned screaming about his daughter scene and towards the end when he wants what he thinks is the truth. Penn is definitely good enough to not make those moments so hokey (even though I do find the one funny, but that's on me) and he gives it the Oscar vibe. It's clear why the Academy would go for this performance but if they actually should have is another question entirely. I know it seems the Academy loves him and it seems like one of those times where they just want to reward someone no matter what. Plus, they seem to really love Clint Eastwood films. Like a lot. So it also has that factor. Penn is good at the controlled anger thing in this role, though, and gives a worthy enough performance I suppose. If I liked him as a person more, I might try and throw more weight behind this decision. But sometimes bloggers can be petty. A solid enough performance that I'm hoping to dethrone.
Johnny Depp - The Pirates of the Carribbean
These are the kinds of performances that make you love Johnny Depp. All of his vibrantly weird, fantastical roles like this just highlight why he's so well liked and just so damn good. Who would have a thought a movie about a pirate themed ride at Disney World would 1) be so entertaining and good and 2) produce one of the most memorable movie characters ever. Yes, EVER. That's what Depp does with his charmingly boozy Jack Sparrow. He creates not just a character but also a cultural icon. I took a vacation to Key West a couple years ago and along with your usual street performers was a guy portraying Jack Sparrow. It's a character that has resonated with the public and is frankly just a lot of fun to watch. Depp has a great sense of comedic timing, makes the most out of his one liners, and gives a performance that is just a ton of fun to watch over and over. And part of what makes it so great and iconic is that it's so very obvious that Depp had as much fun playing Sparrow as we do watching him. That love of the character is infectious. I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who don't like Sparrow. Maybe the subsequent movies send it into overkill, but this movie on it's own really shows why it is so great. I'm glad the Academy was able to reward a comedic role because Lord knows they like to take themselves too seriously most of the time. If this would have won, it might have been the single greatest win in Oscar history just for the sheer ridiculousness of it!
Ben Kingsley - House of Sand and Fog
So one thing I've noticed about Ben Kingsley performances is that I love them. He plays all kinds of characters and does a great job in maintaining that hero worship. When it comes to this movie, Kingsley provides a performance that is way too good for the actual role/movie. I mean, this isn't a great or even good movie. I don't know how anyone couldn't cheer for Kingsley as the humbled patriarch learning again to provide for his family. He was used to a certain way of life and is determined to get them back there. It doesn't matter that he is a former Col. in the Iranian military. No one cares when you start a new life. But Ben is determined to make it as an American. That's noble but he runs into Jennifer Connelly's irresponsible bitch (which is really the only word that describes her for me) of a woman. There's literally no reason to root for Connelly or her dumb cop puppet. This makes it seem that Kingsley's role is a joke but it's not. He's trying to achieve that American dream which can be looked down upon if you're not the right demographic or minority. It's the work of an actor that knows his craft and is going to give a great performance no matter what the script calls for. What you can say about Kingsley is that he is steady all the way through this film. He IS the ex-Iranian Colonel. The big shock at the end is his Oscar moment. I really like Kingsley's performance here because even for someone who has an Oscar, it shows that actors can still care about giving great performances....even in uninspiring movies. This role is heartbreaking and we go on that journey with him. It's an interesting ride.
Jude Law - Cold Mountain
This was a very intriguing film. I was definitely interested in it because of what I'd heard about it before hand and because it's my first Anthony Minghella film, who passed away before his star was up. Minghella also directed The English Patient so I was curious as to how this would go in light of that film. There was no reason to dread it and Jude Law delivers a solid performance. He is a southerner who falls in love with Nicole Kidman's character at first sight but then the Civil War happens and he goes off to fight and is wounded and then spends the film making his way back to her as a deserter in this sort of vague vignette style. I will say that I didn't care for Jude's American accent a lot of the time, it did kind of annoy me but that's a minor quibble. I don't think there is much I can say that is negative about this performance. It's strong, yes, but it also was up against Depp, Penn, Murray and even Kingsley. It might be rated the 5th out of 5 but that makes it seem like Law did an awful job or something which is not true! I liked it but this was just an abnormally strong year for actors. He met the look and physical standards of appearing in a Civil War film and there was no awful love story for him to get embroiled in (yes I know it's about him being in love with Kidman but it never becomes melodramatic or eye rollingly dumb for me). It was just a straightforward piece about returning to your love from the battlefield. I'm also not going to go out of the way to offer up a ton of superlatives for this performance. It's a solid piece of acting but there was better this year. This is where the nomination is the reward.
Bill Murray - Lost in Translation
Bill Fucking Murray. This was supposed to be HIS Oscar. The hype was real and it seemed like most people wanted him to win. Then Sean Penn came in and ruined it like usual. It's a very quiet performance, especially since we are used to seeing Murray in some very over the top comedies. This performance is an excellent departure from that and he really delivers a thoughtful, impactful character. He plays a man that is stuck where he is in life and is resigned to a future he doesn't seem to want. A middle aged man now doing Japanese commercials instead of movies, with a wife who keeps bugging him about a house they are building or remodeling, kids he doesn't seem all that interested in. He just trudges along through life. He meets Johansson's character and she stirs something up within him. He's got more of a purpose and is able to enjoy himself more. That transition is done extremely well by Murray. We can feel his loneliness and pain of being stuck in life, but he's not ready to give up. This role was one that felt like Murray decided to push all his chips in and gamble on taking home that Oscar gold. I think it's a tremendous performance, especially in it's subtlety and lack of showiness. It feels real and that's due to Murray's amazing job. I think if it had been a bit more showy, it might have wowed the voters more, unfortunately. But this is a strong effort by Murray and one I wish was rewarded.
A strong group for this category as per the usual. Watching through all these performances, I'm still mad that Penn won here. It is just way too baity for my taste. Plus, you've got some really great performances from Depp and Murray that should have absolutely been rewarded. Law and Kingsley are there to fill out the rest and the nomination is the reward for them. But between Depp and Murray is an extremely hard choice for me. I want Murray to have his Oscar and I think Depp gave the most memorable and iconic performance of the year. I'll give this one to Depp because I just love that character so much, but Murray is only edged out by a sliver.
Oscar Winner: Sean Penn - Mystic River
My Winner: Johnny Depp - The Pirates of the Caribbean
Bill Murray
Sean Penn
Ben Kingsley
Jude Law
Monday, May 25, 2015
Sunday, May 24, 2015
Leading Actress 2003
I tend to look forward to the Actress categories because they
inevitably offer up movies I'd otherwise never see, for better or for
worse. That will be even more true as I go back in time but I look
forward to branching out. I'm always looking for that diamond in the
rough and hopefully these lesser seen movies can offer something up.
2003 Best Actress
Charlize Theron - Monster
Ah yes, this is one of those stereotypes that people think of when it comes to winning an Oscar, especially for the women. That if you ugly-fy yourself, you stand a much greater chance at being nominated and winning because it's so brave and yadda yadda. Luckily for Theron, she gives a great performance on top of the whole looking ugly bit. The story itself is insanely compelling. A woman who has had a pretty tough life becomes a serial killer. Throw in a competent actress like Theron and you've got a stew cooking! She does a great job of making you feel for a serial killing hooker, which when you read that sentence again, is quite the feat. The good thing about Theron's acting here is that it goes well beyond just the ugly makeup and weight gain. She delivers a thoroughly detailed portrait of a crazy serial killer. It's not just ugly. It's not just crazy. It's a balanced mix of these different qualities that make her performance so, so good. This is one of those wins where you look back and say hot damn! the Academy got it right on the nose. Theron digs deep and delivers these great little touches like the nervous glances, the way she says "Yep", her stare - that fully define her character. It truly is a great performance and the best I've seen so far from the Best Actress bunch along with Marion Cotillard's Edith Piaf.
Keisha Castle-Hughes - Whale Rider
At the time she was nominated, she was the youngest Best Actress nominee ever. That was obviously beaten when Quvenzhane Wallis was nominated in 2013 for Beasts of the Southern Wild. So far, I haven't come across really young actresses getting nominated since I haven't reviewed 2013 yet. This is my first time for that type of nominee. That always brings up the question of if the actress is really acting or just being directed. I feel there is absolutely a difference. I know some people will argue vehemently that being directed is acting but I'll disagree just as vehemently! Being directed and told what to do is not the same as acting or creating a character and having input as to what the character's motivations are, how they would react to a situation, or how they can affect a story. KCH does a really good job in this movie. I think I was definitely surprised at how much I actually got into the movie which is about a girl in New Zealand who wants to please her grandfather who is hard on her because she's a girl. Does KCH deserve to be nominated here for Best Actress, though? I find it tough to really say. There are times where KCH is incredibly raw and looks overwhelmed in some scenes and other times where she is extremely confident and makes a scene better with her acting. It's obvious that she has talent and the role really suits her. I'll commend the Academy for going pretty far out of the box on this nomination. I like when they do this even if I'm not completely won over by the performance. It beats having Streep in her place for her 45th nomination. It's an enjoyable performance and one that I can't really judge too harshly. She plays tough extremely well and falters a bit with the more sappy moments. But overall I can't complain about KCH's inclusion here.
Diane Keaton - Something's Gotta Give
This is an adult comedy for old people. So I guess the whole issue with this movie was that Diane Keaton and Jack Nicholson were basically playing versions of themselves. Well, yeah! If anyone can watch this movie and not think that about these two actors then they are crazy. It's obvious that that is what the movie is going for. I read some reviews who criticized people who felt that's all the movie offered. That all it offered was those two playing versions of themselves and if you didn't see the brilliance in that then you just didn't get adult comedies. I don't know Diane Keaton from a hole in the ground. I don't know her other films or her supposed contributions to cinema. All I know is what I've seen before and Keaton's role lives up to what I understand her to be. Nicholson's role is basically Nicholson at the end of his days (not really death's door, just end of his acting days kinda), though he is very funny with the material he's given. Nicholson is fabulous in this role, even if he's just playing a version of himself, extremely charming. Keaton plays a well liked older woman for the audience and everything is set up in her favor. It's every older woman's fantasy (I'm guessing). The young doctor (Keanu Reeves lol) likes her and Nicholson eventually falls for her. She wonders where all this attention has come from and reacts accordingly. She's full of giddy renewal and it's cute. Keaton and Nicholson share a wonderful chemistry. I kinda hate that she falls into the cliche tropes of a heartbroken woman, along with an unfortunate crying scene (that's a week long). I really wish the film would have turned that cliche on it's head and been more progressive but instead we get 60 year olds behaving like 20 year olds. Keaton is good in the role, however. You latch onto her and go for the ride. I imagine these notes hit harder if you're in the target demographic but we can all relate to being hurt. One thing I did really like about Keaton is that her eyes are so expressive. She's one of those actors that can act with talking and give a multitude of emotions with just a few movements of her eyes. It definitely has it's place in a film like this. Keaton is very likeable in this role, though I don't know if it lives up to a Best Actress win. A casually comedic performance like hers is nice for a nomination, just not sure about a win - no matter how heartfelt it is.
Samantha Morton - In America
This to me is more of a supporting role. Morton plays the wife/mother of an immigrant Irish family who has moved to New York City in the 1980s. We go through basically their first year or so living in a run down apartment and everything they experience along the way. But for me, the husband, the girls, and even Djimon Hounsou's character have more impact on the story and just a lot more to do overall. She is just attempting to get by with her family and keeps things together while also being pregnant. The film just isn't really about her so that's why this performance feels more Supporting than Lead. I think that the voters may have really liked this film and maybe in a year where more than 5 films could be nominated for Best Picture this may have slipped in. But in 2003, they aren't putting this in the BP race and are going to reward it with it's 2 acting nominations. I liked Morton's performance. It's not gonna wow you but it's just a steady, strong portrayal of an immigrant mother. It's something that people can connect with easily and it's a feel good film to boot. I like the nomination even if I feel it's in the wrong category. This probably would have competed a little bit with Zellweger in Supporting instead of being looked over in this category.
Naomi Watts - 21 Grams
I'm gonna state right off the bat that I just really hate Naomi Watts as an actress. She just supremely annoys me. A lot of that is due to stupid internet commenters who will champion any and every film she's in, no matter how bad it might be. It's annoying and also pertains to Winslet and Kidman as well. But I will say that Watts is good in this film. It's hard to piece everything together given the non-linear story which really does hamper a good critique of a performance. The story and acting bounces all over the place. But Watts gives a really honest performance. She plays a woman who is a recovering addict who then experiences an awful tragedy and then reverts back to her addictive ways. I'll admit that when I saw the title 21 Grams I thought of a drug movie, but it refers to the weight of the soul when a person dies. I think my liking her performance has more to due with I haven't really liked her in pretty much everything else I've seen her in. I read one review that said her acting was strained and stressful. I definitely see that in this performance but I think it works for me in a way. Maybe I was just in the right mood for this one but I did think it was an honest take. It easily could have been a lot worse since the character begs to be overacted. That's a testament to Watts, that she is able to keep it feeling authentic and real for me. Maybe if I watched it again I wouldn't like it as much. You can already see my wavering in support of it as I write this. It's not as bad as I anticipated, that's for sure.
Finally another great Best Actress performance! This time from Charlize Theron. It's the clear cut winner in a group that is really, really mediocre. There's an obvious drop off to second for me and even trying to rank them seems kinda pointless to me. Keaton gives an actual full fledged performance so she would be next. KCH is young and has some moments where that inexperience shows through. Morton is good but is more suited for Supporting Actress. Watts is alright but, yeah, just not a fan of hers at all. Luckily you have one of the best female performances of the last 10 years to buoy this group. Hopefully 2002 will be a bit more balanced.
Oscar Winner: Charlize Theron - Monster
My Winner: Charlize Theron - Monster
Diane Keaton
Keisha Castle-Hughes
Samantha Morton
Naomi Watts
2003 Best Actress
Charlize Theron - Monster
Ah yes, this is one of those stereotypes that people think of when it comes to winning an Oscar, especially for the women. That if you ugly-fy yourself, you stand a much greater chance at being nominated and winning because it's so brave and yadda yadda. Luckily for Theron, she gives a great performance on top of the whole looking ugly bit. The story itself is insanely compelling. A woman who has had a pretty tough life becomes a serial killer. Throw in a competent actress like Theron and you've got a stew cooking! She does a great job of making you feel for a serial killing hooker, which when you read that sentence again, is quite the feat. The good thing about Theron's acting here is that it goes well beyond just the ugly makeup and weight gain. She delivers a thoroughly detailed portrait of a crazy serial killer. It's not just ugly. It's not just crazy. It's a balanced mix of these different qualities that make her performance so, so good. This is one of those wins where you look back and say hot damn! the Academy got it right on the nose. Theron digs deep and delivers these great little touches like the nervous glances, the way she says "Yep", her stare - that fully define her character. It truly is a great performance and the best I've seen so far from the Best Actress bunch along with Marion Cotillard's Edith Piaf.
Keisha Castle-Hughes - Whale Rider
At the time she was nominated, she was the youngest Best Actress nominee ever. That was obviously beaten when Quvenzhane Wallis was nominated in 2013 for Beasts of the Southern Wild. So far, I haven't come across really young actresses getting nominated since I haven't reviewed 2013 yet. This is my first time for that type of nominee. That always brings up the question of if the actress is really acting or just being directed. I feel there is absolutely a difference. I know some people will argue vehemently that being directed is acting but I'll disagree just as vehemently! Being directed and told what to do is not the same as acting or creating a character and having input as to what the character's motivations are, how they would react to a situation, or how they can affect a story. KCH does a really good job in this movie. I think I was definitely surprised at how much I actually got into the movie which is about a girl in New Zealand who wants to please her grandfather who is hard on her because she's a girl. Does KCH deserve to be nominated here for Best Actress, though? I find it tough to really say. There are times where KCH is incredibly raw and looks overwhelmed in some scenes and other times where she is extremely confident and makes a scene better with her acting. It's obvious that she has talent and the role really suits her. I'll commend the Academy for going pretty far out of the box on this nomination. I like when they do this even if I'm not completely won over by the performance. It beats having Streep in her place for her 45th nomination. It's an enjoyable performance and one that I can't really judge too harshly. She plays tough extremely well and falters a bit with the more sappy moments. But overall I can't complain about KCH's inclusion here.
Diane Keaton - Something's Gotta Give
This is an adult comedy for old people. So I guess the whole issue with this movie was that Diane Keaton and Jack Nicholson were basically playing versions of themselves. Well, yeah! If anyone can watch this movie and not think that about these two actors then they are crazy. It's obvious that that is what the movie is going for. I read some reviews who criticized people who felt that's all the movie offered. That all it offered was those two playing versions of themselves and if you didn't see the brilliance in that then you just didn't get adult comedies. I don't know Diane Keaton from a hole in the ground. I don't know her other films or her supposed contributions to cinema. All I know is what I've seen before and Keaton's role lives up to what I understand her to be. Nicholson's role is basically Nicholson at the end of his days (not really death's door, just end of his acting days kinda), though he is very funny with the material he's given. Nicholson is fabulous in this role, even if he's just playing a version of himself, extremely charming. Keaton plays a well liked older woman for the audience and everything is set up in her favor. It's every older woman's fantasy (I'm guessing). The young doctor (Keanu Reeves lol) likes her and Nicholson eventually falls for her. She wonders where all this attention has come from and reacts accordingly. She's full of giddy renewal and it's cute. Keaton and Nicholson share a wonderful chemistry. I kinda hate that she falls into the cliche tropes of a heartbroken woman, along with an unfortunate crying scene (that's a week long). I really wish the film would have turned that cliche on it's head and been more progressive but instead we get 60 year olds behaving like 20 year olds. Keaton is good in the role, however. You latch onto her and go for the ride. I imagine these notes hit harder if you're in the target demographic but we can all relate to being hurt. One thing I did really like about Keaton is that her eyes are so expressive. She's one of those actors that can act with talking and give a multitude of emotions with just a few movements of her eyes. It definitely has it's place in a film like this. Keaton is very likeable in this role, though I don't know if it lives up to a Best Actress win. A casually comedic performance like hers is nice for a nomination, just not sure about a win - no matter how heartfelt it is.
Samantha Morton - In America
This to me is more of a supporting role. Morton plays the wife/mother of an immigrant Irish family who has moved to New York City in the 1980s. We go through basically their first year or so living in a run down apartment and everything they experience along the way. But for me, the husband, the girls, and even Djimon Hounsou's character have more impact on the story and just a lot more to do overall. She is just attempting to get by with her family and keeps things together while also being pregnant. The film just isn't really about her so that's why this performance feels more Supporting than Lead. I think that the voters may have really liked this film and maybe in a year where more than 5 films could be nominated for Best Picture this may have slipped in. But in 2003, they aren't putting this in the BP race and are going to reward it with it's 2 acting nominations. I liked Morton's performance. It's not gonna wow you but it's just a steady, strong portrayal of an immigrant mother. It's something that people can connect with easily and it's a feel good film to boot. I like the nomination even if I feel it's in the wrong category. This probably would have competed a little bit with Zellweger in Supporting instead of being looked over in this category.
Naomi Watts - 21 Grams
I'm gonna state right off the bat that I just really hate Naomi Watts as an actress. She just supremely annoys me. A lot of that is due to stupid internet commenters who will champion any and every film she's in, no matter how bad it might be. It's annoying and also pertains to Winslet and Kidman as well. But I will say that Watts is good in this film. It's hard to piece everything together given the non-linear story which really does hamper a good critique of a performance. The story and acting bounces all over the place. But Watts gives a really honest performance. She plays a woman who is a recovering addict who then experiences an awful tragedy and then reverts back to her addictive ways. I'll admit that when I saw the title 21 Grams I thought of a drug movie, but it refers to the weight of the soul when a person dies. I think my liking her performance has more to due with I haven't really liked her in pretty much everything else I've seen her in. I read one review that said her acting was strained and stressful. I definitely see that in this performance but I think it works for me in a way. Maybe I was just in the right mood for this one but I did think it was an honest take. It easily could have been a lot worse since the character begs to be overacted. That's a testament to Watts, that she is able to keep it feeling authentic and real for me. Maybe if I watched it again I wouldn't like it as much. You can already see my wavering in support of it as I write this. It's not as bad as I anticipated, that's for sure.
Finally another great Best Actress performance! This time from Charlize Theron. It's the clear cut winner in a group that is really, really mediocre. There's an obvious drop off to second for me and even trying to rank them seems kinda pointless to me. Keaton gives an actual full fledged performance so she would be next. KCH is young and has some moments where that inexperience shows through. Morton is good but is more suited for Supporting Actress. Watts is alright but, yeah, just not a fan of hers at all. Luckily you have one of the best female performances of the last 10 years to buoy this group. Hopefully 2002 will be a bit more balanced.
Oscar Winner: Charlize Theron - Monster
My Winner: Charlize Theron - Monster
Diane Keaton
Keisha Castle-Hughes
Samantha Morton
Naomi Watts
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)