Yes! Finally I'm catching up to the current Oscar year (until the 2015 Oscars get nominated in a few, short months) and I couldn't be any more happy! This is the freshest Oscar race in my mind, obviously, and I can still remember my thoughts as the race went on and all the controversy and hype. It will be good to finally get all of that stuff out of my brain and into this blog. I'm also kind of glad to return to some of these films and performances since some of them can get lost in the clamor to see them all before Oscar night. It will be great to fully digest them all. On to my least favorite group, though.
2014 Best Supporting Actress
Patricia Arquette - Boyhood
This was the presumptive winner for the entirety of the Oscar race and made for a pretty boring Supporting Actress race. It doesn't help that I don't think Arquette was worthy of being the Oscar winner. There's just something about her performance that really irked me. Let's be real, she's a really shitty mother. She constantly moves her kids around under the auspices of giving them a better life but puts them in awful situations to begin with and uproots their lives without their input. She shacks up with an abusive alcoholic and seemingly does nothing until he explodes one day. She puts her career ahead of her kids and mostly leaves them to their own devices. She marries another drunk with an anger problem and then seems all too eager to get rid of the kids once they hit 18. And Arquette's acting in all of this is so amateurish. That's the appalling and surprising part to me. I read over and over about how revelatory and masterful it was and I was left wondering if we watched the same performance? I don't know what it is about her but it just kinda comes off like she was still learning to act which I know is not the case. Or maybe she just doesn't thrive under non-scripted acting which I think was how some of the film was done. Like I said, I don't know but something about her acting is off and it does not feel Oscar worthy at all to me. Her big scene at the end of the film where she bursts into tears at the realization that her kids are moving on just felt too cringe worthy and hokey to me. That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about with my criticisms of Arquette. Just because it was over 12 years and she portrayed a single mother doesn't mean that automatically equals Oscar which is kinda what happened. Not my favorite for sure.
Laura Dern - Wild
I mean, I thought about making this review about two or three lines and that's it. This is a waste of a nomination. I remember watching the announcements and seeing that Dern was chosen and thinking why the fuck was she even up for a possible nomination? She does absolutely nothing in the film, brings absolutely nothing to the film, and absolutely deserved no nomination for this. She is barely in the film as the mother to Witherspoon's character and I guess shows off some quirkiness and then proceeds to get cancer and die. It really feels needless and pointless and she is such a minor presence that it blows my mind that she was even considered for an Oscar! I say minor presence due to length of time she is onscreen but she's the impetus for Witherspoon making the hike along with her other personal stuff. It still seems underdeveloped and an obvious emotional grab, meant to earn sympathy for Witherspoon's character and I guess partly explain her behavior. But the whole thing is so glossed over that it doesn't even matter much. From what I remember around that time was that her mother was heavily campaigning for her and she had some ads out to vote for her. If that is all it takes to get such a non-entity of a performance nominated then maybe I should quit watching and getting so into the races and ceremony. Literally if you took out Dern's scenes from the film, you either wouldn't notice or the film would seem better for them not being there. I'm just super disappointed that this would get a nod while anyone else wouldn't. I'm not even gonna critique her performance because it's bad. Dern should feel embarrassed that her mom got her another Oscar nomination for a shit role. Gross.
Keira Knightley - The Imitation Game
Knightley delivers a quintessentially supporting performance here. Her character is recruited to help break the Enigma and is the only real female presence in the whole film, which is no small task! Her character is pretty much the classic female character calms and supports the awkward genius so that he can better focus on doing whatever he needs to do. That is the essence of her character and her performance. She is basically an equal of sorts to Turing and gets him to not act like such an arrogant asshole and sort of reigns him in so he can break the Enigma machine. I think Knightley does a perfect job at that role and as the only strong female presence is able to hold her own on screen with all the men. It's good, it's capable and Knightley is endearing but I'm not sure how Oscar-y it really is. But the argument could be made that she is the only female in a big Oscar film and does a good enough job holding her own with Cumberbatch. I'm okay with it being included in this group especially when they went to the Meryl Streep well for the 80th time because apparently there was no one else to choose from. It's a decent performance just not one that will likely be remembered when looking back on this year.
Emma Stone - Birdman: or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)
I'm thinking that this nomination got swept up in all the Birdman love because when you watch it, you're left wondering just what exactly did they nominate? That's no knock on Stone, but she only has a handful of scenes, which admittedly do last pretty long, but still. She's Keaton's daughter in the film and is like a personal assistant I guess and back from a stint in rehab. Sounds like boilerplate actor progeny stuff and really is here. She only has one scene where she really shines and it's the scene that you saw at every single awards show because that's all they could play when they kept nominating her. Which is kinda weird since other performances get to pick and choose from Oscar worthy moments or big scenes and yet there is just that one for Emma Stone. In that one scene, she explodes into a doe eyed, spastic speech telling her dad that there's more important things going on in the world. It's not really profound or anything and fits the daughter who doesn't seem to give a shit about what her dad does and is putting on airs as the rehab kid. It's almost a stereotypical character but Stone does give it some pizzazz and she for sure brings a lot to the role that others probably couldn't. But. That big but. There's just not much else to her performance. She has two scenes with Edward Norton where they flirt but that's about it plus the ending scene. I know I expect a lot out of the nominees but they should at least be integral to the story! I dunno. I like Emma Stone but this is underwhelming.
Meryl Streep - Into the Woods
Yawn. This is getting boring now. I feel like the Academy's motto when it comes to the Actress categories is: "When in doubt, just vote for Meryl Streep again." Go ahead and watch Into the Woods and tell me that she deserved a nomination. Because you can't. She's not bad by any means, not at all! She actually is quite good as The Witch. Her opening scene grabs hold of you and doesn't let go until she's made her mark and left quite an impression. But she also has a pretty easy gig playing The Witch and can ham it up with some Meryl Streep flair so that it looks less hammy and more Streepy. When she bursts in and kicks off the story you think this is going to be a pretty great movie. It doesn't quite live up to that notion but it's not for lack of pizzazz by Streep, that's for sure. So she's able to clearly have fun as The Witch but if this were anyone else, there is no way they also would get a nomination out of it. That's the power of Streep, obviously, but also the downside of her acting that I'm complaining about a decent performance because it was nominated. It of course doesn't rank up with her best and when she's had so many good ones, and so many nominations period, that you have to compare them to each other and wonder what else this year could have taken it's place because I'm tired of seeing her decent performances make it. This is a fun performance but I'm not sure it needed to be included in the Oscars for it to be noticed - it is a Streep performance after all.
Kind of another down year. I didn't particularly enjoy any of the nominees. Either I thought they sucked or just wasn't really moved by them in any fashion. To pick a winner is actually really hard because none of them deserve it. So because Emma Stone is pretty hot, let's give it to her. The rest are just boring to me. Knightley is at least the most competent but she's just there to make Cumberbatch not look so gay. Her character is brilliant herself but completely glossed over. Streep is just out there having fun and it's nice to see but not Oscar worthy. Arquette just rubbed me the wrong way and Dern is a joke. Not a good year for Supporting Actress, but really when is it a good year? Hopefully 2015 delivers.
Oscar Winner: Patricia Arquette - Boyhood
My Winner: Emma Stone - Birdman or: (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)
Keira Knightley
Meryl Streep
Patricia Arquette
Laura Dern
No comments:
Post a Comment