A bunch of performances that I've been looking forward to seeing finally. I'm expecting some really good stuff, too. Also, I see I've been getting like a consistent 4-5 views, so hello friends! Feel free to tell me I'm wrong!
1987 Best Actress
Cher - Moonstruck
Every time I looked at winners while creating the project I was always like really? Cher? She won Best Actress? Was this because she was actually good or was it because they liked Cher the entertainer and cultural icon? I was always intrigued by Moonstruck for this reason (and also because I knew Nicolas Cage was a spicy meatball in this) so I was definitely looking forward to watching her performance. It was not really what I expecting at all. Same as with Dukakis, I thought it would be a very loud, ethnic performance given it's about a family of Italians. But the performance was far from being a caricature or stereotype which I am very glad to see. I actually really enjoyed Cher in her role as Loretta, a widow who gets engaged again and wants to do everything right this time because she thinks she had bad luck before. She then meets her fiancee's brother and sparks up a steamy, hot romance with him and we learn about ideas of family along the way. What I like about Cher is how natural she feels in the role and in the family itself. It's a gentle performance that gives into the whims of love and doesn't feel too corny for it. She and Cage are a lot of fun to watch in their scenes together and I can believe this almost mild mannered accountant getting swept off her feet by the brutish Cage. It's such a calm, comfortable, assured performance. I like that Cher never devolves into histrionics or plays up the ethnicity thing, she just plays a normal person for the most part. There's no crazy yelling scenes or hysterical crying or anything like that. It's just enjoyable to watch. Maybe it's because I expected a lot out of the performance that I was happy with what Cher did in the film but it works for me. Granted, the romance with Cage is a bit ridiculous but even with it's suddenness I can see those two together, mostly because they have good chemistry. I don't know if I'm articulating myself well enough as to why Cher is good and why I liked it, but she is and I did. It's almost like a safe choice. Cher does a pretty good job as Loretta and I'll have to see if anyone else can challenge her for the win.
Glenn Close - Fatal Attraction
I hate to rag on someone because of their looks but man is Close really unattractive in this film. I know it's the 80s and the big frizzy hair was in, but I'm supposed to buy that Close is irresistibly hot and tempting for Michael Douglas and I don't. I can respect Close for choosing the role because she wanted to play against her type, and besides the looks thing, she is quite disturbing which is a compliment here. I like the transition from sexpot to raging crazy bitch because I appreciate that our initial introduction of her is as this seductress who is a somebody in the corporate world. Then we see her descent into becoming a psychopath when she can't handle being rejected and doesn't like being used by Douglas. After a certain point, though, Close isn't given all that much to do really. Once she becomes absolutely crazy, what else is there to do to show she's psychotic? It's like reaching the ground floor and there's no basement. Close can't do anything else to show how crazy her character is. She ends up stalling or maybe idling is a better description. Sure, it's more like how can we make her more evil with killing the pet rabbit and then trying to kill Anne Archer but Close becomes voiceless and just a way to keep the action and tension going. So the performance loses steam but it's not particularly Close's fault since that's all she can do. She is convincingly terrifying, however, which is why the role is so memorable and so scary. As a guy, I couldn't imagine having a woman like that in my life. I'd be scared shitless that she would ruin my life which is what makes her so fascinating. I'm not sure how women feel about the character which I would be very interested to hear. The performance is strong before it tapers off at the end which is a shame because it could have contended for the win if it could have kept up the intrigue. It makes for a great thriller and an interesting Close nomination.
Holly Hunter - Broadcast News
Crazy to think that Holly Hunter was a relative unknown before this film. This role was initially meant for Debra Winger but she got pregnant and then a long search led to Hunter. She is really great in this role which is obviously her breakout role. She acts the shit out of it. She has that nice, girl next door quality but can be ferocious when necessary. She plays a female (duh) producer at a network newsroom which is dominated by men. Hunter's character is a no-nonsense, strong, independent woman in love with her work but who also wants a little more in her life. The thing I like about the performance is that Hunter doesn't make this into an I am woman, hear me roar type thing. Her character, Jane, is strong from the start because that's how she got where she is and because that's how she approaches life. But there are no punctuated moments where the script or director feels it's necessary to remind us that she's a strong, independent woman. Everything seems to grow organically because of the choices Hunter makes. When she's yelling in the newsroom or when she's leading the team and taking the reins it's because that is her job and she does her job well. It feels natural and is fun to watch without being hit over the head with what her character is. She also gets these emotional moments that work well within the story and within Jane the person. She wants love and opens herself up and becomes vulnerable which makes her obviously uncomfortable. That's because Hunter gives such a measured performance where everything she does matters. Her little love triangle feels very authentic from her chasing Hurt and her reaction to Brooks telling her he loves her to her honest moments of emotion. My bone to pick is with the ending that makes her look so anal and by the book. I felt the moment was too contrived to give Jane her a big scene that highlighted her independence and ability to be her own woman while staying true to herself. It just makes Hunter look ridiculous to me, honestly. I don't get the big deal because I don't think it is a big deal. It might stay true to the character but I think that Jane would have handled it a different way than what the script made her do. I think Hunter is pretty great here and I think I like this more than her Oscar winning performance. The whole film is pretty good despite my feelings on the ending. A well deserved nomination for sure.
Sally Kirkland - Anna
So on first look you go what the hell is this film? Then you ask who the hell is Sally Kirkland. Valid questions! And then you investigate and learn that Kirkland campaigned super hard to be nominated and was. And that the film is about a washed up older actress giving it another go and she takes in a younger actress. Said younger actress eventually is discovered and goes on to be a star while Kirkland remains a nobody and doesn't look like she has any future. The little wrinkle is that Kirkland plays a Czech woman who takes in another Czech woman (Paulina Porizkova, a model in real life) and she surpasses Kirkland quickly. This easily checks off a lot of Oscar absolutes. Kirkland is an older actress who was a star in her native Czechoslovakia and came to America to escape communism. She struggles to find work and goes to auditions and her younger countrywoman does the same and Kirkland takes her in. Eventually the younger version of Kirkland is rewarded and given a shot at a major role while Kirkland has to continue to be an understudy on plays. This is obviously very relatable for Oscar voters. The struggle she faces is something all Academy members have probably faced. That's why I feel she got nominated plus the campaigning. On its own, the performance is decent. It is a very specific type of role that appeals to a specific type of person. I guess you could broaden it to mean the takeover of jobs by younger people for those pushing towards retirement but that is a huge stretch. This is just an entertainment breakdown. The very end of the film is also super cliche and sticks out like a sore thumb. Kirkland does something to Porizkova but I won't get too detailed, though I know no one will ever watch this. And that's the lasting legacy of the film is that it is more interesting for the NYC actor than for the general public. This is purely distilled Oscar bait at its finest. It obviously worked for her to score a nomination. I could see this being done today as maybe a Sundance type indie film, and with the right actress, being nominated again. I didn't hate it and I'm actually glad I got to watch this because it is so interesting from an Oscar standpoint. I'll have to let it settle and see how I feel about it later.
Meryl Streep - Ironweed
This might be the first Meryl Streep performance that I genuinely dislike. It only took like 12 nominations. The main reason this performance doesn't do anything for me and makes me kinda hate it, is that it looks like obvious acting. Which I'm not used to seeing from Streep so I was pretty surprised but it felt so labored to me. She plays a hobo in the depression era in Albany who is friendly with Jack Nicholson and is an alcoholic who used to sing in nightclubs. Usually Streep is so refined and subtle and convincing as a character but here I felt she was too much of a stretch as a bum. She just didn't work and it felt way too much like Oscar bait. She's got an old-timey accent that is out of place and she's really not all that likable. I don't care at all about any relationship between her and Nicholson because she gives me no reason to become invested in it. It might be sacrilege to say I dislike a Streep performance and think it's bad but I do think she's the worst part of the film. Plus, she doesn't feel like a true leading actress. Most likely because of her star power and name is why she is here but the film belongs to Nicholson. I really wanted to like this performance because I think Streep is a phenomenal actress but I just can't. It felt too gimmicky and I wish Streep would have approached it differently. I guess sometimes there are performances even by great actors that just don't click with me and this is an example of that. I will say she plays a decent drunk which a lot of people can't pull off, so she has that going for her, which is nice. Anyway, worst Streep performance I've seen so far - this had to happen at some point. Just not something I can ever see myself coming back to or even recommending.
I quite enjoyed this category for a change. When Meryl Streep is your worst performance, it can't really be all that bad, right? She's my 5th, just not for me. Kirkland is my 4th which is a surprise because I thought she'd be the worst. But her performance grew on me when thinking about it, possibly because the role and film seem so contemporary. Like it would be a cool indie nowadays that people love. That's my take on it. Now for the next three, I honestly have no idea the order. I'm cool with Cher after watching the film, I thought Close was pretty interesting before she lost steam, Hunter was very good before that last scene I didn't like. Soooo Close third and toss up between Cher and Hunter. I hate these choices. I think I might stick with the Academy but 5 minutes from now it might be Hunter. They are both really good. So great category and worth checking out.
Oscar Winner: Cher - Moonstruck
My Winner: Cher - Moonstruck
Holly Hunter
Glenn Close
Sally Kirkland
Meryl Streep
No comments:
Post a Comment