I'm a big Paul Newman fan and really like him in this film. I haven't seen any of the others and they are all interesting on the surface. I'll have to see if anyone can dethrone him.
1986 Best Actor
Paul Newman - The Color of Money
I haven't seen The Hustler but I know all about it. I don't think it's a prerequisite to watching this film, though I'm sure it helps add depth to the character of "Fast Eddie" Felson. This film stands on its own and is a very good film, though a lot of people seem to put it down because it's Scorsese continuing someone else's story. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard and this is some great Scorsese stuff. Great shots, helms in the characters, keeps the story tight and mysterious - all around great. But Paul Newman. Newman's Own. A lot of folks think he was robbed in 1961 and though I can't say for sure since I've not seen any of those films, I'd probably agree looking at the names. A lot of folks call this a makeup Oscar for Newman given his body of work and history of snubs. I don't really care about all of that. Newman is quite awesome in this film in 1986. It's the classic story of older guy teaches younger guy the ropes of whatever. In this case, Newman schools Cruise in the art of being a pool shark. His teacher role is fantastic to watch. He latches on to Cruise by way of his girlfriend Mary Elizabeth Mastroantonio and it's a brilliant strategy. She sees the bigger picture and Newman recognizes this, that she has some control over his hot headedness. Newman is Newman. That shouldn't have to be explained really. He's perfect in the role because this is his second go around with the character and gives him exactly the touch he needs. Felson is also a flawed individual. He's not this perfect creation by the story to make everyone happy. He takes on Forrest Whitaker and loses and is very human in those moments. He gets prideful and pissed when Cruise beats him or when, spoiler, Cruise dumps on him to maximize his earning potential in the green room and future tournaments. That means Cruise went easy when Newman thought they were both going toe to toe equally. When Felson realizes this, it's a thing of great acting. I also like that it goes from Newman being out of the game and using his hustling skills to hawk liquor to him getting back in the billiards business teaching Cruise to eventually getting back into playing for real for himself. Who else is going to win this year, seriously? This is your only choice and it's still a great one. Newman is so natural which is part of that lived in effect of having played Felson already. He's at his best when actually playing pool and being back in the game. The tournament at the end is the highlight because it shows how determined he is and how in control Cruise is at different moments. And Newman is great in all of this. I absolutely love this win even if Newman should have been a multi year winner for his other work. But his Felson here is easily worth a win itself and worth watching Scorsese's denigrated masterpiece.
Dexter Gordon - Round Midnight
I was really interested in watching this performance because I'd never heard of Gordon or the film and then once I researched both, I found out he was a well respected and loved jazz saxophone player and didn't have any acting experience. Upon reading about all of that, I was expecting to be blown away by the performance as something really great that could even impress the Academy. I was very wrong about that. This was more in the vein of Jennifer Hudson's unfortunate nomination and terrible win. I guess he's a jazz legend (I'm not a jazz guy) and seems to be nominated simply because of that reason instead of his acting. The performance isn't that good at all. There's no soul or passion behind his character. He plays an old jazz guy playing in a club in Paris and struggling with alcoholism though he doesn't seem to care as much as those around him. Some French guy who loves him becomes like a manager and their lives intertwine. This is actually a French film and it kinda shows and there are lots of scenes where Gordon is playing on stage (live apparently, which is pretty cool) or there is music happening. It's obvious that the producers wanted someone who could actually play music and be great at it at the sacrifice of actual acting ability. Gordon is a bit stiff and can feel like he's just reading lines at times. I think some other people would point to that as realism for the character but it makes me not like watching his character, which is a big problem for the film. Luckily there are so many scenes of him playing sax that he doesn't have to carry the film by acting. The script gives him these inane, flowery things to say as almost one liners that don't do any favors with his gruff, detached, emotionally void voice. Unfortunately, this isn't a Best Actor worthy performance though it is a very interesting inclusion. I can't outright hate it, but I don't think it's all that good, either. A curious Academy choice.
Bob Hoskins - Mona Lisa
I didn't know Bob Hoskins was British. I remember him from Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Super Mario Bros and yes, Hook, but I thought that was a fake accent. Now I know Hoskins is very much a British individual. He plays a guy fresh out of prison who then is made to drive around a prostitute, one which reminded me of the girl from The Crying Game which was, surprise, directed by the same guy, Neil Jordan. Just thought that was interesting. Hoskins puts in a performance that is too good for the film. He is so dedicated and earnest but the film is so crap. He gets out of prison and drives a prostitute around and then goes into super savior mode and tries to save this girl his client knows. Then the film devolves into like a crusade against child prostitution and it feels really weird. He has a lot of range that he has to show off, being a tough guy but also caring and human. He's got to be funny while also being like a detective and kind of a hero type. It really stretches the acting of Hoskins and he's certainly up to the task. He can be scared and timid and assured and confident and in charge and all these different sides to the same character. And that's the thing is that he has built a character. He's the only real reason to watch the film, although it does also star Michael Caine and Robbie Coltrane (Hagrid from Harry Potter) and Clarke Peters (Lester Freamon for you The Wire fans). I just wish the film was better around him. It's so tonally up and down. One minute it's a comedy, the next it's a detective type savior story, then it's a thriller, then it's almost a horror film, and then an intimate portrayal of a man reestablishing himself in society and...well you get the idea. Oh yeah, there's also a shootout. It's a really interesting choice by the Academy because Hoskins is really strong but the film isn't at all. It really made me want to look into any other serious roles Hoskins has done because he commands your attention. I don't expect many have seen this but it is worth checking out to see more of Hoskins than what you know from his children's films. I guess I should thank the Academy for making me watch a film I never would have even known about and seeing a really good Bob Hoskins performance. I don't know where I'll rate this but it gives me something to think about for sure.
William Hurt - Children of a Lesser God
I am really growing to like William Hurt as an actor. I already enjoyed him and thought he was brilliant in A History of Violence, among other things. In this film, Hurt plays a new teacher to a small town who is there to teach deaf kids to speak and takes on a former student who is brilliant and sexy and headstrong. They inevitably fall in love and we watch the relationship go through it's ups and downs. Hurt, just like in everything else I've seen him in, is such an understated actor. He's so calm and collected and natural that it's easy to like him. He's all of that here, of course, as he traverses his relationship with Marlee Matlin. I was actually kinda worried that he was just going to be a quirky teacher character because that is how we are first introduced to him. He does a handstand and other atypical things and I'm thinking of Robin Williams! Luckily, those oddities were mostly it, as Hurt is more of a free spirited type of teacher. I also like that Hurt can easily switch between different emotions without it seeming like he is going from one extreme to another. Hurt and Matlin have great chemistry which obviously helps the film as a whole and the performances individually. Hurt is more hopeful and optimistic about life and the relationship and Hurt's natural charisma helps hammer those feelings home. He also is enthusiastic about helping the deaf kids reach their full potential and those scenes are quite effective for the character, getting us to really like Hurt and see he has a good heart. This was the second of his three Best Actor nominations in a row and you can definitely see that Hurt was on top of his game here. It's a strong performance and the interplay between Hurt and Matlin are the star of the film. If not for Paul Newman winning his much overdue Oscar, Hurt could have contended for a second win in a row. This one is definitely worth seeking out.
James Woods - Salvador
This is the lesser of the two 1986 Oliver Stone features. It's also the one people don't even remember he made. You say 1986 and Stone and everyone automatically thinks of Best Picture Winner Platoon and rightfully so. This film is about the US meddling in the El Salvador civil conflict because communism or some lame scare tactic. Woods is a photojournalist who is kind of a screw up in life who goes down to this conflict to make some money and then of course sees what is really going on and tries to fight against it with his lens and help the people down there. I think you either love or hate James Woods and his frenetic energy. That is certainly on display here as he's going a mile a minute and seems perpetually on cocaine or something. He starts out as a sad sack character getting kicked out of his apartment, having to borrow money to try and get another job, using his "friends" to get what he needs - not a very sympathetic character. But Woods is good at portraying his guy as a scummy lowlife who knows how to wheel and deal and get what he wants. He then goes down to El Salvador and meets up with a lot of contacts he has here and gets into a lot of tough spots that he can get out of because he's so good at bribing and talking his way out of things. That's where Woods' energetic style serves him well. Eventually the style wears thin because there are times where you just want him to shut up and you get tired of his antics. He also doesn't think anything through which is why he ended up in El Salvador because he just wanted to make money quick and didn't stop to think about being in a country with a civil war bubbling up. He dives head long into anything he does and we see why the man is broke with many lovers and homeless. Woods fits this character pretty well and makes him into a believable person who has been all over the world in the middle of conflicts probably drinking, screwing, and narrowly missing death. Inevitably, Woods' character begins to react personally to what is going on, mostly because he has an El Salvadorian girlfriend and a kid (I think) and wants to get them out. He also gets angry at the US diplomats and military guys he knows because they are what is helping to make situations worse in the country. He becomes more caring and involved and not out to just make a quick buck and have a drink. It was a change you could see coming a mile away but Woods still does a good job selling it. This film isn't nearly as good as Platoon is and some of that helps bring down Woods a tad but I also think Woods isn't that good enough to elevate the material much. He's fine and it's that he has a nomination but this certainly wasn't going to be much of a front runner.
This is a kind of interesting group. It was Newman's win from the start, though I did read that Hoskins had a lot of traction with some precursor awards which is really interesting because I had never even heard of the film or performance. Gordon is the easy 5th because it's not Best Actor worthy. Give him a Best Song or something and be done with rewarding him but not a nomination here. Makes no sense. Woods is decent and really has to carry his film with his non stop energy. Not good enough for a win, but I get the nomination. Now for second place, I feel Hoskins does enough to push him over the edge versus Hurt. He has a lot to do in a film that is all over the place and is what keeps it from being a total mess. For that reason, he's the second choice. Hurt gets pushed to third but is still very good and could have won if not for Newman. Newman is great and deserved the win. No doubt I'll probably give him a couple more over the course of the project.
Oscar Winner: Paul Newman - The Color of Money
My Winner: Paul Newman - The Color of Money
Bob Hoskins
William Hurt
James Woods
Dexter Gordon
No comments:
Post a Comment