I just gotta say that the 31 Days of Oscar marathon that TCM does in February/March is my favorite time of the year. I can just put on the channel and relax even if I don't really pay attention to the films. Inevitably, I'll see films like A Guy Named Joe starring Spencer Tracy that I've never even heard of and I come to really enjoy. It's fun to find new films to love and this marathon lets me do just that. I have seen none of these performances so my hopes are high that it's a great year.
1984 Best Supporting Actress
Peggy Ashcroft - A Passage to India
I was somewhat worried about watching this nomination and it being a token nomination in a stuffy British period film featuring a veteran actress not doing much getting an Oscar win because she's old and well liked by the Academy. I feel that's natural to think given the history of Oscar but thankfully it's not the case here. The film is a throw back to David Lean's films of yesteryear, yes, but it's also very socially conscious and and not at all stuffy. Ashcroft fully deserved at least a nomination as she is an integral part of the film and story. I like that both she and her son's suitor (Judy Davis) are appalled at the treatment of the Indians upon their arrival in India by the English living there. She seems like a swell enough old lady, coming to visit her son and escort his possible future wife and her daughter-in-law. She loves her son, is very friendly with Davis, hates that those already there treat the natives like crap, and wants to experience the real India and not avoid the locals. She just seems like a really nice old lady that you'd like to get to know and hear her stories and learn from her. That's the vibe and performance she gives off. And once the incident happens in the caves, I like that she doesn't succumb to the witch hunt the other British folk do and stays true to her own belief that Dr. Aziz is innocent and a great man. Unfortunately, Ashcroft gets an ignominious end to her character that isn't very satisfying but I guess does make sense within the story. Would have preferred her being a thorn in the side of the racist British folk but that's not the story. Ashcroft is wonderful in the role and fits the character perfectly and I don't feel like this was a completely unearned or wasted win. I'll have to look at everyone else in this category but Ashcroft getting the win isn't all that upsetting after watching her performance. I was definitely pleasantly surprised I liked her and the film so much.
Glenn Close - The Natural
This was the third of three straight Best Supporting Actress nominations. That's impressive but when you watch the film, you see that it is also completely undeserved. I don't see any reason as to why Close was nominated for her performance in this film other than she was the hot ticket according to the Academy. Maybe they were trying to reward her with an Oscar? But then they also nominated Geraldine Page who was on her 7th nomination so that is very poor timing. The Natural is a cool film with some super cheesy parts and some moments you know because they are so iconic even if you haven't seen the film ever. Close plays a woman who grew up with Robert Redford and was a brief love interest in his youth before he went off to play baseball but was then shot and wounded. He starts playing ball as an old timer 16 years later and she eventually comes to a game of his after seeing him on a newsreel and they talk. Okay, that's the extent of her performance about an hour and a half into the film that's two hours and seventeen minutes. She then visits him at the end of the film when he's in the hospital and they talk and she goes to the pennant clinching game where he hits a bomb of a homerun. There's really not much else to her performance. She's a brief love interest and a link to Redford's past and that is it. Her only real big moment is when she stands up in the crowd at Wrigley and she's lit up from above and Redford hits a homer. This is the Academy going with what's familiar to them and nothing else. If you're going to nominate someone from the film, it would be Kim Basinger who has a way meatier role and actually does something with it. I don't understand this nomination at all.
Lindsay Crouse - Places in the Heart
This is an odd nomination. Crouse is part of a subplot of the film that seems entirely pointless and frivolous. While Sally Field is going through her story of making the farm work despite the numerous problems she faces, there is also the side story of Crouse who is only tangentially related to the main plot by being Field's sister. Crouse in the film is married to Ed Harris who is cheating on her with Amy Madigan's (his real life wife) character. Crouse finally figures out Harris is cheating on her and it leads to the only noteworthy scene she has in the film where she predictably slaps Harris and says she doesn't love him anymore. This entire subplot never feels like in belongs in this film and indeed drags the rest of the film down, too. So I don't really get what people saw in this to nominate it. Sure, she plays the wronged wife with a steadfast strength and maturity but it has no bearing on the rest of the film at all. It could have been about anything and it would still have the same effect on the audience. So I have to ask if just being a strong woman performance is enough to warrant her a nomination for this film? I don't think so since it has nothing to do with what else is going on in the film even if you take the small town life angle. That's why it feels like Crouse just came along for the ride and was never really going to contend for anything with this performance. It's a head scratcher that doesn't offer up anything all that interesting when her big scene is predictable and underplayed.
Christine Lahti - Swing Shift
After going through these last few Supporting Actress categories, I've come to expect these lesser known actresses (by me, anyway) to have brief, unmemorable performances that make me question why they were nominated to begin with. It's nice when that's not actually the case. Lahti is actually really good and an actually fully fleshed out character who has an arc and contributes to the story. The film is about Goldie Hawn whose husband goes off to war and she starts working at a factory and meets a very young Kurt Russell. They hit it off and drama ensues when the hubby comes back home and Lahti fools around with Russell, too. Lahti plays a neighbor that Ed Harris, the husband, seems to dislike because she's a singer at a club and dresses sexy (though not that much differently than Goldie, but whatever). Hawn isn't that friendly with her either until both are working at the factory where they become pals after a bit and then besties. I like the performance because it has it's own thing going on besides just being support for Goldie. She has a guy who owns the club and they are on and off again and she wants to sing more to make it a career. So while she is Goldie's friend, she also has her own life and a lot of Supporting nominees don't. They show up to be a foil or add comedy or something along those lines and don't do anything else for the story. The film is a bit melodramatic and a throwback to the WWII era of films but Lahti is the one character who seems the most real. She's a tough lady trying to make it in a time when women didn't have the best choices. She also seems more of a realist than the idealistic Goldie, maybe that makes her seem cynical or bitter (and she is) but I think she's got a better grasp on the world than anyone else. Lahti is good in the role because she never overplays her character and brings a realistic element to the melodrama. She also steals the film from Goldie, whose character is what you'd expect and not all that interesting because you can see the beats she's supposed to hit before they arrive. I'd rather the film focus on Lahti because of her performance and character being way more compelling than Goldie. Interesting performance from Lahti that could have been really great if the film was any better.
Geraldine Page - The Pope of Greenwich Village
Here we find Miss Page again gunning for that Oscar. Unlike for The Trip to Bountiful where the whole film was designed to get her that elusive Oscar, this is a small role that packs a punch but is still designed to get some Oscar love. So in two consecutive years you almost have the complete opposite of roles which to me highlights Page's acting ability. Her win was for a pleasant, quirky, lovable old lady who wanted to see her old home once again. Very sentimental stuff but still a decent performance from Page. Her role in this film is literally only two scenes. And she is nothing like her doddering old woman role in 1985. Page plays both scenes with the intensity and acting style turned up to eleven. The first scene she is talking with her cop son and it establishes Page as a rough, hardened lady who gives her son shit but in a motherly, tough love kind of way. I think some of the choices she makes for her character are great and add a lot of substance to the performance. When the son goes to kiss her goodbye, she gets close and then scoffs and pushes him away before grabbing him quickly and hugging and kissing him. In that brief moment, a lot is conveyed about Page's character and who she is as a mother and a person. There's a lot packed into just a couple minutes of screen time. The second scene of hers is when she is confronted by two corrupt cops who check in on her to try to hassle her to give them information on what her son was doing and what he knew (he's recently killed). And man, does Page bring the fury and the anger! She is righteous like she's straight out of a Tarantino film. She mourns her son but at the same time reveals how strong she is as a woman/mother/person and knocks the corrupt cops down a few pegs. It's amazing to watch and really great acting and I can see why the Academy wanted to try and reward her for this short role. But it feels like it belongs in a different film because Pope is a very different film than those scenes would suggest if you watch them in a vacuum. Mickey Rourke and Eric Roberts pal around and deliver some intense acting of their own but only more ridiculous and funny. Page's role is very baity and almost a cameo in the vein of Brando in A Dry White Season, yet better. It impacts the film and is memorable but just feels out of place and like a wasted effort for a weird buddy/crime type film. Didn't think I'd write so much about this performance but it's really interesting when compared to a lot of other things. Page is good but not sure where I'll put her overall.
I was kinda dreading that this would be another awful category all the way through but I am pleasantly surprised that's not the case. I totally get why Ashcroft won and I liked her performance because it actually added to the story. It's nice when the winners are actually good. She wouldn't be my winner, though, because I definitely liked Lahti a lot more. She stole the film from Goldie Hawn and I was more interested in her character overall. I wasn't expecting much more than a friend who stays in the background but Lahti was a big part of the story and I liked that. Page was great in her two scenes. It feels like she's acting in a different movie, yes, but she's tremendous. I knock her down because it feels so different from the film and so baity but you can't deny she has a strong presence that you want to watch more of. Close and Crouse are the lesser performances. Close doesn't have much to do and her nomination feels more like the Academy trying to make her a star with like her 3rd nomination in a row. Crouse is in a subplot of her film that is completely pointless and her little story is so generic and obvious that it's boring to me and Crouse does nothing to make it interesting. Not a bad year and the two not so good ones are at least in decent films. On we go!
Oscar Winner: Peggy Ashcroft - A Passage to India
My Winner: Christine Lahti - Swing Shift
Peggy Ashcroft
Geraldine Page
Glenn Close
Lindsay Crouse
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Best Picture 1985
I've been excited to see the winner of this year because a lot of people call it one of the worst winners in recent history (but they seem to say that every year, right?) and I wanted to see why people thought this way. I can't imagine it's that bad but I guess I'll see.
1985 Best Picture
Out of Africa
This is a film that everyone loves to hate as a winner. And I think because it is the winner is why people love to hate it so much. If it was simply a nominee, I think more people would appreciate it for what it is - a slow moving story of love. I can't really deny everyone's criticisms of the film. It is glacially paced and it took me three nights of watching to get through (mostly because I'm trying to watch this after a long day at work when I'm super tired) and it's just under three hours long, yet seems longer. The story is also mostly about white people in Africa with the actual Africans relegated to positions of servants or as backwards natives that need to be educated. So the cries of racism aren't totally unfounded. But the story is about a white Danish woman's life while she was in Africa so I'm not sure what people were wanting exactly. I'm assuming the book this is based on deals more humanely and appropriately with that issue than the film which is more interested in the romances. Which the romance is the big draw for the film as Streep and Redford were huge stars back then. Their romance is a complicated one. Redford doesn't quite want to commit to Streep because he's such an individual and enjoys being his own man (and seeing other women, presumably). The two are good together but I never really was interested in them ending up together. Their complicated love seems more genuine than having a storybook ending and I liked that about the film. The main draw for the film besides the actors is the cinematography. It was shot on location and looks beautiful and is one reason you'll enjoy the film. There's a sequence near the end where Streep and Redford are flying in a plane over the African wilderness and it is all breathtaking, like it's part of the Planet Earth series. It looks great but also you have to ask how the hell can you not screw up making Africa look amazing and use the locations to your film's benefit? You'd have to be really bad at your job or something would have had to go extremely wrong for this film to not look as good as it does, which means I'm saying it's easy for it to be so gorgeous and should be expected to look as it does. The score is also memorable at points and adds to the epic feel of the film. When you look at this film on its own, it ticks off a lot of what would make for a Best Picture winner. It feels like a BP winner without even watching it. So it doesn't surprise that it ended up winning the award because this is right in the Academy's wheelhouse. I guess it just depends on if you think it's slow and boring (and maybe racist to a degree) if it should actually win. I'll have to see what else is offered up this year to figure out where it stands for me because I don't think it's as awful and egregious as advertised.
The Color Purple
This film tied the record for most nominations without a single win at 11 with The Turning Point. Crazy to think this film went home empty handed and a lot of people claim racism by the Academy for shutting this out and rewarding Out of Africa in the same breath. They may very well have a point and Whoopi Goldberg at least should have won Best Actress but this film does have a lot of faults. A lot of the musical choices are just plain wrong for the tone of the film. They have a light, family friendly sound while the film deals with rape, incest, abuse and all kinds of dark topics and here we are getting a jaunty tune for some reason right before Danny Glover slaps Celia for talking back to him. This comes up time and again in the film where the music doesn't match what's going on or at least tries to make the tone of the story much lighter than it should be. I remember reading this book in high school and I certainly don't remember it having a slapstick comedic tone or being very light in any way. The story deals with everything I said above as we follow Goldberg's Celia through her life of rape, incest, abuse, neglect, misogyny, etc. as she struggles to find her place in the world. It's bizarre to me that Steven Spielberg would try to make this a family friendly type of film as if he's completely unable in treating any subject with a darker tone in favor of sentimentalism, which is what The Color Purple needed. It needed someone else to direct and make it a true drama and not gloss over all of these darker elements found in society at that time especially against black women. It's emotional and sentimental and a little manipulative and I don't think it does the story the justice it deserves. It does manage to pull down some really great acting performances that were rewarded with Oscar nominations and were strong overall like Glover. That's the saving grace of the film for me because the acting was so compelling enough to keep watching even though Spielberg was doing his best to pull me out of the film at every turn. I'm disappointed because this could have been so much better and been much more of an important film in our culture and in the Oscar pantheon. There are scenes that work tremendously and scenes that embarrassingly fizzle out. This film needed to be more consistent to be considered the Best Picture winner.
Kiss of the Spider Woman
This is such an interesting film. One that I think you're better served not really knowing anything about before watching it. Going into it blind allows for much more of an impact, I think. With that said, it's a film about two men in a Brazilian prison, one who is gay and the other who is a political prisoner. We spend almost the entire film with these two men in a prison cell as they learn about each other and we learn about them. These scenes are interrupted by two fake movies as told by William Hurt's character to his cellmate, Raul Julia. The main one is about a Nazi love story and the other is about a spider woman. The premise of this film sounds ridiculous and not very entertaining but it really is. Hurt and Julia are so mesmerizing together and their performances are both so tremendous. Hurt deservedly won Best Actor and I'd wager that Julia deserved some kind of nomination as well. As the film progresses, you realize there is more to Hurt than we realize. Once that comes into full view it makes the previous hour and so more interesting knowing that Hurt is playing Julia to some extent. I didn't quite understand the love angle and initially thought that it was part of Hurt's act but I guess he had really fallen for Julia? And then obviously they consummate that love which was probably extremely daring even back in 1985. The ending feels a bit rushed to me with the love angle included. Once Hurt is released and he does the favor for Julia and it ends badly for all involved, I wonder if another ending would have been better? It does call into question whether or not Julia was just using Hurt and both ended up using each other for what they wanted, which is interesting to ponder. I read that this is the first independent film to be nominated for Best Picture which if true is quite a feat but not all that surprising it was this film, because it is really well done. This is a very intriguing film overall and I'm very glad it was nominated. Will be interesting to see where it ends up for me.
Prizzi's Honor
I thought this film might be pretty cool based on what it's about: a mafia family that has a lot of things happen to it that is supposed to be darkly funny, like a dark comedy The Godfather. Sounds kinda cool even though that's not a perfect description. Jack Nicholson is a hitman for the Prizzi family who meets Kathleen Turner at a wedding and falls in love. The two hit it off and come to find out she's a hitwoman. Anjelica Huston is the daughter of Don Prizzi and former flame of Nicholson. Hijinks ensue where Turner runs afoul of the family and to get back in the good graces of the family dimes out Turner who has now married Nicholson and then hits get put out on each of the married couple so they have to face off and kill each other. It should be a good film but I was thoroughly bored with the film. And it's not like there are bad performances in it, it's just that everything falls flat. I don't really find the comedy in it funny so it comes off as weird and tonally off. It also feels long at only two hours and it felt like it dragged to me. I don't know why it didn't click with me but I really didn't enjoy it. I'm not sure why it got so much Academy love, either. I figure because it was John Huston directing Jack Nicholson and his daughter in a mafia movie with comedy undertones. It makes me wonder if the voters actually watched it or just voted for name association. This is just one Best Picture nomination I don't get at all. And it's not going to grow on me, I don't think, because I'm writing this after almost a week since I saw it and have thought about it a bunch and I feel nothing but bewilderment. Not much else to say I guess, other than I don't really recommend this film unless you're an Oscar completist like me or just really love Jack Nicholson or something. Yes, I'm trying to make this blurb a bit longer because I don't like short BP reviews. Anyway, this will be my 5th of the category without a doubt. Really disappointed this was so underwhelming when you read all the praise and nominations it received.
Witness
This seems to fit the bill of the popular film that makes a lot of money (though surprisingly Out of Africa and The Color Purple made more) and has a recognizable star and is a thriller/crime drama that makes its way into Best Picture. I'm actually more surprised that Cocoon didn't take this spot but I guess this film is a little more serious. Anyway, it's about an Amish boy (played by Lukas Haas who you know by face and who was really a good actor as a kid, he's showed up in more than one Oscar film) who witnesses a murder in a bathroom in Philly and then Harrison Ford the cop has to protect him after the kid says one of the police did the crime. It's honestly your basic thriller/crime drama/romance stuff. You've seen this film countless times but this one just adds in the wrinkle of the Amish setting. Ford is still a mega movie star and gets the girl (which you can call before you even see the film), saves the day and becomes the hero, and looks good while being uber cool during all of it. The Amish thing is its saving grace. If it was just another cop film from the 80s I would dismiss the whole thing but at least it is interesting from that angle. It might not be truthful as to how the Amish live and act but at least it's different, which counts for a lot with 80s thrillers. The ending, though, where Ford hast to take on the three Philly cops who come to silence him is really well done. It looks great, first of all. Second, it has a really inventive death that I won't spoil. And it's really tense. Ultimately, this film has basically everything you could want in a Hollywood film, so it's easy to see why it got a Best Picture nod along with a ton of other nominations. It's not a bad nomination at all and I can say I had a good time watching it.
Maybe not the greatest BP category ever but Out of Africa winning isn't so egregious as others would like you to believe. It looks like a BP winner when you really think about it. But then you have to ask what exactly was going to replace it? The Color Purple is so tonally off at times that it's really off putting. I don't know what Spielberg was thinking but he needed to make better choices or probably better yet, step aside and let someone else do the film justice. Prizzi's Honor is also tonally weird. It's dark and tries to be funny but it fails miserably and isn't all that interesting as a mob film. I don't feel like it should have been nominated, honestly. Witness is good fun to watch. It's turn off your brain type of stuff so naturally it's my 4th even though I enjoy it. Kiss of the Spider Woman is my winner because the others have some faults (and this film does, too) that bump them down and this film is pretty great and an interesting watch. It also would have made history with it's subject matter and maybe Hollywood and Oscar looks a bit different if that happens. Below are my rankings though you could probably flip Out of Africa and The Color Purple and I wouldn't mind.
Oscar Winner: Out of Africa
My Winner: Kiss of the Spider Woman
The Color Purple
Out of Africa
Witness
Prizzi's Honor
1985 Best Picture
Out of Africa
This is a film that everyone loves to hate as a winner. And I think because it is the winner is why people love to hate it so much. If it was simply a nominee, I think more people would appreciate it for what it is - a slow moving story of love. I can't really deny everyone's criticisms of the film. It is glacially paced and it took me three nights of watching to get through (mostly because I'm trying to watch this after a long day at work when I'm super tired) and it's just under three hours long, yet seems longer. The story is also mostly about white people in Africa with the actual Africans relegated to positions of servants or as backwards natives that need to be educated. So the cries of racism aren't totally unfounded. But the story is about a white Danish woman's life while she was in Africa so I'm not sure what people were wanting exactly. I'm assuming the book this is based on deals more humanely and appropriately with that issue than the film which is more interested in the romances. Which the romance is the big draw for the film as Streep and Redford were huge stars back then. Their romance is a complicated one. Redford doesn't quite want to commit to Streep because he's such an individual and enjoys being his own man (and seeing other women, presumably). The two are good together but I never really was interested in them ending up together. Their complicated love seems more genuine than having a storybook ending and I liked that about the film. The main draw for the film besides the actors is the cinematography. It was shot on location and looks beautiful and is one reason you'll enjoy the film. There's a sequence near the end where Streep and Redford are flying in a plane over the African wilderness and it is all breathtaking, like it's part of the Planet Earth series. It looks great but also you have to ask how the hell can you not screw up making Africa look amazing and use the locations to your film's benefit? You'd have to be really bad at your job or something would have had to go extremely wrong for this film to not look as good as it does, which means I'm saying it's easy for it to be so gorgeous and should be expected to look as it does. The score is also memorable at points and adds to the epic feel of the film. When you look at this film on its own, it ticks off a lot of what would make for a Best Picture winner. It feels like a BP winner without even watching it. So it doesn't surprise that it ended up winning the award because this is right in the Academy's wheelhouse. I guess it just depends on if you think it's slow and boring (and maybe racist to a degree) if it should actually win. I'll have to see what else is offered up this year to figure out where it stands for me because I don't think it's as awful and egregious as advertised.
The Color Purple
This film tied the record for most nominations without a single win at 11 with The Turning Point. Crazy to think this film went home empty handed and a lot of people claim racism by the Academy for shutting this out and rewarding Out of Africa in the same breath. They may very well have a point and Whoopi Goldberg at least should have won Best Actress but this film does have a lot of faults. A lot of the musical choices are just plain wrong for the tone of the film. They have a light, family friendly sound while the film deals with rape, incest, abuse and all kinds of dark topics and here we are getting a jaunty tune for some reason right before Danny Glover slaps Celia for talking back to him. This comes up time and again in the film where the music doesn't match what's going on or at least tries to make the tone of the story much lighter than it should be. I remember reading this book in high school and I certainly don't remember it having a slapstick comedic tone or being very light in any way. The story deals with everything I said above as we follow Goldberg's Celia through her life of rape, incest, abuse, neglect, misogyny, etc. as she struggles to find her place in the world. It's bizarre to me that Steven Spielberg would try to make this a family friendly type of film as if he's completely unable in treating any subject with a darker tone in favor of sentimentalism, which is what The Color Purple needed. It needed someone else to direct and make it a true drama and not gloss over all of these darker elements found in society at that time especially against black women. It's emotional and sentimental and a little manipulative and I don't think it does the story the justice it deserves. It does manage to pull down some really great acting performances that were rewarded with Oscar nominations and were strong overall like Glover. That's the saving grace of the film for me because the acting was so compelling enough to keep watching even though Spielberg was doing his best to pull me out of the film at every turn. I'm disappointed because this could have been so much better and been much more of an important film in our culture and in the Oscar pantheon. There are scenes that work tremendously and scenes that embarrassingly fizzle out. This film needed to be more consistent to be considered the Best Picture winner.
Kiss of the Spider Woman
This is such an interesting film. One that I think you're better served not really knowing anything about before watching it. Going into it blind allows for much more of an impact, I think. With that said, it's a film about two men in a Brazilian prison, one who is gay and the other who is a political prisoner. We spend almost the entire film with these two men in a prison cell as they learn about each other and we learn about them. These scenes are interrupted by two fake movies as told by William Hurt's character to his cellmate, Raul Julia. The main one is about a Nazi love story and the other is about a spider woman. The premise of this film sounds ridiculous and not very entertaining but it really is. Hurt and Julia are so mesmerizing together and their performances are both so tremendous. Hurt deservedly won Best Actor and I'd wager that Julia deserved some kind of nomination as well. As the film progresses, you realize there is more to Hurt than we realize. Once that comes into full view it makes the previous hour and so more interesting knowing that Hurt is playing Julia to some extent. I didn't quite understand the love angle and initially thought that it was part of Hurt's act but I guess he had really fallen for Julia? And then obviously they consummate that love which was probably extremely daring even back in 1985. The ending feels a bit rushed to me with the love angle included. Once Hurt is released and he does the favor for Julia and it ends badly for all involved, I wonder if another ending would have been better? It does call into question whether or not Julia was just using Hurt and both ended up using each other for what they wanted, which is interesting to ponder. I read that this is the first independent film to be nominated for Best Picture which if true is quite a feat but not all that surprising it was this film, because it is really well done. This is a very intriguing film overall and I'm very glad it was nominated. Will be interesting to see where it ends up for me.
Prizzi's Honor
I thought this film might be pretty cool based on what it's about: a mafia family that has a lot of things happen to it that is supposed to be darkly funny, like a dark comedy The Godfather. Sounds kinda cool even though that's not a perfect description. Jack Nicholson is a hitman for the Prizzi family who meets Kathleen Turner at a wedding and falls in love. The two hit it off and come to find out she's a hitwoman. Anjelica Huston is the daughter of Don Prizzi and former flame of Nicholson. Hijinks ensue where Turner runs afoul of the family and to get back in the good graces of the family dimes out Turner who has now married Nicholson and then hits get put out on each of the married couple so they have to face off and kill each other. It should be a good film but I was thoroughly bored with the film. And it's not like there are bad performances in it, it's just that everything falls flat. I don't really find the comedy in it funny so it comes off as weird and tonally off. It also feels long at only two hours and it felt like it dragged to me. I don't know why it didn't click with me but I really didn't enjoy it. I'm not sure why it got so much Academy love, either. I figure because it was John Huston directing Jack Nicholson and his daughter in a mafia movie with comedy undertones. It makes me wonder if the voters actually watched it or just voted for name association. This is just one Best Picture nomination I don't get at all. And it's not going to grow on me, I don't think, because I'm writing this after almost a week since I saw it and have thought about it a bunch and I feel nothing but bewilderment. Not much else to say I guess, other than I don't really recommend this film unless you're an Oscar completist like me or just really love Jack Nicholson or something. Yes, I'm trying to make this blurb a bit longer because I don't like short BP reviews. Anyway, this will be my 5th of the category without a doubt. Really disappointed this was so underwhelming when you read all the praise and nominations it received.
Witness
This seems to fit the bill of the popular film that makes a lot of money (though surprisingly Out of Africa and The Color Purple made more) and has a recognizable star and is a thriller/crime drama that makes its way into Best Picture. I'm actually more surprised that Cocoon didn't take this spot but I guess this film is a little more serious. Anyway, it's about an Amish boy (played by Lukas Haas who you know by face and who was really a good actor as a kid, he's showed up in more than one Oscar film) who witnesses a murder in a bathroom in Philly and then Harrison Ford the cop has to protect him after the kid says one of the police did the crime. It's honestly your basic thriller/crime drama/romance stuff. You've seen this film countless times but this one just adds in the wrinkle of the Amish setting. Ford is still a mega movie star and gets the girl (which you can call before you even see the film), saves the day and becomes the hero, and looks good while being uber cool during all of it. The Amish thing is its saving grace. If it was just another cop film from the 80s I would dismiss the whole thing but at least it is interesting from that angle. It might not be truthful as to how the Amish live and act but at least it's different, which counts for a lot with 80s thrillers. The ending, though, where Ford hast to take on the three Philly cops who come to silence him is really well done. It looks great, first of all. Second, it has a really inventive death that I won't spoil. And it's really tense. Ultimately, this film has basically everything you could want in a Hollywood film, so it's easy to see why it got a Best Picture nod along with a ton of other nominations. It's not a bad nomination at all and I can say I had a good time watching it.
Maybe not the greatest BP category ever but Out of Africa winning isn't so egregious as others would like you to believe. It looks like a BP winner when you really think about it. But then you have to ask what exactly was going to replace it? The Color Purple is so tonally off at times that it's really off putting. I don't know what Spielberg was thinking but he needed to make better choices or probably better yet, step aside and let someone else do the film justice. Prizzi's Honor is also tonally weird. It's dark and tries to be funny but it fails miserably and isn't all that interesting as a mob film. I don't feel like it should have been nominated, honestly. Witness is good fun to watch. It's turn off your brain type of stuff so naturally it's my 4th even though I enjoy it. Kiss of the Spider Woman is my winner because the others have some faults (and this film does, too) that bump them down and this film is pretty great and an interesting watch. It also would have made history with it's subject matter and maybe Hollywood and Oscar looks a bit different if that happens. Below are my rankings though you could probably flip Out of Africa and The Color Purple and I wouldn't mind.
Oscar Winner: Out of Africa
My Winner: Kiss of the Spider Woman
The Color Purple
Out of Africa
Witness
Prizzi's Honor
Leading Actor 1985
I have gone back from time to time and read over my early reviews and I feel like I've really matured in my writing and in my understanding and appreciation of film. There are some films I'd love to review again because I simply never gave them the chance they deserved when I first started out. I do feel like I'm giving every new film I watch a legit chance so it's contained to my first few years. One day I might revisit all of those when I'm done here but that might just be 2023!
1985 Best Actor
William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
He has quite the introduction to the world in this film and it is certainly very memorable. We first see him in his prison cell in what looks to be a nightgown and as he slinks around and tells fellow prisoner Raul Julia (who is fantastic, by the way) of this old Nazi film he loves in a very effeminate voice. It's really quite a difficult character to pull off because Hurt has to make his character seem natural and avoid any awful stereotypes and exaggerations. Hurt excels at making his character believable and even somewhat sympathetic, though we know as an audience from the beginning that their is an ulterior motive behind his work which becomes clear later on in the film. It's also impressive a bit because Hurt's Luis Molina is in prison because he molested a kid from what I understand and yet we still feel for Hurt. Although, the more I read up on the film, it seems the pedophile thing was made up by the corrupt police simply because Hurt's character is a flamboyant gay man in Brazil (I think). The real greatness to the performance is the interaction between Hurt and Julia who spend the majority of time together on screen in their prison cell. The two together are a clash of cultures as Julia is a rebel member of some anti-government group - a political prisoner - and Hurt is of course the gay pedophile. The two have amazing chemistry as Hurt prods at the quiet, serious Julia so that he will open to him. They are what make the film worth watching at least once. You also get kinda wrapped up in the movies that Hurt describes for Julia and get a sense of just how much a showman Molina (and Hurt, by association) truly is. It does come close to Hurt chewing the scenery but he strikes the right balance for the antics of his character and you never feel like you're watching a ridiculous acting display. It's easy to see why this kicked off three straight Best Actor nominations for Hurt and why he won for his first one here. It's a tremendous performance from Hurt in a difficult role that he makes look so easy.
Harrison Ford - Witness
This is an easy nomination to explain. Yeah, it's Harrison Ford and you would think he has a couple Oscar nominations but no, this is his one and only nomination to date (and let's be real - ever). But this was the culmination of being in so many critically acclaimed and monster box office films. Ford is and was back then a Hollywood movie star in the purest sense. After this film, he would continue to be a star with some really great action films and more dramatic films. But this was the Academy finally saying yes, you are box office magic and we love you so here's an Oscar nomination for a film we also really love to the tune of eight Oscar nominations. And it's okay! Because Ford is a great actor and can you see him not having a nomination somewhere in his career? It just feels right and this seems like a good enough role for him to earn it on even if we can all point to his other more iconic roles as reasons to reward him. Here he plays a Philadelphia cop who responds to a murder and turns out an Amish boy saw who did it and implicates another Philly police officer in the murder. Ford gets into a brief shootout with the guy and then goes into Amish country to hide out and protect the young boy. He then confronts those responsible. It's basic thriller/crime drama stuff but if you're going to choose an actor for that, might as well be Ford. It's entertaining and the performance is fine enough but obviously this was never winning an Oscar. That's okay because a nomination doesn't have to always win. This is perfectly Harrison Ford stuff and I'm glad the Academy at least rewarded him once.
James Garner - Murphy's Romance
There's not really a negative thing you can say about this performance. That doesn't mean it's brilliant or an all-timer, mind you, just that's it's extremely enjoyable. I know Garner as a guy who was in Westerns and more notably, The Rockford Files. He's got a soothing voice that reminds me of Keith Carradine and he has the old school Hollywood good looks to match. In the film, he plays the titular Murphy who is a local store owner who takes a liking to Sally Field and is a guy who can pretty much do a little of everything. Obviously, the film is about a romance and Garner and Field have great chemistry powered by Field being so direct and Garner being very witty. That's what Garner's performance is all about: the wit and the charm. He doles out one liners and advice like they are the same thing. He's very funny and seems like a real good guy. You can say this is a career nomination and you'd be right, but this is definitely the career nomination I would prefer. An entertaining, enjoyable performance that highlights why the actor is so special. Again, Garner isn't amazing in the Oscar sense. But you realize he's kind of an awesome older guy in the film who is suave and cool and badass and charming and totally going to bang Sally Field. Even when her ex-husband shows back up he just continues being awesome. Honestly, watching him in this performance makes me want to watch his TV shows and other films. He seems like such a cool actor and gives a good career performance.
Jack Nicholson - Prizzi's Honor
I'm going to be really honest: this is probably the worst Jack Nicholson performance I've seen of his that others consider to be a good performance. I just don't get this nomination at all besides it just being a stature nomination. I don't much care for the film which is mostly boring to me even though the parts are better than the sum. Nicholson isn't bad really, it's just his performance isn't interesting in the slightest. The whole film has this weird comedic tone that isn't actually very funny and the performances themselves don't come off as funny even though it feels like Nicholson is trying to do things to be funny. So nothing he does lands with any effect and it just feels so blah. It's an uninspired performance for what should be something fun. He plays a hitman who falls for a lady hitman and they marry and then things happen with his mafia family and the two are contracted to kill each other. It should be darkly funny and provide a lot of entertaining and maybe even some serious, dramatic moments. But there is no moment where Nicholson really shines. He makes a plea towards the end to save his wife but it's not that memorable. I've seen people say this is good for a mafia film but even that angle is a little lacking, mostly because the interplay of the family and the hitmen should be more interesting and funny. It's one of the few films that seems to be lauded that I was thoroughly bored by and one of the few Nicholson performances that wasn't very entertaining. I don't understand the love and I don't like when the Academy props up a boring film or performance based off who directed it or starred in it. No way Nicholson should have been nominated for this.
Jon Voight - Runaway Train
This is a curious nomination and really speaks to my theory that if you've won an Oscar before, they won't hesitate to nominate you again no matter what. This isn't the typical Best Actor nomination type of material. Voight plays a bad prisoner who has been welded (welded!) into his cell and is finally getting out due to a court case. He gets out and promptly escapes with Eric Roberts' dopey ass and they eventually get onto a train that has no brakes and is flying down the Alaskan wilderness rails. It's an action adventure role that is portrayed with an over the top sensibility. Voight has like this New Yawk accent which of course makes him tough and gets injured a few times until it is convenient enough to stop him. Voight brings an intensity to the role it probably doesn't really deserve as we understand him to be the alpha male from the opening scenes. He's always dogging Roberts because he tagged along when he didn't want to so that relationship is at first one of annoyance. But it of course becomes one of respect by the end. So yeah, the film deals in cliches and that's okay because you're here to watch Voight and Roberts on a runaway train. That's kind of why I'm surprised this was nominated for both of them for a basic action adventure thriller. The film tells us how to respond to Voight, as well. He's a sympathetic figure because he's been welded off but is he a bad criminal? Is he actually a good dude? Is he a misunderstood guy? It's all over the place, though Voight tries his best to make his character interesting. And it's obvious that Voight is supposed to represent these different things but it's all muddled in the end. He is simply effective at being a fugitive on a train with a muddied history. Sometimes you don't need to dig too deep into these nominations and just accept that watching a criminal on a train in Alaska is enough.
A very entertaining Best Actor field. Surprisingly, the one I dislike the most is Jack Nicholson - didn't see that coming. But he's just not all that good and it's oddly dark but not funny. The whole film is off and Nicholson is part of the reason why. The rest of the gang is extremely entertaining. Voight is hammy fun in a film that's ridiculous but awesome. I don't know why it was nominated but I'm glad I got to watch it. Garner is just a cool old dude romancing Sally Field. Nothing amazing with his performance, it's just enjoyable. Harrison Ford is Harrison Ford. He does his usual thing in his film and it's fun to watch. Pure escapism. Hurt is the standout, though. While the others in this category are just movie star type roles, Hurt is actually a dramatic, Oscar-type performance. It's really tremendous and is a great first nomination of three in a row for Hurt. He's the easy and obvious winner this year. All in all a great, entertaining category.
Oscar Winner: William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
My Winner: William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
Harrison Ford
James Garner
Jon Voight
Jack Nicholson
1985 Best Actor
William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
He has quite the introduction to the world in this film and it is certainly very memorable. We first see him in his prison cell in what looks to be a nightgown and as he slinks around and tells fellow prisoner Raul Julia (who is fantastic, by the way) of this old Nazi film he loves in a very effeminate voice. It's really quite a difficult character to pull off because Hurt has to make his character seem natural and avoid any awful stereotypes and exaggerations. Hurt excels at making his character believable and even somewhat sympathetic, though we know as an audience from the beginning that their is an ulterior motive behind his work which becomes clear later on in the film. It's also impressive a bit because Hurt's Luis Molina is in prison because he molested a kid from what I understand and yet we still feel for Hurt. Although, the more I read up on the film, it seems the pedophile thing was made up by the corrupt police simply because Hurt's character is a flamboyant gay man in Brazil (I think). The real greatness to the performance is the interaction between Hurt and Julia who spend the majority of time together on screen in their prison cell. The two together are a clash of cultures as Julia is a rebel member of some anti-government group - a political prisoner - and Hurt is of course the gay pedophile. The two have amazing chemistry as Hurt prods at the quiet, serious Julia so that he will open to him. They are what make the film worth watching at least once. You also get kinda wrapped up in the movies that Hurt describes for Julia and get a sense of just how much a showman Molina (and Hurt, by association) truly is. It does come close to Hurt chewing the scenery but he strikes the right balance for the antics of his character and you never feel like you're watching a ridiculous acting display. It's easy to see why this kicked off three straight Best Actor nominations for Hurt and why he won for his first one here. It's a tremendous performance from Hurt in a difficult role that he makes look so easy.
Harrison Ford - Witness
This is an easy nomination to explain. Yeah, it's Harrison Ford and you would think he has a couple Oscar nominations but no, this is his one and only nomination to date (and let's be real - ever). But this was the culmination of being in so many critically acclaimed and monster box office films. Ford is and was back then a Hollywood movie star in the purest sense. After this film, he would continue to be a star with some really great action films and more dramatic films. But this was the Academy finally saying yes, you are box office magic and we love you so here's an Oscar nomination for a film we also really love to the tune of eight Oscar nominations. And it's okay! Because Ford is a great actor and can you see him not having a nomination somewhere in his career? It just feels right and this seems like a good enough role for him to earn it on even if we can all point to his other more iconic roles as reasons to reward him. Here he plays a Philadelphia cop who responds to a murder and turns out an Amish boy saw who did it and implicates another Philly police officer in the murder. Ford gets into a brief shootout with the guy and then goes into Amish country to hide out and protect the young boy. He then confronts those responsible. It's basic thriller/crime drama stuff but if you're going to choose an actor for that, might as well be Ford. It's entertaining and the performance is fine enough but obviously this was never winning an Oscar. That's okay because a nomination doesn't have to always win. This is perfectly Harrison Ford stuff and I'm glad the Academy at least rewarded him once.
James Garner - Murphy's Romance
There's not really a negative thing you can say about this performance. That doesn't mean it's brilliant or an all-timer, mind you, just that's it's extremely enjoyable. I know Garner as a guy who was in Westerns and more notably, The Rockford Files. He's got a soothing voice that reminds me of Keith Carradine and he has the old school Hollywood good looks to match. In the film, he plays the titular Murphy who is a local store owner who takes a liking to Sally Field and is a guy who can pretty much do a little of everything. Obviously, the film is about a romance and Garner and Field have great chemistry powered by Field being so direct and Garner being very witty. That's what Garner's performance is all about: the wit and the charm. He doles out one liners and advice like they are the same thing. He's very funny and seems like a real good guy. You can say this is a career nomination and you'd be right, but this is definitely the career nomination I would prefer. An entertaining, enjoyable performance that highlights why the actor is so special. Again, Garner isn't amazing in the Oscar sense. But you realize he's kind of an awesome older guy in the film who is suave and cool and badass and charming and totally going to bang Sally Field. Even when her ex-husband shows back up he just continues being awesome. Honestly, watching him in this performance makes me want to watch his TV shows and other films. He seems like such a cool actor and gives a good career performance.
Jack Nicholson - Prizzi's Honor
I'm going to be really honest: this is probably the worst Jack Nicholson performance I've seen of his that others consider to be a good performance. I just don't get this nomination at all besides it just being a stature nomination. I don't much care for the film which is mostly boring to me even though the parts are better than the sum. Nicholson isn't bad really, it's just his performance isn't interesting in the slightest. The whole film has this weird comedic tone that isn't actually very funny and the performances themselves don't come off as funny even though it feels like Nicholson is trying to do things to be funny. So nothing he does lands with any effect and it just feels so blah. It's an uninspired performance for what should be something fun. He plays a hitman who falls for a lady hitman and they marry and then things happen with his mafia family and the two are contracted to kill each other. It should be darkly funny and provide a lot of entertaining and maybe even some serious, dramatic moments. But there is no moment where Nicholson really shines. He makes a plea towards the end to save his wife but it's not that memorable. I've seen people say this is good for a mafia film but even that angle is a little lacking, mostly because the interplay of the family and the hitmen should be more interesting and funny. It's one of the few films that seems to be lauded that I was thoroughly bored by and one of the few Nicholson performances that wasn't very entertaining. I don't understand the love and I don't like when the Academy props up a boring film or performance based off who directed it or starred in it. No way Nicholson should have been nominated for this.
Jon Voight - Runaway Train
This is a curious nomination and really speaks to my theory that if you've won an Oscar before, they won't hesitate to nominate you again no matter what. This isn't the typical Best Actor nomination type of material. Voight plays a bad prisoner who has been welded (welded!) into his cell and is finally getting out due to a court case. He gets out and promptly escapes with Eric Roberts' dopey ass and they eventually get onto a train that has no brakes and is flying down the Alaskan wilderness rails. It's an action adventure role that is portrayed with an over the top sensibility. Voight has like this New Yawk accent which of course makes him tough and gets injured a few times until it is convenient enough to stop him. Voight brings an intensity to the role it probably doesn't really deserve as we understand him to be the alpha male from the opening scenes. He's always dogging Roberts because he tagged along when he didn't want to so that relationship is at first one of annoyance. But it of course becomes one of respect by the end. So yeah, the film deals in cliches and that's okay because you're here to watch Voight and Roberts on a runaway train. That's kind of why I'm surprised this was nominated for both of them for a basic action adventure thriller. The film tells us how to respond to Voight, as well. He's a sympathetic figure because he's been welded off but is he a bad criminal? Is he actually a good dude? Is he a misunderstood guy? It's all over the place, though Voight tries his best to make his character interesting. And it's obvious that Voight is supposed to represent these different things but it's all muddled in the end. He is simply effective at being a fugitive on a train with a muddied history. Sometimes you don't need to dig too deep into these nominations and just accept that watching a criminal on a train in Alaska is enough.
A very entertaining Best Actor field. Surprisingly, the one I dislike the most is Jack Nicholson - didn't see that coming. But he's just not all that good and it's oddly dark but not funny. The whole film is off and Nicholson is part of the reason why. The rest of the gang is extremely entertaining. Voight is hammy fun in a film that's ridiculous but awesome. I don't know why it was nominated but I'm glad I got to watch it. Garner is just a cool old dude romancing Sally Field. Nothing amazing with his performance, it's just enjoyable. Harrison Ford is Harrison Ford. He does his usual thing in his film and it's fun to watch. Pure escapism. Hurt is the standout, though. While the others in this category are just movie star type roles, Hurt is actually a dramatic, Oscar-type performance. It's really tremendous and is a great first nomination of three in a row for Hurt. He's the easy and obvious winner this year. All in all a great, entertaining category.
Oscar Winner: William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
My Winner: William Hurt - Kiss of the Spider Woman
Harrison Ford
James Garner
Jon Voight
Jack Nicholson
Leading Actress 1985
Sometimes you have to look at the previous years when a nomination doesn't make sense or seems to come out of nowhere. Like last year for me (1986) where Kathleen Turner is nominated for Peggy Sue Got Married. Inspired choice by the Academy and pretty fun film. But then you see she was the lead in Prizzi's Honor this year and her nomination in 86 seems like a make up. I mean, Anjelica Huston and Jack Nicholson and William Hickey and the film itself were all nominated. Hell, even Robert Loggia was by way of Jagged Edge. So Turner was the odd woman out. And I really feel like the Academy nominated her in 86 as an apology. Sometimes understanding nominations is as simple as looking at the year or two before and seeing what was nominated. There is no doubt that that is the reason Turner was nominated. You get that this year too with Geraldine Page. This was her 8th nomination so the Academy was itching to give her an award. I've only seen Whoopi and I know she's great so I'll have to see if Page deserved it or not.
1985 Best Actress
Geraldine Page - The Trip to Bountiful
There is certainly a ton to talk about for this win and nomination. The most obvious, which I already alluded to above, is that this was the Academy finally giving Page her overdue win on her 8th nomination. A career/veteran win for an actress that was clearly beloved by Hollywood who wins over a black actress that most feel gave the better performance and who would have made history in the process. There is a tinge of racism attached to this win whether real or not that adds up, along with many bloggers hating this performance, to me becoming convinced I would hate it and excoriate it, too. Well, I'm here to say that Page is quite good as old Mrs. Watts. No doubt that she goes all in herself to get that elusive Oscar and yes, you could classify this as sentimental Oscar bait. All of that applies but Page still gives quite an effective performance as the old woman who wants to escape the boring house and city she lives in with her son and overbearing daughter-in-law to return once more to her old home and birthplace - Bountiful, Texas. She is able to escape and meet a bunch of different people on her journey and we see how nice and caring this little old lady truly is. I get why it has a negative appeal for some folks but that doesn't equate to her giving a bad performance at all. A lot of the older actors in their later films stick to the old ways of acting, but Page comes off very natural and not as if she's stuck in a bygone era. This isn't The Whales of August. Page holds her own and makes you really invest in her character because she gives you reason to. I would wager to bet that most of those that put this performance or film down have never actually watched it and just parrot what others say because of its perception. Now, as of right now I can't say whether or not Page deserves the win. I know Whoopi is great but the rest are wildcards yet to be seen. All I know is that this wasn't nearly as bad as I was lead to believe. Page carries the film well and it's a strong performance regardless of it being Oscar bait. Side note, this film reminds me a whole lot of Nebraska and I swear that film steals a shot of Page walking into her old rundown bedroom on the second story and seeing a decaying old bed. Wouldn't be surprised if it was an inspiration for Alexander Payne. The big takeaway from this performance is to not rely on others to think and make opinions for you. Watch the films and performances and judge it for yourself.
Anne Bancroft - Agnes of God
Maybe I'm just in a rut or maybe I'm watching too many performances or films that leave me not really caring either way about them or maybe that's just 1985 for me. But Bancroft is entirely forgettable to me. Maybe that's because Meg Tilly overpowers her the entire film or Jane Fonda has the more interesting role. Bancroft plays the Mother Superior at a convent where Tilly has had a baby that is dead and now authorities are trying to figure what happened and by whom. I don't feel like Bancroft does anything memorable or different for the nun role she's in. She plays the Mother Superior like a bully and also like a mother hen at different times. Of course she's going to protect her own interests and try to stave off Fonda the psychiatrist from digging into her little kingdom. I just wasn't impressed with what Bancroft did with her character. It's exactly what you think a head nun would be like in these circumstances and doesn't offer up anything rewarding in the performance. I feel like you could drop any other actress into the role and get at least the same result. Sure, Bancroft looks the part fine and does a good enough job being the head nun and being firm and authoritative when necessary, but I need a lot more than that for a Best Actress nomination. I need something that shows me why exactly the Academy gave Bancroft her 5th Oscar nomination and I just don't see it. Is this because she's a comfort choice for the Academy since she is a previous winner and is Mrs. Robinson (and Mrs. Mel Brooks)? I don't even think Bancroft is the true lead of the film, that's Jane Fonda. She feels more supporting like Meg Tilly to me. She's there to sort of argue the other side of Jane Fonda's psychiatry point. True faith versus skepticism and to shield the vulnerable Tilly from the outside world. That idea is really compelling but the performance itself is not. Like I said, I need a lot more from a Best Actress performance than Bancroft gives us here.
Whoopi Goldberg - The Color Purple
When you read about this category for this year, all you hear about online is that Whoopi was robbed (which was made up for later) and that Page is a bad winner. I had to watch this in high school and vaguely remembered Whoopi's performance but I was definitely not a film guy back then. Having watched this again, Whoopi really is worth all the praise I've read about. I'll get to all the rankings down below so as to focus on Whoopi here but I didn't realize this was her film debut. We all know Whoopi as this big personality nowadays, telling crass jokes and being loud and crazy and being an Oscar winner and host. She's obviously known much more for her comedy than for her dramatic chops but she is so good as Celie in this film. Celie is of course the main character and we follow her life as she is raped and abused and held down by the men in her life. It's a dark story that Spielberg mishandles but luckily Goldberg is up to the task of making Celie into a three dimensional character. At first she is this meek woman who doesn't really say much at all, just goes about doing her duties as wife and mother to a bunch of rotten kids. But eventually the true Celie peeks out every now and then like when she watches Danny Glover try to prepare breakfast and accidentally hits him on the head with a pot and then plops a chair down in the middle of the kitchen to watch him frantically rush about. The most memorable scene is obviously the one where she blows up at dinner at Glover and everyone else and it's so contained within Goldberg. It's so real and so appropriate and so good. It's not over the top or too much, the anger is believable and even relatable. Once that all goes down, the film lingers a bit too long but the ending is satisfying in that we see Goldberg come into her own and reunite with her sister and children. It's sentimental, yes, but it's a touching moment that Goldberg plays to perfection. Goldberg's trademark smile is used to great effect for Celie as well since she doesn't talk all that much so it becomes like a voice for her. It's a hell of a film debut for Whoopi and certainly leaves a lasting legacy for her. If only Oscar could have rightfully rewarded her instead of insisting on giving Page the win for whatever ridiculous.
Jessica Lange - Sweet Dreams
Okay, so I've seen enough Jessica Lange performances to know that almost everyone has had the air of her super gunning for an Oscar. At this point, she already had one for Supporting in Tootsie so maybe she was really gunning for one in Best Actress? But it's so obvious in everything I've seen of her so far that that is her ultimate goal. Look, I love her as an actress and think she's really great, but I hate when people make it obvious that all they care about is an Oscar. I get that she only has 6 nominations but I'm talking of the films she wasn't nominated for that I've seen on this project and otherwise. Anyway, Lange plays Miss Patsy Cline, a country singing legend. Cline is a singing country legend right? So why do we only get like two songs when Patsy is up and coming in the first hour? From that point we get maybe another 2 or 3 songs? When it comes to Cline's life I think we'd want more of her musical aspect included in her story. We want to hear the songs and see her inspirations for them or at least see her first sing them. I get that her life is tragic but we need her celebrity to carry us through. All I know of Patsy Cline is her Crazy song. We don't get that until a good 3/4ths the way through. All the rest is boring. The ending is unsatisfying because the plane crash could have been done better. The acting is really great but it is held back by a really shitty movie. Lange is dedicated but there is a lot missing from the performance. It feels labored and that seems that it's because Cline is bigger than Lange. She can't fully pull off Cline and that's okay. She's just not an Oscar winner for this performance and she's been much better in other roles.
Meryl Streep - Out of Africa
I write this review just a few days after Streep was nominated for her 20th(!) nomination by the Academy. That's insane. And at this point, I can't blame anyone for having Streep fatigue because this is my 14th review of hers and I feel like I'm running out of things to say about her. I'm at least happy to know that some of her strongest and most beloved performances are still to come for me. So how is she in this film? As per usual she is extremely talented and gives a really strong performance. We again get to see her showcase her ability to do a pitch perfect accent - this time a Danish accent that is quite convincing. The thing is about this performance is that she is the main focus of the film and has to carry it throughout it's just under 3 hour run time, which is honestly impressive. You would think you'd get sick of her in all that time but you never do. Maybe it's because there is a lot happening to her character as she goes to Africa after marrying a Baron she doesn't quite like. She has to adjust to living and working in Africa and dealing with her feelings for her absent and cold husband. She has to deal with his cheating and giving her syphilis as well as meeting Robert Redford's big game hunter and falling in love with him all while keeping her plantation afloat and trying to help educate the native Africans. There's a lot going on and Streep never falters, easily dealing with everything that is thrown at her character and never looking out of place as the wealthy socialite or the determined head of the plantation or the woman trying to navigate through the minefield that is love. Streep holds her own even as the film moves at a glacial pace. She absolutely deserves her nomination here and I think as we go back even more into Streeps beginnings, you can't really say she doesn't deserve her recognition. I feel like this is classic Streep, the performances and roles you point someone to as a starting place. While the film might be a bore, Streep is the main thing keeping it from being a chore to get through. She is definitely in the running for the win.
This is definitely not as bad as I was expecting it to be which is always a good thing! I'm firmly in the camp that thinks Whoopi should have won Best Actress. I don't care much for sentimentality and giving an Oscar to an actress because she's been nominated so many times already and is old is fucking absurd to me. Oscars are a legacy and should represent the best of acting yet what do people remember about this year? That Page won for a performance many people don't think is as good as Whoopi's. Everyone talks about Whoopi and her great performance still and not the other way around. I even like what Page did with her character and it's not awful by any means. It's just that history has shown that Whoopi is better. Hell, I'd probably put Streep above Page because she has to carry such a long, slow film and she doesn't suffer one bit for it. I do think Page is slightly better than Lange only because I don't see Lange as Patsy Cline, she's just Jessica Lange. Bancroft is basically an afterthought at 5th. She should be replaced by anyone else because she's entirely forgettable. So despite the controversy at the top it's not too bad of a category. Neither Bancroft or Lange are bad, just are either uninteresting or not really right for the part (in my opinion). Glad to be done with this one.
Oscar Winner: Geraldine Page - The Trip to Bountiful
My Winner: Whoopi Goldberg - The Color Purple
Meryl Streep
Geraldine Page
Jessica Lange
Anne Bancroft
1985 Best Actress
Geraldine Page - The Trip to Bountiful
There is certainly a ton to talk about for this win and nomination. The most obvious, which I already alluded to above, is that this was the Academy finally giving Page her overdue win on her 8th nomination. A career/veteran win for an actress that was clearly beloved by Hollywood who wins over a black actress that most feel gave the better performance and who would have made history in the process. There is a tinge of racism attached to this win whether real or not that adds up, along with many bloggers hating this performance, to me becoming convinced I would hate it and excoriate it, too. Well, I'm here to say that Page is quite good as old Mrs. Watts. No doubt that she goes all in herself to get that elusive Oscar and yes, you could classify this as sentimental Oscar bait. All of that applies but Page still gives quite an effective performance as the old woman who wants to escape the boring house and city she lives in with her son and overbearing daughter-in-law to return once more to her old home and birthplace - Bountiful, Texas. She is able to escape and meet a bunch of different people on her journey and we see how nice and caring this little old lady truly is. I get why it has a negative appeal for some folks but that doesn't equate to her giving a bad performance at all. A lot of the older actors in their later films stick to the old ways of acting, but Page comes off very natural and not as if she's stuck in a bygone era. This isn't The Whales of August. Page holds her own and makes you really invest in her character because she gives you reason to. I would wager to bet that most of those that put this performance or film down have never actually watched it and just parrot what others say because of its perception. Now, as of right now I can't say whether or not Page deserves the win. I know Whoopi is great but the rest are wildcards yet to be seen. All I know is that this wasn't nearly as bad as I was lead to believe. Page carries the film well and it's a strong performance regardless of it being Oscar bait. Side note, this film reminds me a whole lot of Nebraska and I swear that film steals a shot of Page walking into her old rundown bedroom on the second story and seeing a decaying old bed. Wouldn't be surprised if it was an inspiration for Alexander Payne. The big takeaway from this performance is to not rely on others to think and make opinions for you. Watch the films and performances and judge it for yourself.
Anne Bancroft - Agnes of God
Maybe I'm just in a rut or maybe I'm watching too many performances or films that leave me not really caring either way about them or maybe that's just 1985 for me. But Bancroft is entirely forgettable to me. Maybe that's because Meg Tilly overpowers her the entire film or Jane Fonda has the more interesting role. Bancroft plays the Mother Superior at a convent where Tilly has had a baby that is dead and now authorities are trying to figure what happened and by whom. I don't feel like Bancroft does anything memorable or different for the nun role she's in. She plays the Mother Superior like a bully and also like a mother hen at different times. Of course she's going to protect her own interests and try to stave off Fonda the psychiatrist from digging into her little kingdom. I just wasn't impressed with what Bancroft did with her character. It's exactly what you think a head nun would be like in these circumstances and doesn't offer up anything rewarding in the performance. I feel like you could drop any other actress into the role and get at least the same result. Sure, Bancroft looks the part fine and does a good enough job being the head nun and being firm and authoritative when necessary, but I need a lot more than that for a Best Actress nomination. I need something that shows me why exactly the Academy gave Bancroft her 5th Oscar nomination and I just don't see it. Is this because she's a comfort choice for the Academy since she is a previous winner and is Mrs. Robinson (and Mrs. Mel Brooks)? I don't even think Bancroft is the true lead of the film, that's Jane Fonda. She feels more supporting like Meg Tilly to me. She's there to sort of argue the other side of Jane Fonda's psychiatry point. True faith versus skepticism and to shield the vulnerable Tilly from the outside world. That idea is really compelling but the performance itself is not. Like I said, I need a lot more from a Best Actress performance than Bancroft gives us here.
Whoopi Goldberg - The Color Purple
When you read about this category for this year, all you hear about online is that Whoopi was robbed (which was made up for later) and that Page is a bad winner. I had to watch this in high school and vaguely remembered Whoopi's performance but I was definitely not a film guy back then. Having watched this again, Whoopi really is worth all the praise I've read about. I'll get to all the rankings down below so as to focus on Whoopi here but I didn't realize this was her film debut. We all know Whoopi as this big personality nowadays, telling crass jokes and being loud and crazy and being an Oscar winner and host. She's obviously known much more for her comedy than for her dramatic chops but she is so good as Celie in this film. Celie is of course the main character and we follow her life as she is raped and abused and held down by the men in her life. It's a dark story that Spielberg mishandles but luckily Goldberg is up to the task of making Celie into a three dimensional character. At first she is this meek woman who doesn't really say much at all, just goes about doing her duties as wife and mother to a bunch of rotten kids. But eventually the true Celie peeks out every now and then like when she watches Danny Glover try to prepare breakfast and accidentally hits him on the head with a pot and then plops a chair down in the middle of the kitchen to watch him frantically rush about. The most memorable scene is obviously the one where she blows up at dinner at Glover and everyone else and it's so contained within Goldberg. It's so real and so appropriate and so good. It's not over the top or too much, the anger is believable and even relatable. Once that all goes down, the film lingers a bit too long but the ending is satisfying in that we see Goldberg come into her own and reunite with her sister and children. It's sentimental, yes, but it's a touching moment that Goldberg plays to perfection. Goldberg's trademark smile is used to great effect for Celie as well since she doesn't talk all that much so it becomes like a voice for her. It's a hell of a film debut for Whoopi and certainly leaves a lasting legacy for her. If only Oscar could have rightfully rewarded her instead of insisting on giving Page the win for whatever ridiculous.
Jessica Lange - Sweet Dreams
Okay, so I've seen enough Jessica Lange performances to know that almost everyone has had the air of her super gunning for an Oscar. At this point, she already had one for Supporting in Tootsie so maybe she was really gunning for one in Best Actress? But it's so obvious in everything I've seen of her so far that that is her ultimate goal. Look, I love her as an actress and think she's really great, but I hate when people make it obvious that all they care about is an Oscar. I get that she only has 6 nominations but I'm talking of the films she wasn't nominated for that I've seen on this project and otherwise. Anyway, Lange plays Miss Patsy Cline, a country singing legend. Cline is a singing country legend right? So why do we only get like two songs when Patsy is up and coming in the first hour? From that point we get maybe another 2 or 3 songs? When it comes to Cline's life I think we'd want more of her musical aspect included in her story. We want to hear the songs and see her inspirations for them or at least see her first sing them. I get that her life is tragic but we need her celebrity to carry us through. All I know of Patsy Cline is her Crazy song. We don't get that until a good 3/4ths the way through. All the rest is boring. The ending is unsatisfying because the plane crash could have been done better. The acting is really great but it is held back by a really shitty movie. Lange is dedicated but there is a lot missing from the performance. It feels labored and that seems that it's because Cline is bigger than Lange. She can't fully pull off Cline and that's okay. She's just not an Oscar winner for this performance and she's been much better in other roles.
Meryl Streep - Out of Africa
I write this review just a few days after Streep was nominated for her 20th(!) nomination by the Academy. That's insane. And at this point, I can't blame anyone for having Streep fatigue because this is my 14th review of hers and I feel like I'm running out of things to say about her. I'm at least happy to know that some of her strongest and most beloved performances are still to come for me. So how is she in this film? As per usual she is extremely talented and gives a really strong performance. We again get to see her showcase her ability to do a pitch perfect accent - this time a Danish accent that is quite convincing. The thing is about this performance is that she is the main focus of the film and has to carry it throughout it's just under 3 hour run time, which is honestly impressive. You would think you'd get sick of her in all that time but you never do. Maybe it's because there is a lot happening to her character as she goes to Africa after marrying a Baron she doesn't quite like. She has to adjust to living and working in Africa and dealing with her feelings for her absent and cold husband. She has to deal with his cheating and giving her syphilis as well as meeting Robert Redford's big game hunter and falling in love with him all while keeping her plantation afloat and trying to help educate the native Africans. There's a lot going on and Streep never falters, easily dealing with everything that is thrown at her character and never looking out of place as the wealthy socialite or the determined head of the plantation or the woman trying to navigate through the minefield that is love. Streep holds her own even as the film moves at a glacial pace. She absolutely deserves her nomination here and I think as we go back even more into Streeps beginnings, you can't really say she doesn't deserve her recognition. I feel like this is classic Streep, the performances and roles you point someone to as a starting place. While the film might be a bore, Streep is the main thing keeping it from being a chore to get through. She is definitely in the running for the win.
This is definitely not as bad as I was expecting it to be which is always a good thing! I'm firmly in the camp that thinks Whoopi should have won Best Actress. I don't care much for sentimentality and giving an Oscar to an actress because she's been nominated so many times already and is old is fucking absurd to me. Oscars are a legacy and should represent the best of acting yet what do people remember about this year? That Page won for a performance many people don't think is as good as Whoopi's. Everyone talks about Whoopi and her great performance still and not the other way around. I even like what Page did with her character and it's not awful by any means. It's just that history has shown that Whoopi is better. Hell, I'd probably put Streep above Page because she has to carry such a long, slow film and she doesn't suffer one bit for it. I do think Page is slightly better than Lange only because I don't see Lange as Patsy Cline, she's just Jessica Lange. Bancroft is basically an afterthought at 5th. She should be replaced by anyone else because she's entirely forgettable. So despite the controversy at the top it's not too bad of a category. Neither Bancroft or Lange are bad, just are either uninteresting or not really right for the part (in my opinion). Glad to be done with this one.
Oscar Winner: Geraldine Page - The Trip to Bountiful
My Winner: Whoopi Goldberg - The Color Purple
Meryl Streep
Geraldine Page
Jessica Lange
Anne Bancroft
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Supporting Actor 1985
Looking forward to this group because it's always my favorite category. I have only seen one of these films so it'll be fun to watch the rest, especially Roberts which I hear is really strange.
1985 Best Supporting Actor
Don Ameche - Cocoon
I know that Don Ameche was a well respected older actor. But let's be completely honest, this win is because he's an older actor and only because of that reason. Figure out who he is in this based off performances and I bet you'll be wrong. The correct answer for who should be nominated is Wilford Brimley. Yes, the diabeetus guy. He's great here and the only person you could take in the film. No fucking clue why Ameche was nominated but Brimley is great. Now, what I'd actually like to talk about in regards to this film is that it was filmed in my hometown, St Petersburg, Florida. I knew growing up that it was filmed here but finally seeing it is really fun. I like seeing the old license plates that say Pinellas on them and the Don Cesar Hotel features prominently in the film (that actually might be Cocoon 2). There's even a scene where a guy wears a shirt that says Mad Beach something on it, which is Madeira Beach and I grew up literally a minute or two from there, so yeah, this film has great sentimental value even if I wasn't alive when it was filmed. I spent a lot of the film looking for landmarks and areas I knew and it kept me really engaged. And seeing all the old homes with the jalousie windows like we used to have and the palm trees and all of that just takes me back to my youth. I love it. This is a great film, though! It's funny and sentimental and light fair that's easy to watch and fall in love with. It's a lot stronger than you would ever think it should be. But still, Wilford Brimley, not Don Ameche. I don't care if Don gave a good Oscar speech and is really likable in Hollywood back then. Brimley is your choice from the film. This is purely the Academy wanting to reward one of it's own with an Oscar because they like him and not on the merit of the performance.
Klaus Maria Brandauer - Out of Africa
Technically, this was a dual role, as he plays two twins but the one is only seen in the very beginning before he dies. He plays Baron Bror Blixen, a member of the Danish aristocracy who has little wealth of his own. So he marries Streep's Karen Dineson out of convenience for the two because she is wealthy and he allows her to buy a farm in Africa. I wasn't all that impressed with the performance mostly because Brandauer is so blah. I guess he fits the part but he never really sticks out or does much to make you watch him, he just kinda exists within the film. He's the villain without really being a villain. He's a bad husband more concerned with being a big game hunter than helping the farm out and cheating on his wife and giving her syphilis. He also looks like the kind of guy who would cheat and be a total loser (even if he and Streep remain friendly in the film). His whole disposition is very stoic and emotionless, which might be his Austrian coming out? This just feels like a nomination that came along with the goodwill of the film. When you look at it on it's own, do you really vote for it? I'm not going to advocate for him to not be included, just that it's not the most impressive nominee in this category. It also seems like he may have been the favorite to win this because he won the Golden Globe but I just don't see what makes it a winner.
William Hickey - Prizzi's Honor
Everything I read online always talked about how bizarre Hickey looked and sounded and had me dreading having to review and watch this one. And I wasn't a fan at all of the film itself but surprisingly I didn't mind Hickey. Yes, he's odd looking and his voice is weird as hell but he was fine as a supporting player. He plays the Don of a mafia crime family and is exactly what you'd think a head of family would be minus the skeletal, gaunt, pale appearance and the death rattle voice. I have no idea if that's what Hickey really looks like or sounds like but if it's an affectation for the character, I don't get why but it doesn't really detract much besides saying it's weird. But the film is kinda weird anyway, so maybe he's just matching the tone. Hickey doesn't get too much to do in the film other than be the Don and he has a sit down talk with Anjelica Huston's character, his daughter. Really he just kinda screeches his way through the part and acts all Italian and I think it's supposed to be funny even when it all mostly falls flat - which is the film in a nutshell. Yeah, this is a weird performance but I don't think it's bad and certainly didn't hate it. It's just another forgettable Supporting Actor nomination which we are going to get over and over for the project. Did it need to be nominated? No, but I'm thinking it was a veteran/career nod to a respected actor. Can't be too mad at this one.
Robert Loggia - Jagged Edge
This is Loggia's only Oscar nomination, sadly. He is a great actor that you've seen in a ton of films as more of the supporting player than leading man. He is perfectly supporting in his performance here. He plays a private investigator hired by Glenn Close to look into whether or not Jeff Bridges is telling the truth that he didn't kill his wife. Yep, this is one of those 80s thrillers and it's a fun watch if you like those types of films. Loggia is the typical private eye kind of guy. He's gruff and he cusses a lot and is always drinking a beer. He's been doing it so long that you can see it on his face. What I like about the character is that Loggia just says whatever he wants, no matter how crass or out of place it is. He asks Close once after going to her house why is she sitting alone in the dark, is she playing with herself. It's a funny line but it builds a lot of the character just from that simple line which is why I think Loggia is so good. From that line you learn a ton about who he is as a person couple with everything else going on in that scene and it almost fully develops a picture of who this private investigator is and what he's all about as a man and that he cares about Close (which is more on the good side than the line would have you think, out of context). It's a good supporting performance from a great actor, certainly more deserving than Don Ameche. It also probably helps that Loggia is in Prizzi's Honor as well and was very visible in some high profile films this year. I can't help but like and enjoy Loggia but he does a great job here separate of my like for him and is worth checking out.
Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
Okay, so you'll notice immediately when watching that this is an odd nomination. But it's one that I actually really like in some strange way. Roberts plays a prisoner in a tough Alaskan prison who escapes with Jon Voight into the wilds of Alaska and onto a train to nowhere...dun, dun, dun! I think the first thing you notice is Roberts' ridiculous accent that reminds me a ton of a retarded Matthew McConaughey. Seriously. The way he says maaaan with a stoner, surfer, southern, stupid bend to it is like Matthew. You can't unhear it now. It's also a fun performance in an action adventure film. Roberts' character doesn't ever shut up and is always saying some dumb shit that annoys Voight and it's such a pretty boy supporting nomination. Did I mention it's just ridiculous all over? Because it is. From the voice to his gung ho idiot persona to the concept of the film itself. Roberts doesn't exactly offer up an amazing performance, it's just fun in a stupid way. He doesn't have much to do besides be the stupid sidekick to Voight and try to prove himself a tough guy at every turn. I do think Roberts does a good job in making his character act that way but I also feel like Roberts thought he was doing some really inspired, deep acting. That's the vibe I get. Either way, it's fun to watch and I also feel like maybe the Academy was trying to make him a star in a way and crown him early in his career, which they've done over and over in their 89 years. It could be they just like the Roberts family since sister Julia became so beloved soon after this. This film, though, is a lot of fun to watch. I'm okay with the supporting categories having these kinds of nominations.
Yikes, this year really sucks! There is no runaway winner and no one even really competes for the win. It's a bunch of average to likable performances but nothing award worthy. Ameche wins without any precursor support at all which tells you that is purely a veteran/career win. He does nothing in the film and is my 5th overall. Hickey is next because even though he has a presence about him and is memorable for his voice and looks, it's nothing all that interesting performance wise. Brandauer is 3rd because his role is nothing all that interesting or noteworthy though he does what is needed of his character. But it just does nothing for me. As far as my top two - I don't even know. Loggia plays a crude private eye but besides being somewhat funny with his old gruff demeanor if it won I'd be asking why. I like the idea of Loggia having an Oscar and maybe his two performances add up to a decent win, but is that what I want to do? Roberts at least gives the most memorable performance out of all of them because it's just so strange and entertaining and actorly. It feels weird to give my win to a performance I made fun of, but I do enjoy the hell out of it because it is so stupid and fun. I hate to not reward Loggia, but his role just wasn't enough. This is a very strange year and I'm glad the Academy doesn't get it so wrong like this more often. Roberts winning would be just as weird as Ameche, yet here I am.
Oscar Winner: Don Ameche - Cocoon
My Winner: Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
Robert Loggia
Klaus Maria Brandauer
William Hickey
Don Ameche
1985 Best Supporting Actor
Don Ameche - Cocoon
I know that Don Ameche was a well respected older actor. But let's be completely honest, this win is because he's an older actor and only because of that reason. Figure out who he is in this based off performances and I bet you'll be wrong. The correct answer for who should be nominated is Wilford Brimley. Yes, the diabeetus guy. He's great here and the only person you could take in the film. No fucking clue why Ameche was nominated but Brimley is great. Now, what I'd actually like to talk about in regards to this film is that it was filmed in my hometown, St Petersburg, Florida. I knew growing up that it was filmed here but finally seeing it is really fun. I like seeing the old license plates that say Pinellas on them and the Don Cesar Hotel features prominently in the film (that actually might be Cocoon 2). There's even a scene where a guy wears a shirt that says Mad Beach something on it, which is Madeira Beach and I grew up literally a minute or two from there, so yeah, this film has great sentimental value even if I wasn't alive when it was filmed. I spent a lot of the film looking for landmarks and areas I knew and it kept me really engaged. And seeing all the old homes with the jalousie windows like we used to have and the palm trees and all of that just takes me back to my youth. I love it. This is a great film, though! It's funny and sentimental and light fair that's easy to watch and fall in love with. It's a lot stronger than you would ever think it should be. But still, Wilford Brimley, not Don Ameche. I don't care if Don gave a good Oscar speech and is really likable in Hollywood back then. Brimley is your choice from the film. This is purely the Academy wanting to reward one of it's own with an Oscar because they like him and not on the merit of the performance.
Klaus Maria Brandauer - Out of Africa
Technically, this was a dual role, as he plays two twins but the one is only seen in the very beginning before he dies. He plays Baron Bror Blixen, a member of the Danish aristocracy who has little wealth of his own. So he marries Streep's Karen Dineson out of convenience for the two because she is wealthy and he allows her to buy a farm in Africa. I wasn't all that impressed with the performance mostly because Brandauer is so blah. I guess he fits the part but he never really sticks out or does much to make you watch him, he just kinda exists within the film. He's the villain without really being a villain. He's a bad husband more concerned with being a big game hunter than helping the farm out and cheating on his wife and giving her syphilis. He also looks like the kind of guy who would cheat and be a total loser (even if he and Streep remain friendly in the film). His whole disposition is very stoic and emotionless, which might be his Austrian coming out? This just feels like a nomination that came along with the goodwill of the film. When you look at it on it's own, do you really vote for it? I'm not going to advocate for him to not be included, just that it's not the most impressive nominee in this category. It also seems like he may have been the favorite to win this because he won the Golden Globe but I just don't see what makes it a winner.
William Hickey - Prizzi's Honor
Everything I read online always talked about how bizarre Hickey looked and sounded and had me dreading having to review and watch this one. And I wasn't a fan at all of the film itself but surprisingly I didn't mind Hickey. Yes, he's odd looking and his voice is weird as hell but he was fine as a supporting player. He plays the Don of a mafia crime family and is exactly what you'd think a head of family would be minus the skeletal, gaunt, pale appearance and the death rattle voice. I have no idea if that's what Hickey really looks like or sounds like but if it's an affectation for the character, I don't get why but it doesn't really detract much besides saying it's weird. But the film is kinda weird anyway, so maybe he's just matching the tone. Hickey doesn't get too much to do in the film other than be the Don and he has a sit down talk with Anjelica Huston's character, his daughter. Really he just kinda screeches his way through the part and acts all Italian and I think it's supposed to be funny even when it all mostly falls flat - which is the film in a nutshell. Yeah, this is a weird performance but I don't think it's bad and certainly didn't hate it. It's just another forgettable Supporting Actor nomination which we are going to get over and over for the project. Did it need to be nominated? No, but I'm thinking it was a veteran/career nod to a respected actor. Can't be too mad at this one.
Robert Loggia - Jagged Edge
This is Loggia's only Oscar nomination, sadly. He is a great actor that you've seen in a ton of films as more of the supporting player than leading man. He is perfectly supporting in his performance here. He plays a private investigator hired by Glenn Close to look into whether or not Jeff Bridges is telling the truth that he didn't kill his wife. Yep, this is one of those 80s thrillers and it's a fun watch if you like those types of films. Loggia is the typical private eye kind of guy. He's gruff and he cusses a lot and is always drinking a beer. He's been doing it so long that you can see it on his face. What I like about the character is that Loggia just says whatever he wants, no matter how crass or out of place it is. He asks Close once after going to her house why is she sitting alone in the dark, is she playing with herself. It's a funny line but it builds a lot of the character just from that simple line which is why I think Loggia is so good. From that line you learn a ton about who he is as a person couple with everything else going on in that scene and it almost fully develops a picture of who this private investigator is and what he's all about as a man and that he cares about Close (which is more on the good side than the line would have you think, out of context). It's a good supporting performance from a great actor, certainly more deserving than Don Ameche. It also probably helps that Loggia is in Prizzi's Honor as well and was very visible in some high profile films this year. I can't help but like and enjoy Loggia but he does a great job here separate of my like for him and is worth checking out.
Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
Okay, so you'll notice immediately when watching that this is an odd nomination. But it's one that I actually really like in some strange way. Roberts plays a prisoner in a tough Alaskan prison who escapes with Jon Voight into the wilds of Alaska and onto a train to nowhere...dun, dun, dun! I think the first thing you notice is Roberts' ridiculous accent that reminds me a ton of a retarded Matthew McConaughey. Seriously. The way he says maaaan with a stoner, surfer, southern, stupid bend to it is like Matthew. You can't unhear it now. It's also a fun performance in an action adventure film. Roberts' character doesn't ever shut up and is always saying some dumb shit that annoys Voight and it's such a pretty boy supporting nomination. Did I mention it's just ridiculous all over? Because it is. From the voice to his gung ho idiot persona to the concept of the film itself. Roberts doesn't exactly offer up an amazing performance, it's just fun in a stupid way. He doesn't have much to do besides be the stupid sidekick to Voight and try to prove himself a tough guy at every turn. I do think Roberts does a good job in making his character act that way but I also feel like Roberts thought he was doing some really inspired, deep acting. That's the vibe I get. Either way, it's fun to watch and I also feel like maybe the Academy was trying to make him a star in a way and crown him early in his career, which they've done over and over in their 89 years. It could be they just like the Roberts family since sister Julia became so beloved soon after this. This film, though, is a lot of fun to watch. I'm okay with the supporting categories having these kinds of nominations.
Yikes, this year really sucks! There is no runaway winner and no one even really competes for the win. It's a bunch of average to likable performances but nothing award worthy. Ameche wins without any precursor support at all which tells you that is purely a veteran/career win. He does nothing in the film and is my 5th overall. Hickey is next because even though he has a presence about him and is memorable for his voice and looks, it's nothing all that interesting performance wise. Brandauer is 3rd because his role is nothing all that interesting or noteworthy though he does what is needed of his character. But it just does nothing for me. As far as my top two - I don't even know. Loggia plays a crude private eye but besides being somewhat funny with his old gruff demeanor if it won I'd be asking why. I like the idea of Loggia having an Oscar and maybe his two performances add up to a decent win, but is that what I want to do? Roberts at least gives the most memorable performance out of all of them because it's just so strange and entertaining and actorly. It feels weird to give my win to a performance I made fun of, but I do enjoy the hell out of it because it is so stupid and fun. I hate to not reward Loggia, but his role just wasn't enough. This is a very strange year and I'm glad the Academy doesn't get it so wrong like this more often. Roberts winning would be just as weird as Ameche, yet here I am.
Oscar Winner: Don Ameche - Cocoon
My Winner: Eric Roberts - Runaway Train
Robert Loggia
Klaus Maria Brandauer
William Hickey
Don Ameche
Supporting Actress 1985
So I started this year before the newest Oscar nominations came out so I'm dealing with processing all of that. At time of writing I've seen just one of the acting noms and nothing else. I don't feel as motivated for some reason to try and watch them all before the ceremony and I'll have to figure out when I'm going to squeeze 2016 into the mix. I've only seen The Color Purple and remember those were strong performances so I'm interested in seeing Huston and the others to see how they stack up.
1985 Best Supporting Actress
Anjelica Huston - Prizzi's Honor
Knowing what we have in The Color Purple's nominees just from watching that film in high school and those being very good performances made me wonder even more at what Huston would be able to do. The many different films of hers that I've seen have been good and her performances have been strong so I was anticipating that she would at the very least compete for my vote. After seeing the film, yeah she gives a decent enough performance but this film just completely lost me. I personally didn't like it all that much and thought it was pretty boring. Not sure why this got so much awards love besides maybe it being a John Huston film with Jack Nicholson in it about the mob. Which makes me wonder if the Academy voting for Huston's daughter in his film isn't just coincidence and is instead rotten nepotism. Huston is good and fine and brings a lot to the role of Maerose Prizzi, estranged daughter of Don Corrado Prizzi. She's on the outs with her family because she dumped Nicholson and ran off with another guy. She's a sultry, sexy, scheming woman and is actually a lot of fun to watch in the role but the film is so boring to me even with all that's going on that it made me not really care. She then finds out Nicholson's new wife who is also an assassin/hitwoman like he is, was keeping money from the family. This gets her back into the good graces of the family and her father and sets in motion the calamitous events that follow. Again, Huston stands out and is enjoyable in the role but I'm not so sure she's winner worthy. This would have made a great first nomination and Huston put in great work after this. Obviously, I'll have to watch the other nominees and be sure that Huston wouldn't be my winner. I just don't feel too strongly about the film as a whole, so the parts suffer, too.
Margaret Avery - The Color Purple
To me, this was the lesser of the two Supporting nominees from this film even though it's still mostly good. Avery plays Shug Avery (serendipitous, right?), a sometimes lover of Mister who is married to the main character Celie. Now in the book, from what I remember and have read in the reviews for the film, Shug has much more of an impact on Celie than she actually does in the film. Their lesbian moments are only briefly hinted at in the film and it looks more like two friends embracing. The point is that the two women, Shug and Sofia, have an impact on Celie and are why she reaches her breaking point in being submissive and quiet. Shug is the one who is wild and free and sings and dances in juke joint and travels around and has flings with guys and is sexy and seductive. Avery is good in the role and captures the duality of her character. She's a preacher's daughter and has a good heart as evidenced by taking in Celie and helping her out but is also a wild, free spirited woman who does what she wants. Avery doesn't wow as much as Oprah does in her performance, probably because the singing and dancing elements do nothing for me (and the singing isn't even Avery). I feel like Avery gets lost in a film with a ton of other great performances. You remember Whoopi and Oprah more and Danny Glover comes to mind before Shug ever does. That's not entirely the fault of Avery because the others are so strong. It's a good performance, just not memorable or worthy of the win. Still a good nomination, though.
Amy Madigan - Twice in a Lifetime
I was only able to find what looked like an old VHS rip of this online, which felt like an appropriate way to watch an 80s movie. This movie is an interesting look at divorce. I don't know if it's trying to follow in the footsteps of some of the more serious family dramas of the early 80s, but it's a different look at what goes on for the family when divorce happens. Madigan plays the middle child of Gene Hackman and Ellen Burstyn and she is the sparkplug of the family and of the film. And that's both a good and a bad thing. She breathes life into what is a very tepid film which I give her credit for. She's pissed off that her parents are splitting up and furious at her father because he cheated on her mother and she can't understand why. I would like this performance a lot more if Madigan wasn't such an over actor. It's kind of manic and frenetic and is very acting! like which I dislike greatly. She overacts at times which stands out against everyone else in the film. I understand that is what her character is supposed to be like but she can be angry and tough and loud without being so theater major-like. Plus, she's not very subtle at all even when the performance calls for her to be a little more introspective and quiet. She's angry because the parents divorce thing but also because she herself is married with kids and struggling to make ends meet and now her faith that all the struggling is worthwhile later is shaken to the core. She lashes out because she's the only one in the family with any emotion. This has the makings of a good performance but it never quite gets there for me. Her style is definitely not my favorite, either. I also read online that this might have been a make up nomination for the year before where people felt she gave a great performance in Places in the Heart. If so, that would explain a lot about the nomination.
Meg Tilly - Agnes of God
I feel like I should stop reading about performances before watching because oftentimes people will over praise something or really tear down a performance and then I watch it and wonder what those people actually saw. Everything I read about Tilly was that she was good but the material and role is too much for her. It made it seem like she was lost in the performance but I didn't feel that way about it at all. Tilly plays a nun (Agnes) who had a baby and it was strangled and put into a trash bin in her room. She claims it was a virgin birth and a psychiatrist (Jane Fonda) comes in to see if she did it, if she was raped, and if she is crazy. It's a performance that is designed to be over the top because Tilly's character is delusional and emotional about God (and quite obviously a bit crazy and easily manipulated). Would a more accomplished and experienced actress have done a lot more with the role and maybe given a winning type of performance? Yes, but that doesn't make Tilly's take on it bad. I liked her performance probably because she's the only interesting thing about the film. Anne Bancroft is a bullying Mother Superior and Jane Fonda is pretty good but not great as the psychiatrist. Tilly is the only reason you continue to watch, however. She has a strange quality to her, she's a little weird and not very smart. But the simplicity of Tilly helps make Agnes into a more believable character and she really goes all out with the histrionics and visions and the religious fervor. She nails the aesthetic with the cherub-like face and the lack of caring what anyone else thinks of her. Tilly might have been young but this was the perfect role for her to display her talents, even if it's not as good as say what Meryl Streep could have done (which is an unfair comparison, I know, but you get my point). Especially after watching other supporting performances where they contribute nothing overall to the film, it's nice to see one where the actress is the driving force of the film like Tilly is in this one. Both Bancroft and Fonda play off Tilly in almost a faith versus skepticism tug of war, which is really interesting to watch unfold. But it's because of Tilly that it's all so interesting. I'll have to see where Tilly fits in my rankings because it might turn out to be pretty high.
Oprah Winfrey - The Color Purple
Winfrey has the juicier role of the Supporting nominations from the film and she definitely makes the most of her opportunity. She plays the big ol Sofia, a woman who shows Celie that it's okay for a woman to stand up for herself by any means necessary. Sofia takes no shit from anyone and dominates her husband, Harpo, and is the essence of what a strong, independent, black woman is. Even when they separate she takes it in stride and keeps on going, that's the kind of woman she is. It also gets her in trouble when she knocks out some old white dude for getting in her face. She gets thrown in jail for this which breaks her spirit and her health and she becomes a shell of her former self until Celie's outburst at her family where she tells everyone off. This gets her back to feeling like her old self and it's a nice little character arc. Oprah is great in the role and nails every aspect of Sofia. Her heft adds weight to the performance and it never feels like she's a Hollywood personality trying hard to impress. She realizes what the role is and what it means for some people and approaches it head on (much like Sofia would) and gives it the sincerity it deserves. Oprah has proved to be a great actress when necessary and that is on full display here. You can't watch this film and not be awed by her performance and she is equally good in the louder moments as she is in the quieter ones. She, along with the other women, make the film worth watching despite Spielberg's missteps.
The two ladies from The Color Purple help make this a decent category overall. Madigan is the clear cut 5th place. I'm not a fan of her acting style and her performance didn't do anything for me. Avery, though good in her role, ends up 4th because she's overpowered by Oprah and the other two offer up more memorable and fun turns. Huston is fun to watch, but the further I get from having watched her performance, the less I remember or even really care about it. It leaves no lasting impression. Tilly challenges hard for the win and I liked what she did with her character. I don't think she quite gets there when compared with Oprah but she's close. Oprah is the winner because she leaves a mark on the film and is pretty good to boot. Decent enough year with some interesting films.
Oscar Winner: Anjelica Huston - Prizzi's Honor
My Winner: Oprah Winfrey - The Color Purple
Meg Tilly
Anjelica Huston
Margaret Avery
Amy Madigan
1985 Best Supporting Actress
Anjelica Huston - Prizzi's Honor
Knowing what we have in The Color Purple's nominees just from watching that film in high school and those being very good performances made me wonder even more at what Huston would be able to do. The many different films of hers that I've seen have been good and her performances have been strong so I was anticipating that she would at the very least compete for my vote. After seeing the film, yeah she gives a decent enough performance but this film just completely lost me. I personally didn't like it all that much and thought it was pretty boring. Not sure why this got so much awards love besides maybe it being a John Huston film with Jack Nicholson in it about the mob. Which makes me wonder if the Academy voting for Huston's daughter in his film isn't just coincidence and is instead rotten nepotism. Huston is good and fine and brings a lot to the role of Maerose Prizzi, estranged daughter of Don Corrado Prizzi. She's on the outs with her family because she dumped Nicholson and ran off with another guy. She's a sultry, sexy, scheming woman and is actually a lot of fun to watch in the role but the film is so boring to me even with all that's going on that it made me not really care. She then finds out Nicholson's new wife who is also an assassin/hitwoman like he is, was keeping money from the family. This gets her back into the good graces of the family and her father and sets in motion the calamitous events that follow. Again, Huston stands out and is enjoyable in the role but I'm not so sure she's winner worthy. This would have made a great first nomination and Huston put in great work after this. Obviously, I'll have to watch the other nominees and be sure that Huston wouldn't be my winner. I just don't feel too strongly about the film as a whole, so the parts suffer, too.
Margaret Avery - The Color Purple
To me, this was the lesser of the two Supporting nominees from this film even though it's still mostly good. Avery plays Shug Avery (serendipitous, right?), a sometimes lover of Mister who is married to the main character Celie. Now in the book, from what I remember and have read in the reviews for the film, Shug has much more of an impact on Celie than she actually does in the film. Their lesbian moments are only briefly hinted at in the film and it looks more like two friends embracing. The point is that the two women, Shug and Sofia, have an impact on Celie and are why she reaches her breaking point in being submissive and quiet. Shug is the one who is wild and free and sings and dances in juke joint and travels around and has flings with guys and is sexy and seductive. Avery is good in the role and captures the duality of her character. She's a preacher's daughter and has a good heart as evidenced by taking in Celie and helping her out but is also a wild, free spirited woman who does what she wants. Avery doesn't wow as much as Oprah does in her performance, probably because the singing and dancing elements do nothing for me (and the singing isn't even Avery). I feel like Avery gets lost in a film with a ton of other great performances. You remember Whoopi and Oprah more and Danny Glover comes to mind before Shug ever does. That's not entirely the fault of Avery because the others are so strong. It's a good performance, just not memorable or worthy of the win. Still a good nomination, though.
Amy Madigan - Twice in a Lifetime
I was only able to find what looked like an old VHS rip of this online, which felt like an appropriate way to watch an 80s movie. This movie is an interesting look at divorce. I don't know if it's trying to follow in the footsteps of some of the more serious family dramas of the early 80s, but it's a different look at what goes on for the family when divorce happens. Madigan plays the middle child of Gene Hackman and Ellen Burstyn and she is the sparkplug of the family and of the film. And that's both a good and a bad thing. She breathes life into what is a very tepid film which I give her credit for. She's pissed off that her parents are splitting up and furious at her father because he cheated on her mother and she can't understand why. I would like this performance a lot more if Madigan wasn't such an over actor. It's kind of manic and frenetic and is very acting! like which I dislike greatly. She overacts at times which stands out against everyone else in the film. I understand that is what her character is supposed to be like but she can be angry and tough and loud without being so theater major-like. Plus, she's not very subtle at all even when the performance calls for her to be a little more introspective and quiet. She's angry because the parents divorce thing but also because she herself is married with kids and struggling to make ends meet and now her faith that all the struggling is worthwhile later is shaken to the core. She lashes out because she's the only one in the family with any emotion. This has the makings of a good performance but it never quite gets there for me. Her style is definitely not my favorite, either. I also read online that this might have been a make up nomination for the year before where people felt she gave a great performance in Places in the Heart. If so, that would explain a lot about the nomination.
Meg Tilly - Agnes of God
I feel like I should stop reading about performances before watching because oftentimes people will over praise something or really tear down a performance and then I watch it and wonder what those people actually saw. Everything I read about Tilly was that she was good but the material and role is too much for her. It made it seem like she was lost in the performance but I didn't feel that way about it at all. Tilly plays a nun (Agnes) who had a baby and it was strangled and put into a trash bin in her room. She claims it was a virgin birth and a psychiatrist (Jane Fonda) comes in to see if she did it, if she was raped, and if she is crazy. It's a performance that is designed to be over the top because Tilly's character is delusional and emotional about God (and quite obviously a bit crazy and easily manipulated). Would a more accomplished and experienced actress have done a lot more with the role and maybe given a winning type of performance? Yes, but that doesn't make Tilly's take on it bad. I liked her performance probably because she's the only interesting thing about the film. Anne Bancroft is a bullying Mother Superior and Jane Fonda is pretty good but not great as the psychiatrist. Tilly is the only reason you continue to watch, however. She has a strange quality to her, she's a little weird and not very smart. But the simplicity of Tilly helps make Agnes into a more believable character and she really goes all out with the histrionics and visions and the religious fervor. She nails the aesthetic with the cherub-like face and the lack of caring what anyone else thinks of her. Tilly might have been young but this was the perfect role for her to display her talents, even if it's not as good as say what Meryl Streep could have done (which is an unfair comparison, I know, but you get my point). Especially after watching other supporting performances where they contribute nothing overall to the film, it's nice to see one where the actress is the driving force of the film like Tilly is in this one. Both Bancroft and Fonda play off Tilly in almost a faith versus skepticism tug of war, which is really interesting to watch unfold. But it's because of Tilly that it's all so interesting. I'll have to see where Tilly fits in my rankings because it might turn out to be pretty high.
Oprah Winfrey - The Color Purple
Winfrey has the juicier role of the Supporting nominations from the film and she definitely makes the most of her opportunity. She plays the big ol Sofia, a woman who shows Celie that it's okay for a woman to stand up for herself by any means necessary. Sofia takes no shit from anyone and dominates her husband, Harpo, and is the essence of what a strong, independent, black woman is. Even when they separate she takes it in stride and keeps on going, that's the kind of woman she is. It also gets her in trouble when she knocks out some old white dude for getting in her face. She gets thrown in jail for this which breaks her spirit and her health and she becomes a shell of her former self until Celie's outburst at her family where she tells everyone off. This gets her back to feeling like her old self and it's a nice little character arc. Oprah is great in the role and nails every aspect of Sofia. Her heft adds weight to the performance and it never feels like she's a Hollywood personality trying hard to impress. She realizes what the role is and what it means for some people and approaches it head on (much like Sofia would) and gives it the sincerity it deserves. Oprah has proved to be a great actress when necessary and that is on full display here. You can't watch this film and not be awed by her performance and she is equally good in the louder moments as she is in the quieter ones. She, along with the other women, make the film worth watching despite Spielberg's missteps.
The two ladies from The Color Purple help make this a decent category overall. Madigan is the clear cut 5th place. I'm not a fan of her acting style and her performance didn't do anything for me. Avery, though good in her role, ends up 4th because she's overpowered by Oprah and the other two offer up more memorable and fun turns. Huston is fun to watch, but the further I get from having watched her performance, the less I remember or even really care about it. It leaves no lasting impression. Tilly challenges hard for the win and I liked what she did with her character. I don't think she quite gets there when compared with Oprah but she's close. Oprah is the winner because she leaves a mark on the film and is pretty good to boot. Decent enough year with some interesting films.
Oscar Winner: Anjelica Huston - Prizzi's Honor
My Winner: Oprah Winfrey - The Color Purple
Meg Tilly
Anjelica Huston
Margaret Avery
Amy Madigan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)