Supporting Actress 1979

I am so excited to finally be in the 70s! I am actually making progress in this crazy little project of mine. I haven't seen most of the nominees in this decade with a few exceptions of the obvious big films. This year is interesting because it features Streep's first win, Alexander who I was intrigued by the first time I reviewed her, a TV icon, and two other unknowns.

1979 Best Supporting Actress

Meryl Streep - Kramer vs. Kramer

I know I go on and on about being Streep'd out and how many nominations she has and all that junk, but I have been looking forward to actually watching her first Oscar win to see just how good it is. The film is really great and was part of that run in the late 70s and early 80s of realistic dramas, which I happen to love. Streep plays the mother in the film and is divorcing Dustin Hoffman. We first see her saying goodbye to her sleeping son and then scrambling to get her things together so she can tell Hoffman she's leaving when he gets home. The desperation and fear are readily apparent on Streep's face and we know immediately the gravity of the situation for her. The film, however, is mostly about how Hoffman deals with being alone and a single parent and his fight for custody, so Streep's reasons for leaving are never made known to us besides in the courtroom scenes where she tells how she didn't like not working and being productive. But the film essentially paints her out to be a villain who doesn't love her own son and wants to be free so she goes away for awhile. Streep brings an intensity to that first scene that stays with you and makes you wonder just when is she going to show back up in the film. Her courtroom scenes are pretty great as well, since it shows the brutal nature of divorce proceedings. She remains somewhat friendly with Hoffman and still seems like a decent person but things come up that show she isn't pulling any punches when it comes to getting custody of her kid. That seems very true to life and the scenes hit with a good emotional punch. I read that Streep rewrote her monologue for the courtroom scene so that it read more authentic and made her character come off not looking like a total villain. I think it makes her performance better that she took that initiative and speaks to her instincts as an actress. She brings the right amount of realism to the role, as well, and we see a mother who loves her son but is also conflicted in taking him away from his home. Streep gets all these emotions across in a wonderful way and makes for a very good performance. Streep was showing that she was a force to be reckoned with and that would of course continue for the next 40 plus years. The win for Meryl also makes sense when you remember at this time she was the next big thing. She had been in three consecutive Best Picture nominated films and had other notable performances this year. She was due for a win, I'd say.

Jane Alexander - Kramer vs. Kramer

After watching her first nomination (which was really her fourth one) for Testament, I was really impressed by Alexander and was looking forward to the rest of her work. Alexander continues to impress me because if not for Streep, she possibly probably would have won herself an Oscar for this role. What I love the most about this performance is how real it is. Even in a film like this that deals very frankly and realistically with divorce and its effects, Alexander is the most honest and realistic part of the film. She's the one who gets to tell it like it is when it comes to being a single mother and dealing with being divorced and raising a kid and trying to date and all of those things. She was the across the hall neighbor of Hoffman and Streep, who break up, and Alexander becomes the calming factor for Hoffman as she helps him raise his son a bit and is his shoulder to lean on. I like that she treats the character naturally. She's not an actress going over the top and she's not playing up the subtleties or nuance. She is just matter of fact and it is refreshing to see this in a performance every once in awhile. I most enjoyed the film whenever she was onscreen because she brought the film back to down to earth. Alexander is just a thoroughly good supporting performance for the main characters and the film as a whole. Everyone talks about Streep in this film, who is also very good, but Alexander shines in a different way for me. Can't wait to see her next nomination and if it lives up to the first two that I have seen.

Barbara Barrie - Breaking Away

Okay, so Barbara Barrie wasn't going to be winning any awards with this role and performance but I loved it. I thought she was perfect for the role and brought what was needed for it even though the role itself is relatively minor. Barrie plays the mother to a young man who is way into pretending to be Italian because he loves cycling. Barrie is hilarious in the role because she is so understated with her humor but she has great chemistry with her onscreen husband and the two make a great pair. The two playfully bicker but it's heartfelt and funny and speaks to their relationship. She is so kind and warm to her son who annoys his dad with the whole Italian thing and really encourages and pushes him to keep up the cycling because he's good at it. She and her husband even have a date night to the Italian opera music her son listens to and it's a nice moment intertwined with the son serenading a girl at the university with the same music. The best scene is where she has a sit down talk with her son who doesn't want to race and talks about how she shows off her unused passport because it gives her joy just to have it and tells him he will actually go places. It's heartwarming and effective and Barrie is tremendous in the scene. And that's what Barrie is to the film, perfectly supporting and charming and a joy to watch. If not for the Kramer vs. Kramer women, who knows, maybe Barrie would be my pick for a win. Also, fun fact, she was nominated for an Emmy for the same role in a short lived television series based on this film. Not sure how many other people can claim that distinction.

Candice Bergen - Starting Over

It's crazy because going through this project, I have found some Oscar nominees that I never expected. Such as Candice Bergen here who everyone should know from being a TV Emmy Queen but yes, she does have an Oscar nomination to her name. There are a few others like this and it's always surprising that some TV person or character actor is an Academy darling at some point in history. Her nomination is just that - a nomination. She shows up for a brief moment in the beginning as Burt Reynolds' wife and she dumps him to go start a singing career and has cheated on him, too. She is gone for most of the film and comes back at the very end when Reynolds is getting along great with Jill Clayburgh and wants him back. He caves and gets back with Bergen who is a successful song writer yet can't sing for shit, still. She tries her best at being funny and sexy and nearly succeeds at both but the character is a mess. Though Bergen does infuse the character with some real emotion at times which adds to the performance overall. But Bergen can also be a bit wooden at times so the performance is up and down and crazy and collected and good and bad. It's fun to see her before she launched her mighty TV career because you can see what made her a star. Her character isn't all that much which is why she isn't even a thought for a win but I like the nomination. The film is a romantic comedy that would probably never get nominated in today's Oscars, so it's kind of interesting to see that this managed two female nominations back then. I don't mind Bergen's nomination, though, it's one of those interesting factoid type nominees.

Mariel Hemingway - Manhattan

I wanted to say first that this film has one of the greatest openings in cinema history. I love the mash up of the music of George Gershwin with the black and white scenes of New York City. And when it crescendos with the piano and the fireworks framed against the skyline - man, it's pretty amazing. What wasn't amazing is Hemingway's performance. She plays the 17 year old lover of Woody Allen (there's a ton of comments that could go here but I honestly don't care about his personal life) and she comes and goes throughout the film. Hemingway has zero range as an actress, at least in this film. She is the exact same throughout the entire film and I don't buy her being a teenager as an excuse. Many people have and will give her too much credit for the performance. They will associate things with Allen's history and their own beliefs and whatnot by building her performance up to something it really isn't. She's just a young girl who is speaking like a mature, older adult in a Woody Allen film. Her voice doesn't ring true no matter how many other reviewers will state her maturity and poise and even keel nature, among other dramatic blah blah blahs, point to her performance being this transcendent point about growing up or some such nonsense. She's just a teenager being ascribed Woody Allen's thoughts and voicing those unconvincingly. Sure, the adults are fucked up in this film but treating Hemingway as a voice of reason lends her too much importance. Her performance is only okay and she just isn't up to par with all the other Woody Allen female nominated performances. This one is entirely forgettable and not really all that well deserved.


Not a bad group at all! Even Hemingway, who I didn't much care for, wasn't actually bad. She was more forgettable and young than anything else. Bergen was alright and was funny at times but it was a romantic comedy that probably wouldn't get anyone nominated in today's world. But it's cool that she has a nomination and the film was enjoyable so can't get too upset with her being here. I really liked Barrie, she just gives a pleasant, effective performance. I wasn't sure it would be much of anything before watching knowing it was just a mother/wife role but she was super enjoyable and I can see why she was also nominated for an Emmy for the same role in the TV series. I had been anticipating watching Alexander again because I really liked how natural and nuanced her portrayal of a mother in a post apocalyptic world turned out in her first nomination I saw. I thought she was good here as well, giving a realistic look at being a single mother in the dating world. Streep dominates, though, as would be expected. She's intense in this performance even when she's being nice and pleasant. She had a few notable performances up to this point so this was the Academy recognizing a brilliant actress who had recently burst onto the scene. A decent start to the 70s (though this was ending the 70s...) and I look forward to the rest of the decade!

Oscar Winner: Meryl Streep - Kramer vs. Kramer
My Winner:  Meryl Streep - Kramer vs. Kramer
Jane Alexander
Barbara Barrie
Candice Bergen
Mariel Hemingway

Best Picture 2016

Going back to the current Oscar ceremony has been such a nice breath of fresh air. I have really enjoyed watching all of these films and I think the year after the whole white wash controversy was a very big success. We got such a wide range of films and a diverse palette of performances that I can only hope that 2017 is as strong as this year. It makes me hopeful that the Academy is leaning in the right direction of being a more inclusive awards body and not just going for the same tired Oscar bait films and roles. We shall see if that continues or not.

2016 Best Picture

Moonlight

Oh man, lots to talk about with this film! We all should have seen that crazy ending to the Oscar broadcast where La La Land won but didn't really and Moonlight was the real winner. That won't ever be forgotten about, but don't let that overshadow the fact that Moonlight is a fantastic film. The thing that sticks out for me about this film, besides the acting and the direction and the story, is how intimate this film feels and is. I mean, I know this was a true indie film, but go back and look at the previous Best Picture winners and you will see this is the smallest, most intimate film to win that I've seen so far. And I'd venture to guess this would be true for the Oscars as a whole. Nothing really compares to Moonlight, yet the film, to me, has broad appeal and is way more than just a black film or a gay film. This is a coming of age film, a love story type of film, a film about people living their lives. The film just also happens to be the first all black film to win Best Picture and (I think) the first gay film to win, too. But I don't see this as a direct response to the whole OscarsSoWhite thing the year prior because the film itself holds up under scrutiny. Sure, if Hidden Figures won BP you'd probably have a case. Moonlight transcends all that crap, though, for me. We watch in three parts as Chiron grows up and deals with his tough life situation and his own sexuality. The three Chirons are all fantastic even if all three are a little different individually, though they maintain the same sort of stoic outlook between them. The supporting characters are good, but especially Mahershala Ali, who was rewarded with an Oscar for playing Juan. I wanted more Juan in this film instead of just the first 30 minutes or so and a whole film with him would have been just as great. But I am happy that the film chose to follow Chiron as he maneuvered his way through life. Moonlight is a complete film with amazing direction, cinematography, a nice subtle score - all making for a richly engrossing experience. I really mean that. I wasn't sure if the film would be all hype but once I started watching, I was completely hooked. I think because it's such a simple and honest story, where the story is the main draw besides the acting going on in it. I'm excited to see what Barry Jenkins does next if this is any indication of his future work. I think if people give this film a chance, they will end up liking it enough that it might change some views on indie film, watching black films, watching gay films - all of that. That's why it's kind of awesome that this won Best Picture because so many people are going to watch this solely because of that reason and will experience something different than any other Best Picture winner so far. Anyway, it's certainly a great film and might just be my winner, too.

Arrival

This is the first time I've had the pleasure of writing about a Denis Villeneuve film. I'm a big fan of his work and I firmly believe Sicario should have been a Best Picture nominee in 2015. He's a very exciting director and has the Blade Runner sequel coming out this year along with Prisoners and the brilliant Enemy that both came out in 2013. He's also got a few French Canadian films that are highly regarded in his past that are award winning, so clearly Villeneuve is a person to watch in the future. I think the man is going to win a Best Picture and Director award at some point in his career. Arrival is an interesting science fiction film based on the also brilliant Ted Chiang's novella "Story of Your Life." (Really, read all of Chiang's work if you can, he's a multiple Nebula and Hugo award winner for a reason.) It's about linguistics as Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner try to figure out what these aliens who have come to Earth have to say to us and what their purpose is. A lot of comments online mentioned that people were confused by the film and that it was hard to follow but to me it's a pretty straightforward film even with the time bending. If you can't follow this story, I'm not sure you should be watching films. With that said, this film is a very adult type of film. By that I mean it makes you pay attention and actually has an intellectual subject as it's premise. Adams is fantastic in the linguist role who the aliens entrust with the truth and she realizes that time is a flat circle. Okay, really they allow her to see her future while living in the now which allows her future to happen because she knows what's going on and yeah, it's a complicated concept to understand but the film doesn't get heavy with it. You can understand the basic principle of what they are intending. Adams cracks the code and ends the potential WWIII mess all while knowing that her future brings tons of heartbreak. That is the heavy stuff and it certainly gives you a ton to think about. Villeneuve directs the shit out of this and it looks fabulous and reminds me a lot of his film, Enemy, with the squidward alien things. But also the same sort of person dealing with what is reality concept. I'm super happy that a very smart science fiction film like this was actually nominated for Best Picture because that is what expanding to possibly ten nominees is all about. This would never have made a group of five. But for all time now, people will watch this film and ponder deep things thanks to Denis and Ted Chiang. I hope that more Chiang short stories will be adapted because they will be amazing if done right.

Fences

I was both wary of Fences and somewhat excited. This film came after the whole Oscars so white deal and blah blah blah. But! I think the film came at the perfect time. I was wary about it because of that specific reason. Is this just a cash grab response for the previous year? Well, things get put into production years into advance so obviously no, this wasn't a response. This was Denzel wanting to bring to the big screen a play he loved and respected immensely. And damn, did Denzel pull it off. He filmed, produced, starred in this and it's so good. The big knock on it is that this film is a play on screen. Yes, it is. It has rapid fire dialogue which tends to leave great performances. We get that here, with Denzel almost never shutting the hell up. Seriously, Denzel is talking for the majority of the film. That's why it has that play-like feel. This is an intimate look at a black family in Pittsburgh and we see their familial issues. Denzel dominates and we learn about his life that effects his current wife. That's a very sterile description but Viola Davis holds it down and makes it worth watching. I dunno, I mean, this is a Denzel film and he is the main part of the film. I like the film, a lot! I think Denzel delivers a great performance and Viola Davis is wonderful in her part. But this is very much a theatrical movie. It is a play on film, especially for the first half of the film. It is set up like a play and everything comes off like a play. The dialogue is rapid fire and constant like a play. So that's my big gripe. Denzel doesn't shut the hell up. He has constant dialogue. He's a loud, angry, black man. It serves the purpose of the story but it gets annoying. The film itself is too long. Towards the end, the film loses strength. Too many montages and then a certain character is gone and the story still drags on. Yeah, it loses some steam for the last say 20-30 minutes. It really needs to be condensed and shored up. But I did think it was a very interesting look into the every day black lifestyle. This is the middle class black world in Pittsburgh in like the 50s and though the scope of the film is so insular, it is compelling nonetheless. I'm glad this play was brought to the screen because it's so good and tells a story that we all need to see and hear and experience. But this is a small film that gets stretched to 2 plus hours and it shows. A good film for the post OscarsSoWhite era but not quite a winner.

Hacksaw Ridge

You can't deny that Mel Gibson knows how to tell a damn good story. Hacksaw Ridge is entertaining on two different fronts. The first part of the film tells the story of Desmond Doss' upbringing and how he came to join the Army. We see that he has a tough family life with an alcoholic father who beats the family whenever he feels like it and he almost kills his brother in a fight which starts him on his pacifist ways. We see Doss meet a cute nurse and be a persistent charming cornball before going off to basic. There he runs into his fellow soldiers and his commander hating him for refusing to pick up a gun on religious grounds. He has to win them over by persevering through the beatings and extra duty to gain their trust. He still has to endure an unfair court martial that is ultimately dismissed before Doss is allowed to ship off to Okinawa. This first part of the film is very sentimental at times with how things were and is very Americana in it's praise of the small town kid who is big into his faith. Garfield makes Doss into a compelling character despite it potentially being one big stereotype. I venture to say Garfield is the only reason the early parts work. Once it gets to boot camp, the film really picks up steam and has a hilarious Vince Vaughn as well. The boot camp scenes and then the court martial scenes are more interesting to me than the sun drenched early scenes of Doss' youth. Then we finally get to combat and watch Doss do his miraculous thing. The combat scenes, which were heavily criticized for being too gory and fetishistic, feel pretty powerful to me. Yes, Gibson lingers on some bodies too long and certainly likes using fire and having people burn for a while but I felt like it shows the brutal nature of war in stark terms. It's not the heavily edited Saving Private Ryan opening, it shows carnage without too many fast cuts and one second shots. But it also allows us to become Doss and see what he sees in a way. I know that's stretching things a bit but we get a real sense of what Doss is going through with all the violence and what he has to overcome and push through as a medic. I also like that it doesn't turn Doss into a superhero. He's not some invincible ninja or hooah Army God. He's a guy doing his job to the best of his abilities, saving Americans and Japanese alike, and not trying to be anything special. When we see Doss saving these men, it's almost a matter of fact thing. Doss is using his training and overcoming issues like being shot at or having to drag someone much heavier than himself. I like that Mel doesn't treat Doss as a God but more of a real life human being who did something massively heroic. That's why I like Hacksaw Ridge. I could do without the youth parts or at least have them toned down from the sentimental aspect but the rest of the film is surprisingly good. Some people might not like it as much or will take their Mel bias in with them but he tells a great story and sheds some light on an interesting American hero without taking it to the extremes.

Hell or High Water

I love the hell out of these kinds of films. I guess this is considered to be a neo-Western, kinda like No Country for Old Men, which is the film this got compared to a lot during the Oscar race. I get the comparison in style but the two aren't all that similar, really. An old, hard ass cop and money being involved in West Texas but you can stop there. This film is about two brothers (Chris Pine, Ben Foster) who are robbing banks in order to buy back the family farm from the bank they are robbing. Two Texas Rangers (Jeff Bridges being the main one) track them down to an ultimate showdown. The film is fantastic. It's relatively short by today's Oscar standards (hour and forty minutes) but it packs a ton into that short time. The relationship between the brothers is very well done and never feels hokey or too overstuffed with prior history. That to me is a credit to the wonderful script that doesn't burden us with too much extraneous exposition or background. We get just enough which keeps the pace strong. The other relationship of the two Rangers is funny and we are endeared to both sides through their interactions with each other. The setting will never get old either, as West Texas (or Texas in general) always offers luscious cinematography and that's no different here. So you've got strong performances all around, great writing, great direction/look to the film, and a brisk pace to the events with a lot of action to keep you engaged - what the hell isn't there to like? I think my one big hang up is that in the final confrontation the shooters are just perfect at hundreds of yards which, yeah, I get it's Texas and guns are a way of life but not everyone is a sniper. That's my main nitpick but other than that this is a film I'm going to watch again and recommend for others to watch because it is so well made and enjoyable. There's not much fat and gristle on this thing and that's how I like my BBQ.

Hidden Figures

I will bring up that elephant in the room, so to speak, right off the bat. A year after the Oscars So White controversy, there was no way that a very successful film (critics and box office wise) about smart, strong, historically significant black women wasn't going to be nominated for Best Picture. I'm not fully convinced in earlier years with the five film format that this might not have made it into a group. Hidden Figures fits what the Academy likes with the film being a tidy, crowd pleasing film that only somewhat forcefully rocks the boat when it comes to its subject matter. It does hit us over the head that racism was widely prevalent as a just how things are, the status quo. But these are mostly minor inconveniences for the film that are easily overcome by our three starring black actresses. Hidden Figures is a popcorn flick. Easily digestible for a broad audience even if it's a film about black women. It's meant to be tolerable for every one and certainly makes white people feel good about Costner standing up to the racism by having him tear down a coloreds only bathroom sign (which didn't happen in real life). It's a safe representation of racial feelings and ideas at the time but thankfully that's not exactly the main focus of the film. It's about those three women challenging their roles in society and in their job as both black AND women. The film takes on both of those issues (albeit with kid gloves) and celebrates the achievements of the three women that helped launch America into space. If this film tried to be harder and more realistic in the portrayal of racism and the challenges of black women, it would be an entirely different film that may or not be in this same spot. I'd lean toward not being here but I do wish that someone will make that film at some point, whether about this subject or something else. But Hidden Figures is what it is and that's a nice family friendly look at three black women overcoming astronomical odds to succeed at NASA and become respected figures in the space race. I enjoyed the film and the performances and I'm glad with it being included in a very diverse lineup of Best Picture nominees. If it hadn't been nominated, I'm not sure I'd be clamoring for it's inclusion just because it is such a slick, feel good type of film. But Lord knows there are plenty of those films on the Best Picture list which is why I won't get upset at it being here. It's also just a great film about a little known historical fact for black people and Americans in general. It's worth a watch for that fact alone.

La La Land

Welp, watching this Oscar broadcast was probably the most interesting one I've ever seen, and probably anyone else for that matter, because this won Best Picture but didn't really win. That whole sequence of events was hilarious and messed up and I knew something big was up when I saw a stagehand rush in before the confusion really started. So, this film was super hyped all the way through the Oscar season, winning everything and getting it's fair share of champions and detractors. I've been pumped to finally watch this film to see what in the hell everyone was so enamored with. The film is an obvious homage to all the old Hollywood and French musicals from years ago and it does a great job in imitating their style. The colors are so bright and fun and make the film easy to watch because if anything, you can just watch the colors go by. Musicals live and die with their songs and I think La La Land actually succeeds wonderfully in giving us memorable songs that stay with us after the film is over. I've had a couple of the songs stuck in my head for a few days now and if it can have that staying power with me, then it's a winner. A lot of musicals have very boring, dry, too Broadway-like tunes that never grab the audience's ear. They seem more made for the theater student to audition to and show off vocal range or something. This film has great jazzy numbers that stand out and last and will most likely become iconic on their own. Both lead characters have great chemistry. Gosling and Stone are great together and have shown that in the couple of films they've been in together. You can tell they have built something up over the years and it pays off here. I like all of these things about La La Land so why do I feel pretty underwhelmed with the product as a whole? The story was fine but I didn't think Emma Stone was all that Oscar winning worthy. Gosling is fine but he's not going to steal the show with a performance like that even though I like it. I think this got so hyped up that I was expecting something that would knock me over but instead made me give a confused shrug. I see and understand the appeal but I was expecting the performances to be amazing and the story incredibly compelling. I don't feel that way at all about those things. And I've seen it twice now in a couple days just to make sure my opinion wasn't clouded by being tired or something. But even after two watches I'm still kinda ambivalent towards the film as a whole. To me, this is a perfect example of the parts being greater than the whole. I'm actually glad now that it didn't win Best Picture (this is without seeing Moonlight just yet) because then I think I'd tear it down instead of celebrating some of the things I really liked about it. Damien Chazelle has made two really good films back to back and really has an eye for interesting and inventive shots so I'm excited for whatever his next project is. Though I must say it really bugs me that Stone's big song in this film is a rehash of Kermit the Frog's Rainbow Connection. You won't be able to unhear that one now. All in all, La La Land certainly deserves a lot of its attention and to be included on this list and makes for a very energetic and happy watching experience.

Lion

After watching Lion, the first thing that really struck me about the film was how much the first part reminded me of Slumdog Millionaire. Seriously, both films follow around a young boy trying to survive on the mean streets of India. Both highlight the vicious, poverty infested wasteland that is India's more poorer areas. Both boys have to escape adults who want to groom and traffic them and the poverty stricken landscape is played up to masturbatory levels. At times I was like, I get it, life is pretty rough for the poor and lost in India. The cinematography is beautiful in a weird way even if it's showing the starkness of the poorer areas. With that said, the first half is still good even though all the beats feel familiar due to a very good child acting performance from young Saroo. All kids can be a little precious and annoying but he, and the director, does a nice job of minimizing that. Once we hit the grown up Saroo in Dev Patel, his performance carries on what the younger Saroo was building. Patel is a little reminiscent of his Slumdog work but he has obviously grown as an actor and shows off more range with his character that is also searching for his lost family. The film ramps up the tearjerker moments in the second half and I do think some people might be put off by such obvious emotional manipulating but I guess I was in the right mood for it when I watched it because it hit me pretty good and I enjoyed it immensely. Run on sentence aside, Lion is the kind of film that plays well with today's Academy. Something like this might have had trouble squeezing into a group of 5 but with the more diverse Academy, this tearjerker about an Indian boy adopted by white parents using Google Earth to find where he used to live hits their sweet spot. It's a really easy to watch film that most people will enjoy, some will enjoy it way more than others like I did. But you also have to recognize how similar it is to a previous winner in Slumdog Millionaire and not get too carried away with it. They would make a great double feature, for sure. I'm glad I finally got to see this film, though.

Manchester by the Sea

While watching this film, I was really into the story and was really enjoying it as an overall work. But once I finished and really started thinking about everything that I saw, I had a few complaints. The film feels long and is, at almost two and half hours. If this story doesn't hook you, it's going to be quite the slog to get through. My big huge complaint, though, is the character of Patrick played by Lucas Hedges. The film is about Casey Affleck whose brother dies and he has to come take care of Patrick. Patrick makes no sense to me as a character and I'm not sure what writer/director Kenneth Lonergan was going for with him. Patrick's dad dies and he just doesn't react at all like a normal person would. He never gets emotional save one little breakdown and that's it. The kid makes jokes, hangs with his friends, tries to bang his multiple girlfriends, and just seems completely unfazed that his dad just died. And it's like that the whole film. He's more interested in saving money to buy a new motor for the boat his dad left him than mourning his dad. It blows my mind and really drags the film down for me. It sucks, because I love Affleck's performance and I like how the film uses the flashback technique to show us why Affleck is an emotionally void person. I liked the oh shit moment that happens in the middle of the film because I didn't see it coming and it hit me hard because it shows just how damaged Affleck was/is. I'm also a little annoyed with the ending because there really isn't any resolution to the mess that we just watched for two plus hours. It doesn't have to be neatly wrapped up with a bow, but I feel the audience deserves some sort of payoff. Is Affleck going to stay in Boston and have Patrick live with another family or is he going to stay with Patrick? Because I felt either ending would be possible. I'm sure some people liked the ambiguous nature of the ending and liked that the writing made us come up with our own conclusion but I'm not fully into that kind of payoff. I definitely felt like the longer the film went on, my love for it nosedived from being close to the top to being middle of the pack. I'll have to figure out where it stands after some time thinking about it and seeing if it settles in me or not. I have a feeling this film will be up or down for most people with some loving it and some hating it.


This was a fun year to follow closely. For most of the year La La Land was the presumed winner and we all know how Oscar night went down with them winning but not really winning. It made for a memorable ceremony and at least had some intrigue in what was becoming almost a stale year. I hate when there's a front runner that goes wire to wire with little drama going on.  So Moonlight winning was awesome and I'm with the Academy on this one, a really great choice. Hell or High Water is my number two because it's just such a tight, well done piece of film making. It's the one film in this bunch I would watch again and again with no hesitation. La La Land would come up third because I do like the vibrancy it brings and the fact that it brings back the musical. I could take more musicals like this, honestly. Arrival is a great bit of science fiction and I want more Denis Villeneuve in the Best Picture race in the future. He is going to be a stud director more than he already is. I had my issues with Manchester by the Sea but I really did enjoy the overall story and how it was told and Casey Affleck's acting. It was a frustrating film, though. I considered dropping Fences all the way to second to last because Denzel overpowered the film so much, but I recognize that he brought together a pretty good film and one that was interesting to watch. Hacksaw Ridge was entertaining and Mel Gibson can tell a hell of a story but it was hokey at times and it could have been a tad more serious than what it was for a war film. Lion, though I enjoyed it, was a rehash of Slumdog Millionaire in a lot of ways so that's why it is so low for me. It's still a good film, though. Hidden Figures is last simply because it doesn't really feel like a Best Picture type of film. I get that it tells an important story about our shared history but it probably shouldn't have made this group. This is a fun group to sift through and there are three black majority films and a film about an Indian boy with a musical, a science fiction film, and a war film all thrown in there as well. It's diverse and this is why I like that there can be up to 10 nominees. I wish it was a flat 10 nominees instead of a possibility because we'd get a diverse group every year just like this. I'm interested in what this year's Oscar race will bring as I haven't even heard much buzz yet, though it is still earl in the year. But for now, I'm on to the 70s!

Oscar Winner: Moonlight
My Winner:  Moonlight
Hell or High Water
La La Land
Arrival
Manchester by the Sea
Fences
Hacksaw Ridge
Lion
Hidden Figures

Leading Actor 2016

This was mostly a neck and neck race between Affleck and Denzel, with many people thinking Denzel was getting his third Oscar. I was rooting for Affleck all the way without having seen any of these but I am excited to see how both of them do in their roles and the other three, too.

2016 Best Actor

Casey Affleck - Manchester by the Sea

This was probably the one acting performance I was most excited to finally watch. I am a big Affleck fan and love most of his work. I'm a fan of the brooding, introspective acting that Affleck does in most of his work. He doesn't have to say much, he can just look forlorn or wracked with guilt or overcome with sadness or whatever and display all of those emotions on his face and in his body language and in his very being. Pretentious kinda, I know, but my point stands that Affleck isn't just an actor who gives in to histrionics or big, grand moments. It's like he studies every move his character could make and goes for the unexpected because a lot times you can get frustrated with his characters for not talking or for not acting a certain way. But that's what I like about Affleck and I think he's very good at that type of acting. We get a lot of that in this film as he plays a guy whose brother dies of a heart attack and then has to take care of his nephew. Affleck also has some personal tragedies that have gone on before the current story that we see in flashbacks that further explains why his character is so emotionally void and confused. We also see the change when in flashbacks, Affleck is jovial and cracking jokes with his bro while out on the boat with his nephew and when partying at home. But then the thing happens and there's a moment where we see the realization on his face that his life is irrevocably changed and his world crashes inside of him. In the current story, he trudges along staying emotionally removed from most people though he is very protective of Patrick, his nephew and new charge. There is just so much depth and layers to Affleck's performance, so much subtlety in how he moves or reacts and how he responds that it's just a treat to watch him work. It's like you have to do some work of your own to parse through just what is going on for Affleck's character and that makes the performance richly rewarding, to me anyway. It's why I enjoy watching Affleck do his thing and yes, it can be frustrating at times but he definitely pulls it off for his Oscar win. I'm very happy that Casey won because I feel like it's been a long time coming.

Andrew Garfield - Hacksaw Ridge

I wrote and re-wrote this review a couple times because I felt like I wasn't saying anything more than Garfield was okay. This is a difficult role to pull off and I think Garfield was the perfect choice to play Desmond Doss. Doss is a conscientious objector from the Virginia boonies who enlists in the Army to be a medic but won't touch a gun which gets his commanders above him pissed off and his fellow soldiers wary of him as an equal, thinking he won't protect them. Doss keeps at it and makes it all the way through boot camp before they court martial him because he didn't complete the rifle range. He's saved at the last minute by a letter from a General friend of his father's and can go to war like everyone else. I say this is a difficult role because in this first part of the film, Garfield has to be this charming, countrified, cornball and make it look natural and not cringey. His Doss is such a goober, but a sweet, firm in his beliefs and convictions kind of goober. He's a good ol' boy with an aw shucks type of demeanor and it works for Garfield. We see that Doss isn't like other men and is firm in his moral beliefs even if the performance to this point is hokey and goofy. Doss suffered through a tough upbringing with an alcoholic veteran father and he almost killed his brother when fighting. His dad beat the family whenever he felt like it so there was turmoil for Doss to overcome and rectify with his own faith. Garfield does a good job in showing all of that turmoil in the early parts of them even if Gibson makes these scenes turn out somewhat sentimental in nature. I think Garfield really excels in the second part of the film where he goes off to Okinawa and we see the battles scenes atop Hacksaw Ridge. His story is so unbelievable that I'm surprised it took this long for a film to be made about his actions. Doss saved something like 75 men, Japanese and Americans alike, on his own while out on the ridge with no Americans around him except the wounded. He overcame rough terrain and tough odds and run ins with the Japanese to pull this truly heroic deed off. But Garfield succeeds in this part of the performance because he treats Doss the same way as in the first part. There are no gung ho action hero type moments or big heroic speeches or any nonsense other than a man believing his faith will help him find more men to save. Garfield is scared but determined and we see these little moments of introspection that show us that Doss wasn't super human or even God-like, he was just a man doing his job to the best of his abilities. That's mostly why I think Garfield is the perfect choice for the role of Desmond Doss. I don't see any other actor portraying the cornball hillbilly and the American hero without letting one of the two suffer greatly. Garfield takes on both roles and gives us something really interesting and compelling to watch that isn't over the top which the role seems to invite. I feel like there's a lot more to this character and performance than what you might see on first watch. When you really look into it is when you see how much work and effort Garfield put into this. It might not be obvious or classical but his performance is something that stands out in the film. I also think his performance in Silence helps him land a spot in this group, too. This might not be the one I like the best but I can enjoy Garfield's performance for not adhering to stereotypes and giving us something much more intelligent and compelling to watch.

Ryan Gosling - La La Land

I am a Gosling fan. He does some great work and has been really amazing in some indie films, one of which he got nominated in 2006 for Half Nelson. He's also getting into bigger films with the new Blade Runner sequel coming out this year so things are exciting for Gosling and his fans. My big question going into this film was if Gosling just came along for the ride with the film or if he really stood out on his own, independent of all the La La Land hype. I would say it's a mixture of both. If the film wasn't so loved, I'm not sure he gets nominated. But that doesn't mean Gosling does a poor job. He is actually quite perfect for the role of Seb, a jazz musician trying to find his way in LA. Gosling has that old school movie star quality with his good looks and presence and that helps him here in this performance. He has great chemistry with Emma Stone, as the two have been in a couple films prior to this and clearly have established a great rapport with one another and it's palpable onscreen. They sizzle together and it makes watching the film enjoyable just from them alone. Gosling also excels at the comedic aspect of the role. He has great comedic timing and he does it all in this sort of dry, sarcastic way almost. So he is hilarious when the film calls for it and it makes his performance that much better. I think my main issue with Gosling in this film and his others is that he can become an emotional void at times. He has this stoic quality about him that at times it takes the place of actual emotion. He does it here a little bit and it's the one thing that annoys me about his performances. It might be appropriate in some of his other roles like in his Nicolas Winding Refn work, but Gosling shouldn't just play the cool, reserved dude always. Give me some passion and energy, especially in a film so energetic and happy as this one. So while I do think he does a good enough job for this role and adds overall to the film, I want more out of him. I want him to push himself beyond just being a merely good performance in a well liked film. Be a great performance in a well liked film! But, let me reiterate, Gosling is pretty good in this film. The chemistry, the music (his singing is okay but not amazing), the screen presence and comedic talent all add up to a good performance. I just know he could have been great here. This could end up being the weaker link of the five but that's not exactly a terrible knock against him when he makes a very good five.

Viggo Mortensen - Captain Fantastic

What I know about this performance and film from the Oscar race last year is that it came out of nowhere. In the lead up to awards season, I don't remember a single mention about Viggo anywhere. Then all of the sudden he's landing a SAG nomination and Golden Globe nom and things were heating up for him to make an Oscar play and then, voila, he was nominated here. A lot of the reason why is that he seems to be extremely well liked in the industry and people noticed his performance in the film and decided to reward him for it. It also happens to be a really, um, fantastic performance. Viggo is a father who lives out in the forest with his 6 kids while their mother is getting treatment somewhere else. Viggo trains and teaches all the kids in self defense and music and physical fitness and regular school stuff. They are essentially hippies living on the land and hating on the man. But we quickly learn early on that their mother and his wife has killed herself. This leads to them making a journey to the funeral that she expressly did not want and lots of issues for Ben (Viggo). Ben is a great dad and the kids are super smart and well behaved and not very well versed in everyday human interactions. What I really love about the performance is that Viggo is a lot of different things with the character. He is a selfish asshole at times, putting his beliefs before the family. Another reviewer called him exasperating, which fits his character perfectly. There are times where you want to yell at his character that he needs to think more about his kids than himself or to stand his ground like at the funeral or to just take a breath and just talk to his kids or to his wife's father or whoever. But Viggo also comes across as such a warm, caring, standup person who does actually love and put his family first and who does understand their well being is paramount. It's a gentle performance from Viggo and it really impressed me. He is so good with the child actors (who are all mostly great, the one who hates him for some of the film is kinda meh but that's being picky) and just exudes so much fatherly love throughout the film that it's palpable. Other reviewers called him arrogant which he definitely is, having raised a bunch of geniuses out in the woods. I think Ben just feels strong in his convictions that being an arrogant asshole like when calling out his sisters' kids or tearing down religion while in a church at a funeral is not something that he even thinks about. There's so much subtlety and nuance and grace in Viggo's performance that you really have to pay attention to him, especially his facial expressions. There are times where his face tells what he's truly thinking and feeling even though he may be saying something else. To me, there is just a lot to like about Viggo in this performance. I suspect that not many people have actually watched this film and just dismissed it as one of those Academy bones to a respected actor. But I honestly think this film could have and probably should have been nominated for Best Picture. Although, I do feel like having a liberal bent to your own self ideals certainly helps. Viggo, though, is amazing in the role and isn't simply a throwaway nomination. I highly recommend watching this film.

Denzel Washington - Fences

Okay, so during the Oscar race, Denzel literally took the lead for the majority of the season and was a threat to win his third Oscar. There are a surprising number of people who feel Denzel deserves a third Oscar a la Streep or Daniel Day-Lewis but I'm not of that society. Denzel does not deserve a third Oscar. He is a great actor and is one of the very few black actors with a Best Actor award but forget giving him a third Oscar just because. If you've followed me, you know I don't like merit Oscars. Earn the fucking Oscar or get out. There was a ton of talk of Denzel getting rewarded for this role and honestly, I wasn't sure who was winning this come Oscar night. Denzel won the SAG Award which was a huge oh shit! moment for the prognosticators. My point is that I don't just want to reward someone because they are considered Oscar royalty. Earn your fucking Oscar! So during the season I wasn't sure if he was worthy or not but now I know Denzel was. Denzel is Fences. He directed and produced and starred in it. This is his baby. My issue is that this feels like a play on film and Denzel feels like he rehearsed for months and then filmed it. It's too wordy and slick and he doesn't shut the fuck up for like 40 minutes. The more quiet, introspective moments with his baby (actual baby in the film) are cool but not earned and feel scripted (it IS a play) and don't have the emotional impact they should. Denzel is flipping good in this. This is the best he's been in ages. I thought he was great with his role in Flight, but that was the first time we'd paid attention to him since his win for Training Day. This was just as great as those nominations and shows that Denzel is a force to be reckoned with for Broadway. Denzel is solid but I still need to see a couple performances to see exactly where he ranks in this group of five. I just know that Denzel really chews the scenery in this film and dominates every scene and every supporting actor, too. He shows how great he is as an actor, but sometimes you have to let your acting breathe a little and Denzel just keeps his foot on the gas pedal all the way through the film. I like it, but certainly not enough for a third Oscar.


This category had some heavy hitters going up against each other. There is no bad performance here, which is always nice to see. I went back and forth on who would bring up the rear and went with Gosling. Really that's because he plays his cool guy, charming persona like he always does and while he is funny and entertaining, he's not anything spectacular. He comes along with the film. Garfield has a tough role in making a hokey character into something not so hokey and actually believable as a hero soldier. I think he does quite well with what he's given to work with and his battle scenes elevate him from the bottom. Denzel is Denzel. He chews the hell out of the scenery in his film and at times it's great and at times you want him to shut the hell up and let the other characters do something for a change. Because he dominates so much, I have him in third because it's way too much Denzel for me to take. Now, Viggo, any other year and he wins easily. I was ready to write him off as just a token nominee but he is so damn good in his film. Watch it right now, please. You'll see just how wonderful his performance is. I wish I could give him the win but I just really like Affleck's acting. I'm glad he won and not Denzel because I honestly don't think he deserved a third acting wise. But yeah, I'm happy Affleck won and I hope that next year gives us some really great performances like these.

Oscar Winner: Casey Affleck - Manchester by the Sea
My Winner:  Casey Affleck - Manchester by the Sea
Viggo Mortensen
Denzel Washington
Andrew Garfield
Ryan Gosling

Leading Actress 2016

Stone wasn't quite a juggernaut during the Oscar race, as both Huppert and Portman got quite a lot of press and hype. Some of that was early on which faded before Stone really cemented herself as the one to beat. Streep is always in the mix and the darkhorse, even more than Huppert, was Negga coming out of nowhere with a nomination. I'll have to see how they all stack up.

2016 Best Actress

Emma Stone - La La Land

I have been sitting here awhile trying to figure out just what to write about Emma Stone and her win. La La Land was fun and interesting but very underwhelming to me. I feel like that perfectly explains Stone's performance in my opinion: fun and interesting but ultimately very underwhelming. I even watched the film twice just to be sure my opinion wasn't lukewarm because I was tired or something. But even after two views, I just didn't feel very strongly at all about Stone's performance as Mia, an up and coming actress trying to find her way in Hollywood. It's clearly not a bad performance but I was looking for something to wow me and I just never found it. She has amazing chemistry with Ryan Gosling, as the two have starred together in a few films now and the rapport is quite evident. They are two actors having fun working together and it makes each of them better and the film better as a whole. Stone is alright with the singing and dancing but she is by no means amazing at either aspect. Whereas in the old Hollywood musicals the female stars would belt out song after song and pull off some dizzying tap dance or whirling dance moves for most of the film, that doesn't happen here. The singing and dancing is sort of a background element or really just a supporting player in the film. I do think Stone is stronger when she's playing the more dramatic and actorly parts. And I think Stone succeeds in part because she comes off as an everywoman or a girl next door type that you can easily relate to and doesn't have that Hollywood stuck up asshole vibe going on. That all makes her likable and easy to root for. I just wasn't blown away by her performance and I was really expecting to love it. I think she is good and definitely deserves to be nominated in this group but I just wanted more, same thing for Gosling and the film itself. I don't hate the win, though, at all. I'm happy she won and was fine it wasn't Streep or Portman (who is very good herself!) again because I like having new winners. Maybe in time I'll warm up to the performance itself more because I do like it, it's just that I don't feel strong enough to advocate for it and add to the hype. I am excited to see where Stone goes from here. I'm hoping she continues to give us interesting performances and make good choices for the films she's in.

Isabelle Huppert - Elle

I always have trouble with these foreign actor nominations because I wonder if I'm missing something in translation or missing some subtlety in the acting while I'm reading the subtitles. I've gone on about that subject in the past but it's always there for me. This is a wild Paul Verhoeven film who you know from directing Basic Instinct, Showgirls, and Starship Troopers among a couple other big films. This one tells the story of Michele, a successful businesswoman who is raped in her home and goes on about her life after it happens. She's got a long list of heavy issues going on in her life: her son has a pregnant overbearing girlfriend who gives birth to a black baby (everyone is white in this), an ex-husband who is with a prettier, younger yoga teacher, she's sleeping with her business partner's husband, her mother pays young men for sex and is now getting married to one before she dies, her father is up for parole after a mass murder incident some 30 years prior that involved Michele, and a seemingly perfect couple who live across the street who are more than meets the eye. Like I said, a ton going on in Michele's life and Huppert has to navigate all of this while still creating an engaging, cohesive performance. I'll admit I don't know what else Huppert has done, but she is treated as a living legend when you look online. I can understand why a little bit after watching this performance because she is able to wrangle all these different possible emotions and keep it compelling and interesting. The whole point of the film is that Huppert turns the tables on her attacker. It's a rape revenge thriller and she is actually raped a couple of times in the film leading to the final big moment where she does indeed get her revenge. It doesn't surprise me, either, that the character would plan something long term like that because she is whip smart and creative. What I like about Huppert's performance is the fact that she is sorta cold and aloof after the first rape. By that I mean, she doesn't turn into a scared, blubbering mess for the rest of the film. She goes about her life and deals with the issues she has going on and eventually hatches her revenge plot. I feel like that better matches the story and Huppert makes her Michele into a believable character and even somewhat sympathetic. It does reek a bit of a male fantasy with rape almost becoming sexy but I guess women could think the same way. Honestly, the material is very frank and goes to places not many other films would which makes it unique and very interesting to watch. The performance Huppert gives is a big reason for that. I think people will react differently to this film and thus Huppert's performance, but it certainly belongs on the Best Actress list. I have a feeling I'm going to be thinking about this one for a long time after watching it.

Ruth Negga - Loving

I am having a hard time really coming up with anything interesting to say about Negga and her performance. Now, don't get me wrong, I think Negga is good in the role of Mildred Loving, part of an interracial couple that takes their case to the Supreme Court to overturn all miscegenation (the mixing of races) laws in the country. Her and her white husband are allowed to be legally married anywhere in the country and the film has an important message about love and common decency. And I think it's great that a woman born in Ethiopia could one day become an Oscar nominated actress. But Negga's performance is a quiet, yet firm, portrayal of a woman who just wants to live with her family without any fuss over her marriage. I think Negga strikes the right balance of keeping her character grounded and not becoming prone to any outlandish acting choices. This film doesn't call for the latter stuff at all and Negga quietly turns her character into a dignified woman who just happens to be a turning point in the civil rights of this country. She is sort of that reluctant hero who just wants to do good by her family and enjoy her little slice of life. There are no big Oscar moments in this performance. No big screaming scenes about being persecuted. No big weep fests over the cruelty of her being locked up and told to leave Virginia. Nothing like any of that and while it makes the performance seem small and insular, it is sort of refreshing in that Negga stays even keeled while chaos is going on around her, just like her husband does, too. So it can be hard to really enjoy the performance on an emotional level when Negga is almost without emotion for long stretches of the film. Now, she does internalize a lot of that emotion that you have to watch her face and eyes to see what's going on in her head and heart. Sometimes that connects with me but it didn't quite get there for me this time. I still like the performance and am glad she was nominated but this is the one quiet performance of the five in this group and struggles to rise above the noise of the others. But you should watch Loving for yourself and decide if Negga is worth of a possible Oscar win.

Natalie Portman - Jackie

I watched this film twice in a week during the heart of the Oscar race, the only film I actually watched before the Oscars. At first I wasn't a fan of Portman's. The accent when you first hear it is jarring. I was thinking how can I suffer through a whole film of this awful accent? But Portman settles into the accent, though there are plenty of times where it looks like she is working at making it believable, where it's heavily affected. But you get used to it and Portman settles into actually becoming Jackie and the film takes off from there. My second watch let me not get so involved in the accent thing and just watch Portman be Jackie and it made for a much better experience. So I say that just to let you know to stick with it. The film follows the days after Kennedy is assassinated as Jackie recounts those days for an interview. Portman is intense as Jackie, there's no other way to put that. She put everything she had acting wise into this performance to become Jackie and make the character her own. All of the best scenes hit hard because Portman brings the intensity but also because she embodies Jackie's calm, strong spirit to not let people walk all over her and be her own person. Portman is all at once fragile and strong and vulnerable and devastated and determined and hopeful and melancholy and a million other emotions at the same time. She pulls off this amazing range of acting without ever really wavering. Her Jackie is brutal to watch and you just sympathize with a woman who was thrust into the public eye and had to endure such an awful tragedy while keeping a classy face for a nation in mourning. Just listen to the beautiful and haunting score (which should have won the Oscar over that La La Land crap), especially the track "Children" to hear what I just described about Portman's performance summed up in music. It perfectly accentuates everything Portman does in this film. Portman at one point was the front runner for the win which is what prompted me to first watch her. I was ready to bash it because the online world loves them some Portman but I was hooked after getting used to her Jackie. I just think even now that her performance has grown in my mind and it is her best work to me, even better than her win in Black Swan which I wasn't a big fan of back then. I'm very much debating whether or not to give Portman the win here, that's how much I enjoyed the film and her performance as a whole.

Meryl Streep - Florence Foster Jenkins

I am coming to the end of my Streep responsibilities. It's Meryl Streep. You are tired of Meryl Streep. I have two more Meryl Streep to go and I'm almost tired of Meryl Streep. This is her 20th(!) nomination for acting. No one will EVER match this. So how is the actual performance? Streep is flawless as usual. Seriously. She gets to become Mrs. Jenkins and she does the actual bad singing that you hear in the film. It's awful and you get the sense of what this was like in the 40s but it's still Streep giving her all. Besides the awful singing she still gives a very heartfelt performance because she is very calculating in her acting choices. This is Streep being Streep. You know the performance is going to be solid and have some quirk to it that sets it apart (the bad singing here). I feel like I've been writing mostly the same thing for her year after year. You'll be fine with the performance but you will also wonder if it really should have been nominated. I always feel like unless Streep is just absolutely amazing, they should let in some other actresses for these nominations. That's unfair, I know, but that's what 20 nominations does to a reviewer. I also wanted to note that both Hugh Grant and Simon Helberg are pretty great in their roles, Grant more so. He could have easily been a Best Actor nominee, though I do remember a lot of people putting him in Supporting conversations but whatever. It's a decent little film that has some pretty great performances that make it a must watch for any Oscar fan. I just wonder how many more nominations Streep has left in her.


You know, I really wanted to love Emma Stone's performance but I frankly don't feel like it lives up to the hype and I wasn't wowed by it at all. It's good, sure, but damn if Huppert and Portman don't blow her away. I don't even know how to rank these five. I guess we can put Streep last even though she is very entertaining and does a great job as usual just because it's Streep for the umpteenth time. Negga would be fourth because a lot of her performance is internalized and below the surface. She might actually rise in the future for me but for now this is where she goes. I'll put Stone third because there is a lot to like about her performance and she tries hard to be charming and likable and all that. It just never grabbed me how it seemed to grab everyone else. The hardest choice is between both Huppert and Portman. Both have difficult roles and films and both knock em out of the park. I feel like Portman has resonated with me for so long that she gets the slight edge. I think it's the combination of her performance with that haunting score and the melancholy cinematography that creates a whole experience for me. Writing this now, I want to watch her again which doesn't happen too often. I know I said I was fine with her not winning because we got a new winner but after watching them all, she is my choice. This is definitely one of the better Best Actress groups I've seen in awhile and I'm hopeful that trend will continue for 2017.

Oscar Winner: Emma Stone - La La Land
My Winner: Natalie Portman - Jackie
Isabelle Huppert
Emma Stone
Ruth Negga
Meryl Streep

Supporting Actor 2016

This was Ali's year from start to finish. No one really challenged him except Bridges who had the veteran angle going for him but there wasn't much traction to that, I don't think. Everyone else was just glad to be along for the ride.

2016 Best Supporting Actor

Mahershala Ali - Moonlight

This was absolutely the year of Mahershala Ali. He starred in two Best Picture films, Moonlight and Hidden Figures, and was also one of the best parts of the Netflix Marvel show, Luke Cage. I thought he was a really great villain in that show and the series suffered when he left in the middle of it. All three of these roles show off Ali's range. In one, he plays a deadly villain. In the other, he plays a charming military man. And in his winning role, he plays Juan, a drug dealer with a soft spot for a boy he meets that reminds him of himself. I honestly wasn't expecting Ali to be so sweet and tender and human. I know that's weird to say but I figured he'd be a hardass gangster from the little that I knew of the film but Ali takes in Chiron and becomes an almost father figure to the young kid. The kid has a terrible home life with a crack addict mother and Ali recognizes that the boy needs some guidance and someone to be there for him. The standout scene is Ali's last in the film where Chiron asks what a faggot is and is he one and how would he know. Ali and his character treat this situation with the utmost delicacy, sincerity, and genuine compassion so much so that this part of the performance floored me. This was tremendous acting and honestly, that scene will stick with me forever as a favorite and an example of masterful acting. Up until then it was yeah, Ali is pretty good like in the realness of yelling at Chiron's mom when she was smoking crack in a car on his street, but this was where the win for Ali made perfect sense. I like every other person nominated in this category and would be happy if any of them had won, but Ali winning makes me the happiest because he is phenomenal in this role. This isn't just a black man winning because of past controversy, this is a well earned Oscar for a performance that more people need to see. I wanted the whole film to be about Ali and could have watched him for two hours or more. But I do like that we don't know a whole lot about Juan and we just get this small snapshot of who he was because it actually feels supporting to the main character, Chiron, influencing his decisions later in life. These are the kinds of performances that I live to find in doing this project and I'm glad the most recent Oscars provided me with one.

Jeff Bridges - Hell or High Water

I have gone off elsewhere about the Academy always going to the same well for it's nominees and that goes especially true for this year (just look in the Supporting Actress group for my hot take on that). There was a very real sense that Bridges could win his second Oscar for this performance and the run up to Oscar season had it as Bridges versus Ali as the main contenders. There was also a loud sentiment that his costars in Ben Foster and Chris Pine were equally as deserving to be nominated and it was a take your pick kind of thing for the film, maybe even a double nomination. Well, Bridges was obviously the one and he is damn good in this role. He plays a Texas Ranger about to retire who takes on a string of bank robberies. He's got a heavy Texan accent and a sarcastic, asshole demeanor. He clowns on his partner who is Mexican/Native American and the relationship feels authentic and legit. The quips are funny and come from a place of respect even if they are terribly racist. Bridges is a grizzled Texas Ranger veteran, though, coming to the end of his career. He has that intuition about what a criminal is going to do and is able to predict where the next bank robbery will be. Say what you will about deus ex machina and all that and the fact that Bridges is this expert sniper from hundreds of yards away (not terribly unbelievable), he makes you believe in his character. It's also the fact that Bridges has played a couple western type characters, including his Oscar nominated turn in True Grit, so he has cultivated this character and performance over years so this feels lived in and like a fully developed character. Obviously, the standout scene is the very end where he and Chris Pine have a nice verbal tete a tete about Pine's involvement. It's full of so much subtext that you need to watch it a few times to soak it all in. Just watch Bridges' hands at the end and fully listen to his words that mean more than what they say. It's great acting and probably secured him the nomination. But, to my earlier point, if Foster was nominated here (or even Pine, though he seems more Best Actor material) I wouldn't be upset. But Bridges is more than deserving. You can also compare Bridges to Tommy Lee Jones in No Country for Old Men, and though there are some similarities, the two men are completely different. Bridges' character isn't weary at all and would continue being a Ranger if he could, which he kinda tries to do. Jones is just a tired old lawman. But both are cut from the same cloth, I think. Bridges is good and I hope he has more performances like this in him in the future.

Lucas Hedges - Manchester by the Sea

The main thing that sticks out to me about this performance, or really just the character in general, is that Patrick (Hedges) doesn't act normal. I get that people react differently to tragedy in their lives but this is almost absurd and I really loved the film! So Hedges has his father die from congestive heart failure which everyone knew could happen at anytime. But the kid doesn't react at all to this sad, life changing news. He just cracks jokes, tries to bang his multiple girlfriends, hangs out with his friends, and goes on with his life as if nothing has happened. It really boggled my mind that that was the direction writer/director Kenneth Lonergan wanted this character to go. He doesn't even ever seem sad. All we ever get emotion wise is that he doesn't like the idea of his dad being in a freezer until he can be buried in the spring and has a freak out moment when food falls from his freezer and he has trouble putting it back in. That's it! That's the only emotional response we get from Patrick. It's absurd. He doesn't cry at the hospital or at the funeral or anywhere and he just goes on with life. Hedges does what he can with the character but your performance is going to suffer when a film with so much tragedy has one role that is completely unaffected by said tragedies. Hedges reminds me a tiny bit of a taller, skinnier Matt Damon and he holds his own against Casey Affleck just fine, but I feel that's because the character is just immune to emotion. I just didn't get this character at all, so maybe someone out there can explain it to me. For that reason, I find it hard to get into Hedges' performance. He's a typical kid, he's funny, he's likable and he's got a little bit of presence but how can you judge this without any real emotion? I'm struggling to figure out why Hedges was nominated other than the Academy loved the hell out of this film. Anyone care to explain it to me?

Dev Patel - Lion

Honestly, the first thing that even pops into my mind when seeing him nominated here is that this is a make-up nomination. I don't feel like I'm wrong at all about that. I do feel like this is because Patel was so good and so instrumental in Slumdog Millionaire winning Best Picture. Without Dev Patel, that film doesn't win a thing. So this is Dev's consolation prize, so to speak. It is for great work, though, which is good. The film is about an Indian boy who gets separated from his brother one night and travels hundreds of miles away from home and is eventually adopted by an Australian couple. He is raised in a loving, normal home and goes to college in Melbourne. From there, his friends encourage him to search for his birthplace on Google Earth and he finally locates home. Patel is good because he moves the story forward. I know that sounds stupid but he's so good at being a conduit to move a story forward. He is a vessel for the audience to put all their emotions and not feel weird or hesitant about it. A 56 year old white woman from Kansas can become emotionally involved in an Indian boy in Australia because of Patel's acting. It's beyond emotional and he hooks you with his sincerity to his journey and to his mother. Patel makes the adult Saroo into a charming yet troubled version of himself. He kills a relationship because of an identity crisis but we understand because it's a very real one. I think Patel delivers a very poignant portrayal of what it's like to be unsure of one's history while trying to search for it. Patel is tired and desperate yet unyielding. He takes the audience on an emotional ride that feels natural and earned and highlights a very good supporting performance. The big issue is that some feel he was Leading but he shows up 53 minutes into a less than 2 hour film, so no, he is very much Supporting. And he's very good at it.

Michael Shannon - Nocturnal Animals

Michael Shannon could have like 7 Oscar nominations already if it were up to me. He's a great character actor and supporting player who gives amazing performances in almost everything he does. No different here as he plays a policeman who helps Jake Gyllenhaal after his traumatic night of terror where his wife and daughter were raped and murdered. Shannon is just a gruff old cop who responds with grunts at times and looks like, and is, a hardass with a good heart. A lot of people will think this film is all style without any substance and you wouldn't really be wrong. The film looks gorgeous and Tom Ford's style is pretty evident in everything about the film. I personally like the mood and intensity of the film and don't care about the paper thin real life characters. I'm just along for the beautifully dark ride. Shannon does make a little something out of a role that with anyone else would have probably fallen flat or been way too overdone. Shannon gets it just right and his get justice done at any cost style feels natural to the character. You naturally gravitate towards watching Shannon work in the film because you want to see what he does next and how he does it. He's like that in all of his performances and probably why he was the choice for the nomination here over Aaron Taylor-Johnson (who is equally as good in his sadistic, psychotic bad guy role) and because Shannon has been nominated before. Shannon's character might not be the most deep or unique one of all time but Shannon takes a rote role and turns it into something interesting and compelling and that is why I like Shannon as an actor.


This is always my favorite category because the films and nominees are always so diverse. This is where you'll get a crazy film like Nocturnal Animals or an Indian actor actually nominated for once. This year was no exception as everyone is good or great minus Lucas Hedges. I hate to call him out like that but I didn't get the character so the performance suffers for me and didn't understand the nomination. Plain and simple. Patel is a make-up nomination for essentially the same role in Slumdog Millionaire but he is pretty good and I'd say he belongs here. I just love Shannon even if the role isn't the most unique one ever created. He puts his Michael Shannon spin on it, though, and I was entertained. Bridges is clearly a league above the other three and could have won in any other year. I really do hope Bridges will continue to deliver great performances like this one in the future. But this year was all about Ali. His performance is amazing and it definitely deserved the win. Everyone should watch it, if just for his last scene, which is a thing of beauty. This was a very good year and I hope that trend continues for 2017.

Oscar Winner: Mahershala Ali - Moonlight
My Winner:  Mahershala Ali - Moonlight
Jeff Bridges
Michael Shannon
Dev Patel
Lucas Hedges

Supporting Actress 2016

Obviously I've seen none of these before now but how amazing is it that 3 black women make it into one category? It's a record and it's really awesome to see. I want these nominations to be about merit from now on so that's what I want to see in the future, doesn't matter if it's one or five minorities in the category. Davis was the front runner the entire way even though you could argue she's a Leading Actress in her film. Category fraud is what it is and has been an Oscar thing forever. It is nice to see Davis get her Oscar, though.

2016 Best Supporting Actress

Viola Davis - Fences

The big issue with this performance was that everyone claimed it was category fraud and wrote it off. Like okay she's great and in the wrong category and obviously strong enough to win so fuck everything else let her win and then go on from there. I finally watched Fences with the category fraud on my mind and I gotta say that I can legit understand why Davis was nominated in Supporting. She is onscreen for like half the film or more and a big part of the movie but she does seem to take the backseat at times because Denzel just chews every scene he's in. But let's be real, Viola shouldn't be supporting. She was placed here to win and she did. She deserves the win and hopefully that means she stops manipulating the categories to be nominated. Viola feelings aside, she really does a great job with her role as the neglected, secondhand wife to Denzel. She cares wholeheartedly for her kids, whether they are actually hers or not, which gives her this savior type of role in the film. She loves being a mother and it shows and her performance is just as slick as Denzel's. She is great in the scenes where she interacts with Denzel who threatens to take over. She holds her own and is strong and steadfast and comfortable in her role. She is a woman on top of her game giving great performances and this is a continuation of that. This is as good as her previous Oscar work and as good as her Emmy Award winning work. This is the culmination of a woman who has become so good that she can do no wrong with her work and every move is amazing. Her work as the battered wife is worth nominating and rewarding. It might be category fraud but she at least deserves her Oscar, from this performance or another. All I can really say is that this was coming. You know certain actresses are guaranteed an Oscar after awhile because of their work and Viola Davis was one of them. There are lots of those examples where an actress builds up to a win and this was Davis' example of that. I'm on board with the win because it gets Davis her Oscar.

Naomie Harris - Moonlight

I really hate to say this but Harris was the one thing in Moonlight that I wasn't all that thrilled with. I enjoyed all the other performances but I kinda feel like maybe Harris came along for the ride with the film. I think she does a good job at being the crack addict mother but I don't feel like she has any pay off. She is awful to her son Chiron and only wants him around when convenient or to get money from him. She is a drug addict and sleeps with men for money and is just overall a poor excuse for a mother and is the reason Chiron is so quiet and meek in the beginning. That is the character for the most part, though there is an ending scene for her as the mother when adult Chiron comes to visit her in a rehab type place. She apologizes and says she loves him and all that but I didn't feel any closure or payoff with her character from that. It just kinda felt like that was something that was added in as an afterthought or just wasn't fully developed because it wasn't really emotional to me. Harris' best scene, her most Oscar-y scene, was when she was confronting middle Chiron after coming home late and wanting money and just being this frantic, drug addled woman who was treating her son like an ATM and not like her actual son. She was screaming and just very convincing as a woman who had lost all control to her habit and didn't care about Chiron and only used him for selfish reasons. Harris is fine in the rest of her performance but it really wasn't anything that wowed me like Ali or kept my interest like the Chiron kids. Can't hate on this performance or nomination too much because the film is so good and Harris does what she can with a role that is limited. It's also pretty awesome to have three black women nominated in this category, so there's that, too.

Nicole Kidman - Lion

I have been pretty harsh when in comes to Kidman in my previous reviews. Although, I did like her Oscar winning turn in The Hours, it's more I hate her fans and most of her Oscar bait performances. But, this is about Lion. And Nicole Kidman in Lion actually kinda blew me away. She was so prepared to love and was desperate when meeting Saroo for the first time that it was palpable onscreen. She just wants to be a loving mother and Saroo just happens to be that loving son. Kidman was certainly not done up beautifully and had a big curly redhaired do going on but the thing that stands out is that she transcends being Nicole Kidman and became a desperate mother and it was entirely believable. We don't spend much time with Kidman at this moment but it was so obvious that it leapt off the screen. Once we return to her, we see she is devoted to Saroo and her other Indian adoptee son. She loves having a family and deals with all that comes with including a difficult second son who beats himself and we see later is into drugs. She still loves him despite this and it tells us the kind of woman she truly is. Kidman is even okay with Saroo seeking his real mother and going off to find her. It's a very good supporting performance, honestly. I've had my issues with Nicole Kidman but I feel this is deserving and warranted. She may not be good enough to win but she is good enough to pay attention to.

Octavia Spencer - Hidden Figures

It becomes obvious as you watch more and more of the Oscars year by year that they just can't help themselves when it comes to previous nominees/winners. By that I mean, in a film like Hidden Figures, with a couple strong supporting performances that you could take to represent this film, the Academy falls back on the person they already know instead of going with someone like Janelle Monae for a nomination. Now, you'd then have to argue about whether Spencer is truly better than Monae and all of that but this kind of thing happens again and again throughout Oscar history. Hell, it happens twice in Supporing Actor this year with Jeff Bridges getting a nomination over Ben Foster and Michael Shannon getting a nomination over Aaron Taylor-Johnson! It's a thing that the Academy does that annoys me because you could have so many opportunities to reward not only younger people but set those actors up for possibly better roles in the future. Anyway, diatribe over. Spencer is not bad here by any means, I don't want this to be misconstrued. She's a great actress and does a very good job in her role as the de facto supervisor of the black women working at NASA. She's the elder one of the trio and a realist and a calming, authoritative figure. Like I said, it's a very good performance from Spencer in a film that highlights the amazing accomplishments of a few black women who were essential in the space race. Someone needed to be represented from this film and Spencer got the draw over Monae. Monae was very good herself as the angry but determined one of the group. I'm fine with either of the women getting the nomination but Monae getting it would have been cool just for having someone new in the historical aspect of Oscars. I think even without the controversy of the year prior with the OscarsSoWhite thing that someone from this film was getting nominated no matter what. No one was winning from this film because of the Viola Davis buzzsaw, though. Nitpicking aside, I'm glad someone from the film was nominated and am content with Spencer since she was the one chosen.

Michelle Williams - Manchester by the Sea

I am a Michelle Williams fan and she consistently puts in good, serious work. I would have given her an Oscar for her turn in Blue Valentine which was tremendous. In this film, she plays the wife/ex-wife of Casey Affleck's character. There is a lot of tragedy in this film centered around Affleck's life and Williams is a part of that. Without giving anything away, she too suffers personal loss. The story is told in the present with flashbacks before the major tragedies interwoven throughout the film, much like in Blue Valentine. Williams' role in the film is very small with essentially three to four small scenes. I will say that her Boston/Massachusetts accent is pretty great and she fully embodies a lower middle class type of mother. I mean, honestly, those first two or three scenes don't really offer up much in the way of characterization. She's there so we see that Affleck had a wife and kids before things happened and it seems to be a typical family life with ups and downs. Her big Oscar moment is her last scene where she runs into Affleck after everything has happened and opens up to him about being sorry for the way she treated him and wanting to talk more with him and crying her eyes out and being emotional. You will read in reviews and online about how stunning and mesmerizing and powerful and all those big adjectives Williams is in this film and performance but I felt her big scene was overly dramatic and frankly not well done. I wish it had more actual heart behind it but it just feels like Williams was told to cry and be emotional and it got away from her a little bit. She's a supremely talented actress but this one didn't do all that much for me. Along with it being pretty short, I think she gets in for her prior history with the Academy. I wanted to really like this performance but I just can't unfortunately.


This was mostly an underwhelming group. I am happy that three black women were nominated but I really wish they were better roles. Davis is the clear winner but that's because she dominates with a Leading performance even if she got placed here. I'm fine with her win because she now has an Oscar and she was one of those women that were due, so to speak, as claimed by the internet hivemind and others. Plus, no one else here really stands out all that much. I really enjoyed Kidman, which surprised me since I'm not her biggest fan but she put in solid work as a loving mother. Spencer was the representative nominee for her film and that's fine. I did mention Janelle Monae who was in the film, too, without realizing she was also in Moonlight which makes me surprised they didn't nominate her. Normally a breakout year like that is rewarded, but whatever I guess. The bottom two are also whatever. You can have either one in last place. Harris is fine but she does nothing with her crackhead mother role that's interesting. Anyone could have played that role with the same results. And Williams is just not in the film enough to register and her Oscar scene is somewhat awkward. So yeah, underwhelming for sure. I expected a lot more from the group so I'm pretty disappointed overall. Really hoping 2017 is a lot better for this category!

Oscar Winner: Viola Davis - Fences
My Winner:  Viola Davis - Fences
Nicole Kidman
Octavia Spencer
Naomie Harris
Michelle Williams