This year has a couple of interesting nominations that I have been waiting to watch for a long time. I'm thrilled to finally get to them and I know I say that every year but it's still true here. I'm very interested in Robertson, Arkin and O'Toole as I have heard a lot about those or at least know a lot about the actors. Should be a good category to review.
1968 Best Actor
Cliff Robertson -Charly
A lot of people know this story even if they haven't ever seen the film or read the book Flowers for Algernon. I really know the story from The Simpsons episode where Homer has a crayon removed from his brain and becomes super intelligent. It's a classic episode and shows how much the story has permeated popular culture. So that's what Charly is about: Cliff Robertson is a retarded guy who has some procedure done to him that makes him hyper intelligent. Robertson secured the rights to the story and starred in the film, obviously, but he knew he had some gold here. I do like that Robertson never waded into the I am Sam territory of playing a retarded person. It's never, ever over the top and his physical manifestations come across as normal. Yes, he is slow but Robertson endears him with some humanity and we start to root for him. Once Charly becomes smart, Robertson transforms the character into one that is kinda like a robot. He has no humanity and no softness to him. Robertson lowers the voice and even becomes a bit creepy. He stalks his former night teacher and then attacks her once she lets him in and then they become a couple. I hate that trope in film and it rings super hollow. I don't like them together and I resent what Charly becomes only because he happens to be smarter. Smarter equals more dangerous? It's a weird revelation and it is where the performance goes off the rails. It's not a fault of Robertson as he does what the script wants but the goodwill he earned as the simple retarded guy is gone when he assaults a woman. We feel for Charly initially and we are expected to feel for Charly once we realize he is going to end up being retarded at the end. But I have no compassion for someone like that and that is a failure of the film. Robertson does a good job at playing these different iterations of Charly, but I can't be happy about it. Maybe this was a reaction to seeing a performance that showcased a mentally retarded fellow, I dunno. Robertson does a great job in both variations of the character but it still has to be believable and likable. Robertson is fine in the role but is he worth the win? I'm not sure.
Alan Arkin - The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter
We know about Arkin's later win for Little Miss Sunshine and nomination for Argo, but I was always surprised that he seemed to have a really great start to his career because his Oscar win was really my introduction to him. I've been eager to finally get to his first two nominations to see what they were like. And oh boy, I love this performance a lot. A lot a lot. Arkin plays a guy who is a deaf mute that moves to a new town to be closer to his deaf mute friend who gets admitted to a mental institute. In this new town, Arkin meets a bunch of different people who seem to be as lonely as he is. As a deaf mute, Arkin doesn't say a single word in the whole film. That's what is so impressive to me about this performance. Arkin has to convey all these emotions and feelings and thoughts and actions without saying a word. With a lot of other, less capable actors this would be a mess. But Arkin has so much emotional depth in this character that I enjoyed watching him immensely. And Arkin doesn't ham it up or be too outgoing or anything. He brings a lot of subtlety and nuance to the performance that really adds to the character overall. Walking alone on the street and he signs to himself as if he's just talking to himself like a normal person. His face isn't more expressive than it needs to be which I loved. It felt like his character was naturally a quiet guy beyond the deaf mute thing and Arkin doesn't turn it into some sort of pantomime performance. He connects with other characters and shows empathy and patience and tries to do what's right and find the good. Arkin has to do so much while also doing so little and he allows us to connect with the character because he makes him almost universal but unique. It's just a really fantastic performance and I especially love when people can create something complete from very little. His deaf mute character is a person, not just a stereotype and it makes the ending so heartbreaking and emotional. Everyone should watch this film just to see Arkin's performance.
Alan Bates - The Fixer
This film, to me, was pretty interesting. It's one of those films that no one has really heard of, let alone seen, so it's neat to go into it without any expectations. I've seen Bates in quite a few other films on this journey but this was his first and only nomination. It seems appropriate that he earned a nomination because he was in so many films that were seemingly loved by the Academy. This film is about a Russian Jew who goes into hiding because the Jews are being arrested and killed and helps rescue a government official who is passed out drunk in the snow. Official guy gives him money and let him stay at his big house and then his daughter tries to sleep with Bates. Eventually, he gets found out to be a Jew and is jailed and tortured over some made up charge of killing a boy in a ritual sacrifice and then accused of being a part of a Jewish revolution. The film is obviously about the mistreatment of Jews in Russia and how Bates' character deals with all of it while maintaining his innocence. He's a really good guy who just happens to be of a different culture and is punished for that reason. Bates is very good at playing up the innocent man and getting you to become emotionally vested in dire circumstances. He is incredulous at the accusations of killing a boy and even becomes tearful at the description which shows us his humanity but to the accusers looks like guilt. There's a lot of strength in this performance from Bates who has to show us a broken man who still tries to carry on and maintain his innocence. He doesn't play it as purely a victim, there's humanity in the performance as well as some righteous anger and contempt at times. But it's the emotion at the core of the performance that makes this an interesting nomination to actually watch. The pain is real and heartfelt and we as an audience feel it ourselves. I will say the film drags on a bit too long and Bates has a lot of scenes in his cell where he is losing his sanity that sometimes are brilliant and sometimes seem a bit much. It's not really Bates' fault, though, as he does a great job with the heavy material in the second half of the film. I won't even get into the fact that everyone has British accents in a film about Russians and Russian Jews. It's a good performance and this is the kind of thing I like experiencing with this project.
Ron Moody - Oliver!
Moody originated this role on the London stage adaptation but wasn't even the first choice for the producers of this film. He was a fall back choice it seemed, but it worked out pretty well for all involved. How many times have we seen stage roles get nominated at the Oscars with the same person in each? There are so many of these types of nominations you wonder why producers don't just go with what works instead of trying to get Peter O'Toole or Peter Sellers to star for you. Moody, in case you don't know, plays Fagin. He is the head of the gang of young pickpocket kids and is that sort of stereotypical old Jewish creepy looking guy. Obviously Moody is done up to look at bit more villainous and scary (though Bill Sikes is the real villain in this film unlike the book). Moody plays the role perfectly to me. He has created it and lived within it for so long it comes off as natural. His singing and dancing is effortless and he gets you liking him at times, too, even though he's not the greatest guy ever. This is a musical and Fagin has one of the more memorable songs in "You've Got to Pick a Pocket or Two." He's good with the songs and being animatedly villainous but ultimately with a good heart, I think. He just wants to steal stuff and hide away and not get mixed up with kidnapping and all that, even though he employs child labor but whatever. I think that Moody gets swept up with the love for Oliver! and gets his nomination that way and maybe as a hey, we recognize you from the stage version kinda thing. But Moody is good as Fagin and it's very much his role and it's one of those things you take away remembering about this film. Before I had even seen the film, I knew of Fagin and that's due in part to Moody doing a good job in the role and being memorable enough to make it to the pop culture lexicon. It's a good performance but was never going to seriously win.
Peter O'Toole - The Lion in Winter
Peter O'Toole deserved an acting Oscar over his long and storied career. The Academy had many chances to do so and this was one of those instances. O'Toole plays Henry II, the second time he was nominated for playing the monarch (Becket being the other time). O'Toole looks and feels comfortable in the role and he is on the top of his game here. I fully believe that starring opposite of Katharine Hepburn helped balance out this performance. By that I mean, O'Toole can be a bit theatrical in some of his roles, but he is balanced here with Hepburn's old Hollywood style and the two create some memorable performances. It's a treat watching the two acting titans go toe to toe with each other without upstaging the other. The film and this performance can be described as intense. Henry II has brought his sons together and estranged Queen to name an heir. So there are lots of twists and turns as he flip flops on who to choose and there are many intense scenes of actors just talking or arguing back and forth and it's fun to watch. That's mainly what the film is as a whole which is lots of dialogue and actors going against one another in a room. O'Toole is a big part of why this film is successful and it's simply because he is one of the best actors to ever live giving some of his best work on screen. A lot of that work is in how he can play all these different emotions with the character. He can be righteously angry, mired in grief, clever and cunning, tender and passionate. He can turn on those emotions in the blink of an eye and always makes it look convincing and well measured. He takes us through those twists and turns and keeps us hooked. It's a great performance from a great actor - simple as that.
A lot of people feel like this is one of the worst Best Actor decisions ever. I'm inclined to agree that this is not a good win. Peter O'Toole is the absolute and correct winner without a second thought. His Hnery II is so freaking good. Especially over a retarded role that becomes smart. I am actually also really into Arkin's role who has to do so much without ever saying a word. And he acts it as if it's a normal role. He doesn't overact and just plays his character. If not for O'Toole, Arkin is my winner hands down. So freaking good. I actually like what Alan Bates did over Robertson because he had a tougher assignment. He had to play a Russian Jew tortured and acting against himself in a cell and had to show a lot of emotion. Robertson is decent but not at all a good winner. I don't like retarded persons being subject to wins or even nominations. I don't think the acting is ever authentic or worthy of these people. Moody brings up the rear because he just is there. Not a very good performance or role and just not at all exciting in this group of pretty exciting performances. Can't wait for the next year.
Oscar Winner: Cliff Robertson - Charly
My Winner: Peter O'Toole - The Lion in Winter
Alan Arkin
Alan Bates
Cliff Robertson
Ron Moody
No comments:
Post a Comment