I do this in reverse order so when I reach Best Picture, I'm all ranted or controversied out. I think of topics to spend my forewords to talk about but forget them when it comes time to write them down. I've got nothing here other than let's get the fuck to 1996 because I'm sick of 1997!
1997 Best Picture
Titanic
Wow, it's been a long time since I've actually watched Titanic start to finish. This came out when I was in middle school and I hated it without even seeing it because it was such a huge phenomenon that you couldn't escape hearing about the film if you tried. Plus, I just thought it was a stupid love story and I was not about that when I was in middle school. I never got the hype back then and I'm still not sure I understand it today but whatever. Titanic has a lot going for it as a film. The opening is amazing and really sets the tone of just how epic the film is going to be with the whole underwater submersible vehicle thing inspecting the wreck on the ocean floor. You kinda get the sense that this was a real thing that happened and is more than just a film. The thing Titanic has going for it is how epic and impressive the sets and scope of the film are, or at least how they look. The engine room is remarkable to behold even if they used tricks to make it seem bigger than it was. The ship itself is so grand and awe inspiring that it sucks you in completely and you want to watch just so you can see everything the ship has to offer and what it all looks like. The visual effects are the best thing about the film, just watch the sinking of the ship to see what I mean. It's intense, sure, but also marvelous in how they were able to pull that off because it is quite the sight. The romance part between Jack and Rose is also good because they have such great chemistry between them that it makes it very believable. My issue is that the story isn't the best thing going for it and has too many boring parts that needed to be trimmed down or cut out. The film is over three hours long and there are times when it feels like it, mostly due to the story. Titanic is all about the spectacle and the story takes a backseat to it which is why I don't think the film is as good as it's box office draw and Oscar count. There's a lot to like but I wouldn't call it a complete film. Still, the visual effects and sheer enormity of the undertaking is extremely impressive and definitely makes this a must watch and a really good film, period.
As Good as It Gets
I had heard so many good things about this film since it was one of those mature dramedies, leaning more heavily on comedy that I was stoked to finally watch it. I knew it was a big hit back in 1997 as it was talked about everywhere. Then I finally watched it and am sitting here wondering what all the fuss was about. For one thing, I thought this film was going to be a lot funnier than it was but its humor is not as abundant as I was lead to believe. Sure, there were parts where I laughed, but most of the time I thought the humor fell totally flat. The film has decent acting but I also think just how good they are is overstated and I say this knowing it won both Best Actor and Actress which makes me look silly but I wasn't into either winner all that much. The story, however, is where this film just doesn't really work for me. In the beginning we see Nicholson's character as this really negative OCD guy who no one likes, the joke being that he writes well received books about love. That little tidbit is never really explored even though it could have been put to exceptional use. Anyway, the story has Nicholson, who hates his gay neighbor and dog, warm up to them after Kinnear is attacked viciously in his home (which is so glossed over that it makes my head spin). Nicholson also offers to care for Hunt's son because he wants his favorite waitress at his breakfast spot because no one else there can stand to wait on him. Eventually the three go on a road trip for Kinnear to ask his parents for money and they all connect and eventually Nicholson admits he loves Hunt and they fall in love and that he likes Kinnear even though he seemed to hate gays so vehemently at the beginning. The story sucks because that change in persona is not earned at all. I never believed the love story between Hunt and Nicholson and never felt it was earned even after the road trip. So my problem is that there are so many things about this film that I can't believe based on what I saw in the beginning. Everything feels forced in that tidy Hollywood way that I'd tolerate it if it was at least laugh out loud funny, but it's not! To me, this is just one of those middling type of mature comedy films that adults are supposed to like because of the more sophisticated themes and all that nonsense. But the film should at least be believable and good all the way through. As Good as It Gets is not. I found it somewhat boring save for some okay performances. A little harsh but this is Best Picture, damn it!
The Full Monty
If you were to point to a film that looks like it doesn't belong on a list of Best Picture nominees, this would be an easy choice. This was also the last of the feel good, crowd pleasing British comedies that somehow got nominated year after year in the 90s. Though I did read a comment on a blog that said this was the only real competition for Best Picture to Titanic because it actually won the SAG for Outstanding Performance by a Cast and cleaned up at the BAFTAs, while also being the highest grossing film in the UK until, well, Titanic happened later. So that all kind of boggled my mind that this film was so popular and so almost a Best Picture winner, at least in theory. It tells the tale of some blokes from Sheffield who are struggling because the steel jobs are all gone and they have to provide for their families and so they come up with the idea of dancing like the Chippendales except they are all regular looking dudes. Simple story told in the humorous British way that apparently people couldn't get enough of that year. I remember the hype being all over the place, though I never saw it back then. So why was it such a cultural phenomenon? Well for one, it's pretty funny. It's that British humor but I think it translates well enough to be universal. Second, it's working class, so it's pretty relatable for a large portion of the population. And of course America loves it's working class heroes, even if they are ugly British strippers. Third, it's pretty flipping entertaining. It might not be high art or a very serious film, but it is simply entertaining. You can watch it and enjoy it and have a laugh and feel good, all while feeling cultural because it's British. Win/win. I can see why this did so well out of the blue because it reaches out to everyone and offers something to them. It's a very entertaining film and though I had my reservations about it being included in the Best Picture group, I think it probably should be here, especially since it did so well and was so universally liked. I think the one thing I could change about it is if it actually delivered on its full monty promise. We only get the behind look and not the actual full nudity with dicks hanging. I think that would have made this so memorable if at the end it ends with the unexpected. Instead, it's almost as if we are cheated from the whole point of the film. Either way The Full Monty is very entertaining and fits in fine among the Best Picture nominees.
Good Will Hunting
When I got to Good Will Hunting I was like, "ah man, I've already seen this thing so many times!" but I decided to put it on for about 10-20 minutes before I fell asleep and it completely sucked me in. Next thing I know it's over an hour later and it's after 130am and I'm like I gotta go to sleep! So I did finish it the next day but the film had me from the beginning because it's vastly entertaining. The thing is, this film has been parodied so much over the years that it actually looks silly and cliche in a lot of its scenes. I'm sure I'll say something similar when I hit Jerry Maguire, but these films are parodied because they are endlessly entertaining. And that's what I think Good Will Hunting has going for it. The writing can be pretty hokey at times even if it did give Matt and Ben an Oscar. Especially since it reads like a South Boston kid's ultimate fantasy: guy is a genius but works as a janitor and solves equations on chalkboards with ease all while getting the pretty Harvard girl while staying true to the Southie roots. Again, it all goes back to entertainment and Matt and Ben know how to make an entertaining film. It helps that we get some pretty good acting out of the cast and some really interesting directing from Gus Van Sant making the film look better than it probably should. It's also pretty damn sincere. I'd believe that Matt and Ben wrote this from the heart because deep down it's a genuinely goodhearted story. It's easy to see why the Academy would fall so hard for this little indie film, which is what it was, because I'm sure a lot of them had wish they had made something just like this for their debut. Is it the best film of the year? Of course not, but it is a lot of fun to watch and I'm okay with the Academy including it here.
L.A. Confidential
I don't know why I had such a time writing this one because I think L.A. Confidential is a masterpiece. It should be held in high regard like so many of the other classics you read about all the time, yet this film never gets the praise it deserves. It seems like more of an afterthought when people talk about the Oscars or Best Picture snubs because it ran into the Titanic monstrosity. It's a neo-noir film about corruption amongst the police ranks in the LAPD and riffs on old Hollywood as well. I feel like noir is a very hard film genre to pull off while not looking too hokey and B movie-esque, especially in modern times like 1997. The genre was done to death back in the 40s and 50s with some truly remarkable films that set the standard with which everyone else copied from. Much like when an actually good Western film comes out nowadays, it's not only a revelation and an event, it highlights just how tough it is to pull off a genre that was so saturated at one point. L.A. Confidential broke the mold and gave us a gripping, intense, powerful, and masterfully done bit of noir for a modern audience. There's so much going on in the story yet everything is easy to follow. There's layers to peel back and search through and it's a satisfying feeling to do so, it doesn't come off as too much or as being too dense. The acting is phenomenal, buoyed by the three main cops all giving excellent performances. Hard to believe that this film launched the careers of both Guy Pearce and Russell Crowe who were basically unknowns in America. They deserved some Oscar love because they are what make the film so intriguing and so enjoyable. The look of the film is great, too, and I'm glad they decided to shoot it in a modern style instead of trying to ape the old movies and do it in black and white. It gives the film a lot more weight as a serious picture and throughout the film there is this intensity buzzing from scene to scene. It's hard to describe for me but it just kept me glued what was going on, like I was on some ride of impending doom or a runaway car or something. That's where I can say the pacing keeps this film tight and fast paced and helps keep the story on track. L.A. Confidential is a film that I can immerse myself in time and time again and never get sick of it. I wish we could get more noir-ish films like this made these days because the genre is so compelling and I feel like today's Hollywood could find something interesting to say about the genre. This is right up there with best non winners in Oscar history.
This is a pretty good Best Picture group. At first glance you're going to automatically dismiss The Full Monty and you absolutely should not because it is so entertaining. That was something Oscar was all about in the 90s was including the crowd pleasing box office smash. One reason the Academy went to a 5-10 possible result was because of films like that, which may have taken a spot from a serious contender but fully deserved to be in the race as well. So the expansion allows everything to be included which is great because we don't have the arguments of I can't believe that comedy or that film got in over such and such. I say all that and The Full Monty is my 3rd favorite! Titanic gets the second spot because it's influential and because the effects are so damn good. I get it's win but I think L.A. Confidential is a perfect film. It deserves to be recognized as one of the best films of all time and I'll continue to champion it as much as I can because it's fucking good. I'll watch it over and over and never get sick of it. If it had won, it would be regarded in the top 15 of Best Picture winners, easily. My 4th would be Good Will Hunting because I'd rather watch it and it's corniness than As Good as it Gets again. That latter film is just boring when all is said and done. At least Matt and Ben's film has heart and soul. How bout dem apples, eh? A great group to watch, no doubt.
Oscar Winner: Titanic
My Winner: L.A. Confidential
Titanic
The Full Monty
Good Will Hunting
As Good as It Gets
Showing posts with label 1997. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1997. Show all posts
Thursday, March 10, 2016
Leading Actor 1997
Besides Damon, I've seen none of these so that's exciting for me,
especially given the names attached. I just hope those names live up to
their previous billings! No rant for this category, so let's get to it.
1997 Best Actor
Jack Nicholson - As Good as It Gets
Here's Jack Nicholson playing Jack Nicholson. I kid somewhat but it's mostly true. While his About Schmidt performance has way more humor in it, the two are similar in a lot of ways. It's like Nicholson is pushing a bunch of the same notes in his performance but just in a slightly different order. In this film, he's an angry, self-absorbed writer with extreme OCD who has absolutely no tact, calling people derogatory names and saying whatever he's thinking however unpleasant that may be. It's as if the OCD thing should somehow excuse the abhorrent behavior. This character comes off very strong in the beginning which is probably why I have a hard time believing in his sudden change of heart into being a decent human being because he loves Hunt's character and also got to know his gay neighbor. Nicholson gives a strong performance and honestly, he's Jack Nicholson, he's going to give great performances. He's very domineering in this film at first, partly because of the persona, but also because that's just how good Nicholson is as actor. He takes over scenes probably without even meaning to do it. A lot of the Nicholson traits are present and work well for the character, my thing is that I just don't buy the 180 he does as a character. Nicholson is able to get by on his charisma and legacy but does rely on it a little too much in this performance, as he would in his later films. Nicholson has his moments where he is the best thing about the film and others where he ends up getting let down by the script and can't overcome it. It's a likable Nicholson performance but it definitely has it's flaws.
Matt Damon - Good Will Hunting
This was Damon's breakout role in the movie he wrote with his buddy Ben Affleck. So naturally he shines in the big part of Will Hunting. The movie is basically a fantasy as Damon gets to play the genius from Southie who upsets the intellectual elite in Boston by working as a janitor and in construction and getting the pretty, smart, British girl all while being kind of an asshole. Damon still displays his every man charm, the one he's been riffing off of for 20 years now and has made a career out of. His The Martian nomination is all about what he started with this character. The ability to charm the audience and get us rooting for him even if we aren't quite sure why we are other than he's a main character. Damon is good in this role because he's able to play two different sides of himself very well. He's the charming genius who is loyally devoted to his friends and he also is the douchebag genius who revels in letting the intellectual elite know just how easy he can do the proofs they spend years and months on all while squandering his potential because of bullshit ideals of staying true to his roots. The character is pretty layered and Damon is able to convey all of those layers easily and transition between the different sides of his character with little effort. It's impressive because the movie is resting squarely on his shoulders and if he were to falter the whole thing would come crashing down. Luckily, his performance works and we get an entertaining movie that might be a little goofy at times but is full of heart - much like Damon's performance, even if it's a little raw.
Robert Duvall - The Apostle
The Academy really loves to nominate passion projects, which is something about the Oscars that I've learned since doing this passion project. Duvall wrote, directed, produced, and starred in this film which is always impressive to me. But if it's your passion project and you're working on it for years and years, when you finally get to make it you better knock it the fuck out of the park! You can't go through all that and have it suck. Maybe that's why the Academy has honored Duvall and Ed Harris and Glenn Close among others with nominations because they know the dedication in spending years of your life trying to create something. Duvall surely does create something here. This is a terrific performance and Duvall really inhabits the role of a troubled preacher who starts up a new church in a small town. Duvall is great at becoming possessed by God like many televangelists and back water revivalists are. I was thinking that acting in that specific way has to be pretty easy and an actor's wet dream to be able to be as loud and ridiculous as possible. But Duvall showed you have to be great to make it believable. I'm sure anyone could go off shouting about the Lord but few could make you believe he was truly one with the Holy Spirit. There's more than just the shouting preacher to Duvall's performance, however, as we see him as a man quick to anger and dole out his own spiritual justice. The turns he makes from preacher to combatant mesh so well it can be hard to tell them apart. Duvall's character explains it as something divine but we know it's just an excuse to try and get away with kicking someone's ass or putting them into a coma. I thought in the beginning we were going to get this arrogant preacher who has anger issues and deals with his members and wife and church with the same slick hatred and conniving tactics to keep himself in power. The film defies my expectations when he goes on the run and settles in a small town and the film becomes this intimate man making amends but also satisfying his urge to be the Word of God because of his need for control and power of something. Duvall is fantastic especially during this part of the film when he's enthusiastic about building his new church and congregation that we start rooting him on. He dances on that fine line between sincerity and snake oil salesman and he's a treat to watch. I said that if you're going to devote years of your life to a passion project, you'd better knock it out of the park. Well, Duvall hits a grand slam because this is a role and performance and film he should be better known for. He is the Apostle, through and through. This is a must watch for Duvall's performance and I'm glad the Academy nominated him so I could watch this.
Peter Fonda - Ulee's Gold
This movie doesn't have a very good start to it. Let me back up a second and say that I'd heard good things about this performance all over the place. This was one of the first Best Actor performances I'd never heard of at all. I'd never heard of Ulee's Gold and I was very much alive in 1997. So I was intrigued at what the Academy might have unearthed so to speak that people seemed to like a lot. Most of the praise was that Fonda evoked his father in this performance because it's a quietly strong man trying to deal with life on his own terms. He doesn't say a whole lot and has that morally good quality to him. Yeah sure, he reminds you of his father Henry but let's not get carried away now. The movie does start off poorly like I said. The writing is just bad and comes off sounding like someone's first attempt at writing a script. The acting all around is wooden and awkward and subpar, including Fonda. This is a small indie movie about Fonda who is a beekeeper in North Florida who takes care of his son's daughters while he's in jail and then gets their junkie mother from Orlando. It starts out really rough, but once it settles in and the script gets a little bit better, Fonda's performance benefits and looks a lot better. It honestly reminds me of a mix of Clint Eastwood and some Henry Fonda, with the weariness of keeping a family together and the whole stern, breathy voice. At least you can say Fonda gives this performance his heart and soul, as I think that's pretty evident here. It's quiet as already stated but also strong, clunky writing be damned. Fonda is better the further he gets away from that writing so towards the end where he doesn't speak as much, the performance is best. I can see what all the critics loved about it but I do still think they are conveniently overlooking the flaws and exaggerating the strengths of the performance. If this was me in the role of Ulee, this isn't getting nominated. It's nomination is in large part because of the name as it is the performance. I really do like the beekeeping stuff, also, as it is pretty fascinating. It helps that Fonda's dad also kept bees so Peter at least had that experience to draw on for those scenes, which helps. So it does have that going for it but let's not make it seem like this is a can't miss performance. Fonda is good but I liked other performances in this group more.
Dustin Hoffman - Wag the Dog
A lot has been said about Wag the Dog already, but it's still amazing that this political satire that basically mirrored the Clinton scandal came out months before any of that actually happened. It's a pretty funny film, made funnier by the real life events that came later and is funny in large part due to Hoffman's performance. This is not much of a challenging role for Hoffman, but it's one he nails regardless of how difficult it is. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role and that translates to a very good performance. He plays a Hollywood producer who is enlisted to help start a fake war to get the pressure off the president having an affair, or I think it was sexual harassment in the film, and is determined to make his war a worthy production. I love that Hoffman's character treats the whole thing like a big budget movie, always pushing for his vision to be realized and getting agitated when things don't work out his way just like a movie producer would. He's totally invested in his product and detached from even caring about it's real world implications. He doesn't care about the political and real life part, he just wants his war to be well done and to his specifications. He treats the President like an actor and the whole thing is just really hilarious to me. Hoffman portrays the producer perfectly, infusing his work with a sense of pride at getting the job done and singular determinism at making sure it work even with all the hitches and hiccups. He plays it like a producer should without any big emotional points or loud acting, just getting the war and it's components done like it was any other movie. It may not be Hoffman's best work but he's really good in the role and brings a lot of humor to it as well. I'm glad this performance is included because it's really entertaining and Hoffman deserves to be here.
Overall, this is a pretty damn good group. There's not a performance I dislike at all and that's a rare thing. It's interesting because when I looked down the years at what I had to watch, this jumped out with two films I'd never heard of being nominated in Duvall and Fonda. I liked Duvall so much I made him my winner. That's a performance that would make a top 10 or so of the decade, probably. Fonda started out awful but redeemed himself and made for an interesting performance to be my 3rd guy. Hoffman would actually slot in between those as number two because his performance was just so fun and humorous. Amazing that he shot that with Barry Levinson while on a break from them making The Sphere. That was done as like a distraction! That's crazy. Anyway, I liked him a lot in that film. Now, Nicholson is my 4th because it's not that great compared to his other stuff, before and after, and honestly I'd rather Fonda win this year than Jack. It just didn't do much for me. Damon comes in last because he's still pretty green and his performance is not fully fleshed out. But hey, I'll take a category like this at any time. Give me categories where I like every performance and I'll be happy.
Oscar Winner: Jack Nicholson - As Good as It Gets
My Winner: Robert Duvall - The Apostle
Dustin Hoffman
Peter Fonda
Jack Nicholson
Matt Damon
1997 Best Actor
Jack Nicholson - As Good as It Gets
Here's Jack Nicholson playing Jack Nicholson. I kid somewhat but it's mostly true. While his About Schmidt performance has way more humor in it, the two are similar in a lot of ways. It's like Nicholson is pushing a bunch of the same notes in his performance but just in a slightly different order. In this film, he's an angry, self-absorbed writer with extreme OCD who has absolutely no tact, calling people derogatory names and saying whatever he's thinking however unpleasant that may be. It's as if the OCD thing should somehow excuse the abhorrent behavior. This character comes off very strong in the beginning which is probably why I have a hard time believing in his sudden change of heart into being a decent human being because he loves Hunt's character and also got to know his gay neighbor. Nicholson gives a strong performance and honestly, he's Jack Nicholson, he's going to give great performances. He's very domineering in this film at first, partly because of the persona, but also because that's just how good Nicholson is as actor. He takes over scenes probably without even meaning to do it. A lot of the Nicholson traits are present and work well for the character, my thing is that I just don't buy the 180 he does as a character. Nicholson is able to get by on his charisma and legacy but does rely on it a little too much in this performance, as he would in his later films. Nicholson has his moments where he is the best thing about the film and others where he ends up getting let down by the script and can't overcome it. It's a likable Nicholson performance but it definitely has it's flaws.
Matt Damon - Good Will Hunting
This was Damon's breakout role in the movie he wrote with his buddy Ben Affleck. So naturally he shines in the big part of Will Hunting. The movie is basically a fantasy as Damon gets to play the genius from Southie who upsets the intellectual elite in Boston by working as a janitor and in construction and getting the pretty, smart, British girl all while being kind of an asshole. Damon still displays his every man charm, the one he's been riffing off of for 20 years now and has made a career out of. His The Martian nomination is all about what he started with this character. The ability to charm the audience and get us rooting for him even if we aren't quite sure why we are other than he's a main character. Damon is good in this role because he's able to play two different sides of himself very well. He's the charming genius who is loyally devoted to his friends and he also is the douchebag genius who revels in letting the intellectual elite know just how easy he can do the proofs they spend years and months on all while squandering his potential because of bullshit ideals of staying true to his roots. The character is pretty layered and Damon is able to convey all of those layers easily and transition between the different sides of his character with little effort. It's impressive because the movie is resting squarely on his shoulders and if he were to falter the whole thing would come crashing down. Luckily, his performance works and we get an entertaining movie that might be a little goofy at times but is full of heart - much like Damon's performance, even if it's a little raw.
Robert Duvall - The Apostle
The Academy really loves to nominate passion projects, which is something about the Oscars that I've learned since doing this passion project. Duvall wrote, directed, produced, and starred in this film which is always impressive to me. But if it's your passion project and you're working on it for years and years, when you finally get to make it you better knock it the fuck out of the park! You can't go through all that and have it suck. Maybe that's why the Academy has honored Duvall and Ed Harris and Glenn Close among others with nominations because they know the dedication in spending years of your life trying to create something. Duvall surely does create something here. This is a terrific performance and Duvall really inhabits the role of a troubled preacher who starts up a new church in a small town. Duvall is great at becoming possessed by God like many televangelists and back water revivalists are. I was thinking that acting in that specific way has to be pretty easy and an actor's wet dream to be able to be as loud and ridiculous as possible. But Duvall showed you have to be great to make it believable. I'm sure anyone could go off shouting about the Lord but few could make you believe he was truly one with the Holy Spirit. There's more than just the shouting preacher to Duvall's performance, however, as we see him as a man quick to anger and dole out his own spiritual justice. The turns he makes from preacher to combatant mesh so well it can be hard to tell them apart. Duvall's character explains it as something divine but we know it's just an excuse to try and get away with kicking someone's ass or putting them into a coma. I thought in the beginning we were going to get this arrogant preacher who has anger issues and deals with his members and wife and church with the same slick hatred and conniving tactics to keep himself in power. The film defies my expectations when he goes on the run and settles in a small town and the film becomes this intimate man making amends but also satisfying his urge to be the Word of God because of his need for control and power of something. Duvall is fantastic especially during this part of the film when he's enthusiastic about building his new church and congregation that we start rooting him on. He dances on that fine line between sincerity and snake oil salesman and he's a treat to watch. I said that if you're going to devote years of your life to a passion project, you'd better knock it out of the park. Well, Duvall hits a grand slam because this is a role and performance and film he should be better known for. He is the Apostle, through and through. This is a must watch for Duvall's performance and I'm glad the Academy nominated him so I could watch this.
Peter Fonda - Ulee's Gold
This movie doesn't have a very good start to it. Let me back up a second and say that I'd heard good things about this performance all over the place. This was one of the first Best Actor performances I'd never heard of at all. I'd never heard of Ulee's Gold and I was very much alive in 1997. So I was intrigued at what the Academy might have unearthed so to speak that people seemed to like a lot. Most of the praise was that Fonda evoked his father in this performance because it's a quietly strong man trying to deal with life on his own terms. He doesn't say a whole lot and has that morally good quality to him. Yeah sure, he reminds you of his father Henry but let's not get carried away now. The movie does start off poorly like I said. The writing is just bad and comes off sounding like someone's first attempt at writing a script. The acting all around is wooden and awkward and subpar, including Fonda. This is a small indie movie about Fonda who is a beekeeper in North Florida who takes care of his son's daughters while he's in jail and then gets their junkie mother from Orlando. It starts out really rough, but once it settles in and the script gets a little bit better, Fonda's performance benefits and looks a lot better. It honestly reminds me of a mix of Clint Eastwood and some Henry Fonda, with the weariness of keeping a family together and the whole stern, breathy voice. At least you can say Fonda gives this performance his heart and soul, as I think that's pretty evident here. It's quiet as already stated but also strong, clunky writing be damned. Fonda is better the further he gets away from that writing so towards the end where he doesn't speak as much, the performance is best. I can see what all the critics loved about it but I do still think they are conveniently overlooking the flaws and exaggerating the strengths of the performance. If this was me in the role of Ulee, this isn't getting nominated. It's nomination is in large part because of the name as it is the performance. I really do like the beekeeping stuff, also, as it is pretty fascinating. It helps that Fonda's dad also kept bees so Peter at least had that experience to draw on for those scenes, which helps. So it does have that going for it but let's not make it seem like this is a can't miss performance. Fonda is good but I liked other performances in this group more.
Dustin Hoffman - Wag the Dog
A lot has been said about Wag the Dog already, but it's still amazing that this political satire that basically mirrored the Clinton scandal came out months before any of that actually happened. It's a pretty funny film, made funnier by the real life events that came later and is funny in large part due to Hoffman's performance. This is not much of a challenging role for Hoffman, but it's one he nails regardless of how difficult it is. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role and that translates to a very good performance. He plays a Hollywood producer who is enlisted to help start a fake war to get the pressure off the president having an affair, or I think it was sexual harassment in the film, and is determined to make his war a worthy production. I love that Hoffman's character treats the whole thing like a big budget movie, always pushing for his vision to be realized and getting agitated when things don't work out his way just like a movie producer would. He's totally invested in his product and detached from even caring about it's real world implications. He doesn't care about the political and real life part, he just wants his war to be well done and to his specifications. He treats the President like an actor and the whole thing is just really hilarious to me. Hoffman portrays the producer perfectly, infusing his work with a sense of pride at getting the job done and singular determinism at making sure it work even with all the hitches and hiccups. He plays it like a producer should without any big emotional points or loud acting, just getting the war and it's components done like it was any other movie. It may not be Hoffman's best work but he's really good in the role and brings a lot of humor to it as well. I'm glad this performance is included because it's really entertaining and Hoffman deserves to be here.
Overall, this is a pretty damn good group. There's not a performance I dislike at all and that's a rare thing. It's interesting because when I looked down the years at what I had to watch, this jumped out with two films I'd never heard of being nominated in Duvall and Fonda. I liked Duvall so much I made him my winner. That's a performance that would make a top 10 or so of the decade, probably. Fonda started out awful but redeemed himself and made for an interesting performance to be my 3rd guy. Hoffman would actually slot in between those as number two because his performance was just so fun and humorous. Amazing that he shot that with Barry Levinson while on a break from them making The Sphere. That was done as like a distraction! That's crazy. Anyway, I liked him a lot in that film. Now, Nicholson is my 4th because it's not that great compared to his other stuff, before and after, and honestly I'd rather Fonda win this year than Jack. It just didn't do much for me. Damon comes in last because he's still pretty green and his performance is not fully fleshed out. But hey, I'll take a category like this at any time. Give me categories where I like every performance and I'll be happy.
Oscar Winner: Jack Nicholson - As Good as It Gets
My Winner: Robert Duvall - The Apostle
Dustin Hoffman
Peter Fonda
Jack Nicholson
Matt Damon
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Leading Actress 1997
I never know the best way to facilitate doing these categories. I mean I always start in the same order but when say Supporting Actress has a film that has 3-4-5 nominees that I have to write about, should I start there first and knock out a couple reviews with one film? Or should I start with the single nominee films because it's quicker to write and I don't get bogged down in writing about the same film for hour and hours and days and days when I'm worn out writing about American Hustle or similarly nominated films? Should I mix them together to give myself a break? Or should I (like I did for this year) do the most nominee'd ones first? I knocked out 11 reviews for just 3 films this year but was mentally fatigued after! I worry that towards the end my writing begins to suffer and I can't make any good points or observations or tap into what I'm really feeling and trying to say about something. I'll probably keep mixing it up as I go with whatever suits me at the time. Figured I'd give a look into my thought process for this project. I haven't seen any of them besides Winslet so hopefully that works out well!
1997 Best Actress
Helen Hunt - As Good as It Gets
There's an Oscar factoid that whenever I read about Hunt for this film, it was accompanied by the mention that when Jack Nicholson won his three Oscars, the Best Actress winner also came from the same film. I just also wanted to mention that fact so I wouldn't be the odd man out. As for Helen Hunt, she is up to the task of matching Nicholson. We first meet her as the only waitress that can stand Nicholson's persona and we see she's tough and takes none of Jack's bullshit. Her character, however, has a sadness to her and she seems constantly on edge, which makes sense with her home life and caring for a sick child. Her comedic chops aren't too bad here, either, delivering them with some dripping sarcasm and wit helped most likely from her TV sitcom days. She has a great scene where she's arguing/talking with her mom and when she's done she gives this exasperated, honest "Okay" that comes off so amazing. The way she says that one word makes her performance that much better. It felt like an improv or add on or something like that. I say this because I think that's where Hunt succeeds is in the intimate moments with her mom, with Jack, with Kinnear. However, I still don't exactly buy the love story. It seems very forced to me, and I honestly can't picture Hunt and Nicholson together at all. I guess it's that she brings out the good in Nicholson's character but I just don't get it and I certainly wasn't rooting for them to fall in love or anything. I do like that Hunt's character calls Jack on his behavior and even threatens to stop seeing him when he continues to be his asshole self. That feels more real than their relationship. I guess I don't fully know how to judge Hunt's performance. She does a great job with her character and balances out Nicholson's domineering persona but I just don't feel all that attached to her. I'm watching her act and nodding that it's good but it's not compelling me to feel anything for her character. I think that's mostly on the film but still some falls on Hunt. She's good but not the one for me.
Helena Bonham Carter - The Wings of the Dove
This is a hard performance to review. Every so often I get hit with a performance that isn't bad at all but also doesn't leave me writing effusive praise. This is one of those that sort of falls in between the two extremes, though I wouldn't go so far as calling it meh. I actually quite liked Bonham Carter in this role, she really fit the Henry James woman well. Maybe because it is a Henry James adaptation that I can't rightfully dissect Bonham Carter's performance because it's so nuanced and layered. Maybe it's also because I don't have anything insightful to say other than I really enjoyed Bonham Carter's performance. Roger Ebert called it emotionally violent and I loved that phrase so much that I had to write it here. The film really is emotionally violent because even though Bonham Carter's character is in love with Merton and friends with Millie, she still schemes to use the two to get what she wants but in a more tender way. It's as if there is tact in all the lying and half truths and deceit. And Millie tolerates it even though she is wildly rich because she gets partly what she wants before she dies and Merton gets to travel with two beautiful women who both want him but use him all the same. It's a deeply layered film and Bonham Carter is the same way. She doesn't have any loud moments, she just remains diligently observing and steadfast in her lies and friendships. You watch it and know it's good but struggle to say why. I like the performance and I think Bonham Carter is very memorable in her role and that's good enough for me. I'm glad the Academy nominated her for this one.
Julie Christie - Afterglow
I'm sorry but I'm going to be harsh because this does not belong among those known as Oscar nominated. I don't care what Julie Christie has been nominated for in the past, this is a garbage movie. It might think it's clever in tying up it's threads at the end of it but it just reeks of cheesy. She's a housewife whose husband is a handy man (Nick Nolte) who bangs all of his customers and is generally having a lot of fun in his role. She isn't too loving and also had a child that wasn't Nolte's though told him it was until like 15 years later and he was mad and they've had marital strife ever since because that child ran away because she heard Nolte say she wasn't his and didn't love her or some crap. This movie sucks, first of all. Second, there's too much going on to really give a hoot about. Nolte is a philanderer but Christie decides to cheat too and cheats with the husband of the gal Nolte is currently banging, conveniently enough. Christie's performance is basically just jilted lover and bored housewife without being anything interesting. It's insanely boring and she does nothing worthy of being nominated! This has to be an example where the Academy saw the name and decided to vote for it because it sucks. She's meant to look all sexy in her 50s but just ends up looking dumb. It's barely a leading performance on top of being a boring performance. I'd say this is one of the least deserving nominations and one of the worst Oscar nominations ever. It's legit garbage.
Judi Dench - Mrs. Brown
I'll admit I was wary of this film and performance knowing it was Judi Dench playing another Queen role and backed by Miramax. I'll also admit my apprehension was unnecessary because this is a fantastic little film. This may have been Dench's first nomination but it honestly doesn't feel like it. By that I mean it takes all the strong parts of her other performances and throw them together and you'd get her portrayal of Queen Victoria. I've groaned about her playing the same role time and time again but this one felt fresh and new even though it was our first real introduction of her by way of the Oscars. Her performance as Victoria is very stately but I don't mean that in a stuffy, noble way. It's a very smart, measured performance that flows with her character wonderfully. In the beginning she is in mourning for the death of her husband Prince Albert and she is fittingly sort of dour and morose, going through the motions. Once John Brown arrives, he shakes her from her depressing stupor and gets her to liven up, as much as the Queen is able to in strict society. This doesn't happen in one big grand occasion but rather in a gradual way as we see Dench bring the character to life slowly. Towards the end we know she's more happy and sure of herself but we also see the confidence come back to her and we see the Queen become the Queen again. It's stellar work by Dench because this all comes along slowly but deliberately and doesn't feel forced or rushed or too slow, it feels just right. There's no doubt that Billy Connolly helps Dench out by giving his own masterful performance and Dench is able to play off his charisma and let him take the lead and bring her own character along accordingly. There's no pressure for Dench to do anything unnecessary with her character so we get a really thought out performance. I was surprised by how much I liked Dench and this film but it really is a great little film, in large part because of Connolly who is truly awesome in this. A well earned first nomination for Dench.
Kate Winslet - Titanic
I think people forget that Winslet was nominated once before this in a supporting role so it makes sense to me that she would be singled out again for a box office smash like Titanic was. I've read all sorts of arguments online about whether she really deserved a nomination for this role but it almost seems like how could the Academy not? She's the main actress in a billion dollar film and part of the reason why so many people loved it - it's really as simple as that. As for Winslet's performance, I always thought she was very stiff in the beginning of the film, like she was trying to figure out her character onscreen and how to act like an upper class lady. When she admonishes Jack for asking if she loves her fiance, that whole exchange is rather cringe worthy because it comes off as an actress unsure of how to really act. A bit harsh, yes, but when you compare that scene to her later ones you can really see the difference in her acting ability. Maybe it's part of the woes of establishing a character from the beginning but later Rose is a lot better than this. After her romance with Jack has had some time to blossom and she's fighting for her survival on the sinking ship, does Winslet really come into her own. Obviously her character grows more confident about who she is as the story unfolds and Winslet benefits in not having to play someone that's somewhat boring. It may not have been enough for a win but Winslet cemented herself as a leading lady and showed just how good she could be as evidenced by her later nominations and win. There's no doubt, however, that Winslet is Rose.
This was a decent enough group as far as Best Actress goes. I'm starting to resign myself that strong years from top to bottom will be very rare and I'm going to have to suffer through some bad films and performances to get to them. I at least know I'll have deserved it when I finally do! This year is not too bad, though Christie is the one true stinker. I just didn't like her performance at all and the movie was more movie of the week type stuff than an Oscar player. No thanks. Winslet is my 4th simply because she is so green and it shows in the beginning. She's good enough, but not for a win. This is where it gets muddled for me. I like Bonham Carter but I don't know if I articulated it well enough other than it being her presence, this would be my 2nd because it's at least memorable to me. Hunt just didn't do enough for me as a winner even though she held her own against Jack Nicholson. Dench surprised me in how much I liked her performance and the film. She looks better because of her co-star but she's plenty good on her own. I've admitted to being underwhelmed by some of her nominations in the past but not here. She is excellent in Mrs. Brown and deserves my win. A good group that could have been better without Christie.
Oscar Winner: Helen Hunt - As Good as It Gets
My Winner: Judi Dench - Mrs. Brown
Helena Bonham Carter
Helen Hunt
Kate Winslet
Julie Christie
1997 Best Actress
Helen Hunt - As Good as It Gets
There's an Oscar factoid that whenever I read about Hunt for this film, it was accompanied by the mention that when Jack Nicholson won his three Oscars, the Best Actress winner also came from the same film. I just also wanted to mention that fact so I wouldn't be the odd man out. As for Helen Hunt, she is up to the task of matching Nicholson. We first meet her as the only waitress that can stand Nicholson's persona and we see she's tough and takes none of Jack's bullshit. Her character, however, has a sadness to her and she seems constantly on edge, which makes sense with her home life and caring for a sick child. Her comedic chops aren't too bad here, either, delivering them with some dripping sarcasm and wit helped most likely from her TV sitcom days. She has a great scene where she's arguing/talking with her mom and when she's done she gives this exasperated, honest "Okay" that comes off so amazing. The way she says that one word makes her performance that much better. It felt like an improv or add on or something like that. I say this because I think that's where Hunt succeeds is in the intimate moments with her mom, with Jack, with Kinnear. However, I still don't exactly buy the love story. It seems very forced to me, and I honestly can't picture Hunt and Nicholson together at all. I guess it's that she brings out the good in Nicholson's character but I just don't get it and I certainly wasn't rooting for them to fall in love or anything. I do like that Hunt's character calls Jack on his behavior and even threatens to stop seeing him when he continues to be his asshole self. That feels more real than their relationship. I guess I don't fully know how to judge Hunt's performance. She does a great job with her character and balances out Nicholson's domineering persona but I just don't feel all that attached to her. I'm watching her act and nodding that it's good but it's not compelling me to feel anything for her character. I think that's mostly on the film but still some falls on Hunt. She's good but not the one for me.
Helena Bonham Carter - The Wings of the Dove
This is a hard performance to review. Every so often I get hit with a performance that isn't bad at all but also doesn't leave me writing effusive praise. This is one of those that sort of falls in between the two extremes, though I wouldn't go so far as calling it meh. I actually quite liked Bonham Carter in this role, she really fit the Henry James woman well. Maybe because it is a Henry James adaptation that I can't rightfully dissect Bonham Carter's performance because it's so nuanced and layered. Maybe it's also because I don't have anything insightful to say other than I really enjoyed Bonham Carter's performance. Roger Ebert called it emotionally violent and I loved that phrase so much that I had to write it here. The film really is emotionally violent because even though Bonham Carter's character is in love with Merton and friends with Millie, she still schemes to use the two to get what she wants but in a more tender way. It's as if there is tact in all the lying and half truths and deceit. And Millie tolerates it even though she is wildly rich because she gets partly what she wants before she dies and Merton gets to travel with two beautiful women who both want him but use him all the same. It's a deeply layered film and Bonham Carter is the same way. She doesn't have any loud moments, she just remains diligently observing and steadfast in her lies and friendships. You watch it and know it's good but struggle to say why. I like the performance and I think Bonham Carter is very memorable in her role and that's good enough for me. I'm glad the Academy nominated her for this one.
Julie Christie - Afterglow
I'm sorry but I'm going to be harsh because this does not belong among those known as Oscar nominated. I don't care what Julie Christie has been nominated for in the past, this is a garbage movie. It might think it's clever in tying up it's threads at the end of it but it just reeks of cheesy. She's a housewife whose husband is a handy man (Nick Nolte) who bangs all of his customers and is generally having a lot of fun in his role. She isn't too loving and also had a child that wasn't Nolte's though told him it was until like 15 years later and he was mad and they've had marital strife ever since because that child ran away because she heard Nolte say she wasn't his and didn't love her or some crap. This movie sucks, first of all. Second, there's too much going on to really give a hoot about. Nolte is a philanderer but Christie decides to cheat too and cheats with the husband of the gal Nolte is currently banging, conveniently enough. Christie's performance is basically just jilted lover and bored housewife without being anything interesting. It's insanely boring and she does nothing worthy of being nominated! This has to be an example where the Academy saw the name and decided to vote for it because it sucks. She's meant to look all sexy in her 50s but just ends up looking dumb. It's barely a leading performance on top of being a boring performance. I'd say this is one of the least deserving nominations and one of the worst Oscar nominations ever. It's legit garbage.
Judi Dench - Mrs. Brown
I'll admit I was wary of this film and performance knowing it was Judi Dench playing another Queen role and backed by Miramax. I'll also admit my apprehension was unnecessary because this is a fantastic little film. This may have been Dench's first nomination but it honestly doesn't feel like it. By that I mean it takes all the strong parts of her other performances and throw them together and you'd get her portrayal of Queen Victoria. I've groaned about her playing the same role time and time again but this one felt fresh and new even though it was our first real introduction of her by way of the Oscars. Her performance as Victoria is very stately but I don't mean that in a stuffy, noble way. It's a very smart, measured performance that flows with her character wonderfully. In the beginning she is in mourning for the death of her husband Prince Albert and she is fittingly sort of dour and morose, going through the motions. Once John Brown arrives, he shakes her from her depressing stupor and gets her to liven up, as much as the Queen is able to in strict society. This doesn't happen in one big grand occasion but rather in a gradual way as we see Dench bring the character to life slowly. Towards the end we know she's more happy and sure of herself but we also see the confidence come back to her and we see the Queen become the Queen again. It's stellar work by Dench because this all comes along slowly but deliberately and doesn't feel forced or rushed or too slow, it feels just right. There's no doubt that Billy Connolly helps Dench out by giving his own masterful performance and Dench is able to play off his charisma and let him take the lead and bring her own character along accordingly. There's no pressure for Dench to do anything unnecessary with her character so we get a really thought out performance. I was surprised by how much I liked Dench and this film but it really is a great little film, in large part because of Connolly who is truly awesome in this. A well earned first nomination for Dench.
Kate Winslet - Titanic
I think people forget that Winslet was nominated once before this in a supporting role so it makes sense to me that she would be singled out again for a box office smash like Titanic was. I've read all sorts of arguments online about whether she really deserved a nomination for this role but it almost seems like how could the Academy not? She's the main actress in a billion dollar film and part of the reason why so many people loved it - it's really as simple as that. As for Winslet's performance, I always thought she was very stiff in the beginning of the film, like she was trying to figure out her character onscreen and how to act like an upper class lady. When she admonishes Jack for asking if she loves her fiance, that whole exchange is rather cringe worthy because it comes off as an actress unsure of how to really act. A bit harsh, yes, but when you compare that scene to her later ones you can really see the difference in her acting ability. Maybe it's part of the woes of establishing a character from the beginning but later Rose is a lot better than this. After her romance with Jack has had some time to blossom and she's fighting for her survival on the sinking ship, does Winslet really come into her own. Obviously her character grows more confident about who she is as the story unfolds and Winslet benefits in not having to play someone that's somewhat boring. It may not have been enough for a win but Winslet cemented herself as a leading lady and showed just how good she could be as evidenced by her later nominations and win. There's no doubt, however, that Winslet is Rose.
This was a decent enough group as far as Best Actress goes. I'm starting to resign myself that strong years from top to bottom will be very rare and I'm going to have to suffer through some bad films and performances to get to them. I at least know I'll have deserved it when I finally do! This year is not too bad, though Christie is the one true stinker. I just didn't like her performance at all and the movie was more movie of the week type stuff than an Oscar player. No thanks. Winslet is my 4th simply because she is so green and it shows in the beginning. She's good enough, but not for a win. This is where it gets muddled for me. I like Bonham Carter but I don't know if I articulated it well enough other than it being her presence, this would be my 2nd because it's at least memorable to me. Hunt just didn't do enough for me as a winner even though she held her own against Jack Nicholson. Dench surprised me in how much I liked her performance and the film. She looks better because of her co-star but she's plenty good on her own. I've admitted to being underwhelmed by some of her nominations in the past but not here. She is excellent in Mrs. Brown and deserves my win. A good group that could have been better without Christie.
Oscar Winner: Helen Hunt - As Good as It Gets
My Winner: Judi Dench - Mrs. Brown
Helena Bonham Carter
Helen Hunt
Kate Winslet
Julie Christie
Sunday, March 6, 2016
Supporting Actor 1997
There's two films/performances in this group that I've been waiting to see for awhile so I'm pumped for that. I've seen the other three though I can't complain about having to watch them again. I have a feeling this is going to be another strong Supporting Actor group. On to my favorite category!
1997 Best Supporting Actor
Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
I always get this role mixed up with his Dead Poets Society one or at least I fuse them together. This one is the more grounded performance and I feel like it is one of Robin Williams' best of his career. He is the psychologist who is able to get through to Matt Damon's character in part because he's been in Damon's shoes before. That life experience is communicated well and contrasted at various points with how Will doesn't have much life experience and needs to get out and experience the world. It's believable to me that Williams was a genius who followed a girl instead of his intellectual pursuits and settled down into a comfortable life. I've talked a lot of about sincerity when discussing Good Will Hunting and Williams has it in spades here in this performance. His anger, resentment, hopefulness, embarrassment, pride, and love are real and palpable because Williams loses himself in the character. I don't care about accents as I've read a bit about how he doesn't have a convincing Boston accent and people putting down the performance for that. Who cares? It comes out every now and then but I'm focused on the character as a man and how he interacts with Will and it's very heartfelt and natural. Williams tones down his humor and antics but they are still there, just more subtle and more fitting for the role. I just really like how serious and helping Williams is in this role. He's able to blend together all the things we like about him and create a very relatable character. I think I might be in the minority on this one but I feel Williams more than holds his own in this film and delivers a very good performance.
Robert Forster - Jackie Brown
This was the last Tarantino film I hadn't watched and I can't really explain why I hadn't seen it until now, other than waiting to watch it for this performance. But hey, two new Tarantino films in one year for me! Though this film doesn't feel like typical Tarantino probably because it's his only film that is adapted from another source. Anyway, Forster plays a bail bondsman who becomes infatuated with Pam Grier's character and they hatch a plan to sort of double cross her weapons peddling boss and the cops who arrested her. He is the same Robert Forster as you've always known. The sour face, hard ass demeanor, tough looking dude playing an authority figure. The twist is that he falls for Pam Grier and we get to see the sensitive side. Forster plays a good guy and his helping out Grier feels genuine. His performance is good and adds to an overall decent film. By the end, you are rooting for him to go with Grier to Spain but I understand the choice to not have him go. He's the kind of guy that's married to his job and won't take any risks in forgoing all of that. And while Forster played his typical character, I really liked Robert De Niro in this film. His character was a bit quiet and a loner of sorts and I thought he really shined. But of course, this resurrected Forster's, and Grier's, careers so it makes sense that he would get the nomination from the film. It's good but it won't blow you away, much like his career overall.
Anthony Hopkins - Amistad
People forget that Amistad is a Steven Spielberg film but it undoubtedly is one. Anthony Hopkins is very much a Steven Spielberg character even though he's playing former President John Quincy Adams. By that I mean he's so morally good it's hard not to like him. It helps that he's arguing for the black people who were aboard the slave ship Amistad to be declared free men and returned to Africa. I mean, what is more righteous than that? Therein lies the typical Spielberg character and Hopkins does a fine job of portraying that ideal. It's actually a really likable character without being too righteous and perfect. Hopkins plays the elderly Adams with some vim and vigor, constantly having him on the move and looking like a doddering old fool when he's far from it. He's still sharp as a tack as evidenced by his introduction where he's sleeping in the House of Representatives while a colleague talks to him thinking he's asleep but Adams rebuts with a stinging barb all while eyes closed and feet up. That's the kind of man and character and performance we are dealing with. Hopkins has great fun with it and in turn we get to laugh and smile along with him at his whimsical but serious role. He's great, too, at giving one of those Spielberg speeches about some good thing this one being a speech to the Supreme Court. Hopkins shines in this moment and flexes those acting muscles that already won him an Oscar. If he hadn't won an Oscar before, I could see there being a considerable amount of people pushing for this to be the winner. As it stands, he was still in the grace period after his win that he could get nominated for anything. In fact this would be his last nomination, but it definitely could have won because it's so fun and just good in general.
Greg Kinnear - As Good as It Gets
Kinnear plays a gay painter who lives in the same apartment building as Nicholson and seems to constantly catch Jack's ire. He gets attacked by burglars and is the catalyst so to speak for the film's events. If Kinnear's character wasn't gay in this film, would he have been nominated? I don't say that to bash gays or start trouble, just that if Kinnear was just a normal dude would the Academy have paid attention? The film was a big hit in 1997 so I think it could have been included because of the success of the film and the other actors. I only ask because without the personality quirks and foibles is this a strong character still? Kinnear does a good enough job in the role that I think it would have been a possibility. Anyway, I'm typing myself into a corner when my point was that the homosexual part of the role is what makes it memorable as opposed to if Kinnear played it straight. I know that can be a dumb question because changing that character changes the entire rest of the story so it's essentially a moot point. Kinnear does a fine job as Nicholson's whipping boy and brings some small laughs and has some emotional moments with which to toy around with but I'd rather have had an actual gay man play this role. Though, that's not to say Kinnear overacts the part at all, he's actually very subdued and only brings out the mannerisms when it suits the film. I think that might be partially an acting choice but also some lazy writing, too. It doesn't help that Nicholson dominates the film so any spotlight on a supporting character is quickly snuffed out. For me, this is just a performance that's there and gets swept up alongside the other nominations for the film. It's not bad and I'm glad Kinnear plays his character in a toned down version, but ultimately it doesn't do all that much for me.
Burt Reynolds - Boogie Nights
There was a lot going on with this nomination for Burt Reynolds. He actually fired most of his team of managers and agent and whatnot because he hated Boogie Nights and thought it was going to be awful. He also had on set issues with director Paul Thomas Anderson so go figure that he ended up winning the Golden Globe for this performance and was nominated here. It was thought that if Reynolds played ball and didn't have all this baggage surrounding him, he probably would have won the Oscar. I see his nomination as one like a slew of other actors in a similar predicament including Eddie Murphy, Mickey Rourke, Bill Murray, and probably others I'm forgetting. These are the veteran actors making a comeback after years of not being around who were at some point expected to win Oscars before something got derailed and another actor won. Reynolds was really good in his performance as the tawdry porn director who stays mostly even keeled through the whole film save for a dramatic, explosive fight near the end. But he is mostly a calming influence on the film and on his actors. He's a director who isn't perturbed by things he sees since he films sex all day and his stable of actors routinely do drugs at his parties. I mention this because while everyone else in the film has these emotional or somewhat psychotic breakdowns, Reynolds is quietly there doing his thing. He's also the father figure to his porn actors and he plays that part perfectly. He controls those around him not because he's the prototypical evil porn guy taking advantage of people but because he sincerely thinks of himself as a filmmaker and wants to make the best films he can. So there's this quiet determinism in Reynold's performance where things are more about the art than the sex, which is obviously the bonus. It was a really good performance and it's a shame that Reynolds himself didn't think so because he definitely could have won an Oscar for it.
Thank God for Best Supporting Actor, especially since it always comes after Supporting Actress. It's always a nice palate cleanser and usually the best part of each year. This year was very good as usual, with no one giving a bad performance at all. Kinnear brings up the rear just because he could have been so much better and used in a way better way. Then it becomes really hard. I'll go with Burt Reynolds as my 4th even when the guy probably could have won the whole thing if he hadn't been such a baby about the film. I like his performance but he's more of a quiet, father figure that doesn't wow too much. Forster is my 3rd because he's grown on me so much since I saw his performance only like 3 days ago. It's a pretty chill performance but I like it more and more after thinking about it. My 2nd would be Hopkins because his John Quincy Adams is so fun. You can't not like him. And my winner would be the same as the Academy with Williams. I think it's a very strong performance from him and I'm totally okay with the win. This year was really good and I hope next year can top it.
Oscar Winner: Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
My Winner: Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
Anthony Hopkins
Robert Forster
Burt Reynolds
Greg Kinnear
1997 Best Supporting Actor
Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
I always get this role mixed up with his Dead Poets Society one or at least I fuse them together. This one is the more grounded performance and I feel like it is one of Robin Williams' best of his career. He is the psychologist who is able to get through to Matt Damon's character in part because he's been in Damon's shoes before. That life experience is communicated well and contrasted at various points with how Will doesn't have much life experience and needs to get out and experience the world. It's believable to me that Williams was a genius who followed a girl instead of his intellectual pursuits and settled down into a comfortable life. I've talked a lot of about sincerity when discussing Good Will Hunting and Williams has it in spades here in this performance. His anger, resentment, hopefulness, embarrassment, pride, and love are real and palpable because Williams loses himself in the character. I don't care about accents as I've read a bit about how he doesn't have a convincing Boston accent and people putting down the performance for that. Who cares? It comes out every now and then but I'm focused on the character as a man and how he interacts with Will and it's very heartfelt and natural. Williams tones down his humor and antics but they are still there, just more subtle and more fitting for the role. I just really like how serious and helping Williams is in this role. He's able to blend together all the things we like about him and create a very relatable character. I think I might be in the minority on this one but I feel Williams more than holds his own in this film and delivers a very good performance.
Robert Forster - Jackie Brown
This was the last Tarantino film I hadn't watched and I can't really explain why I hadn't seen it until now, other than waiting to watch it for this performance. But hey, two new Tarantino films in one year for me! Though this film doesn't feel like typical Tarantino probably because it's his only film that is adapted from another source. Anyway, Forster plays a bail bondsman who becomes infatuated with Pam Grier's character and they hatch a plan to sort of double cross her weapons peddling boss and the cops who arrested her. He is the same Robert Forster as you've always known. The sour face, hard ass demeanor, tough looking dude playing an authority figure. The twist is that he falls for Pam Grier and we get to see the sensitive side. Forster plays a good guy and his helping out Grier feels genuine. His performance is good and adds to an overall decent film. By the end, you are rooting for him to go with Grier to Spain but I understand the choice to not have him go. He's the kind of guy that's married to his job and won't take any risks in forgoing all of that. And while Forster played his typical character, I really liked Robert De Niro in this film. His character was a bit quiet and a loner of sorts and I thought he really shined. But of course, this resurrected Forster's, and Grier's, careers so it makes sense that he would get the nomination from the film. It's good but it won't blow you away, much like his career overall.
Anthony Hopkins - Amistad
People forget that Amistad is a Steven Spielberg film but it undoubtedly is one. Anthony Hopkins is very much a Steven Spielberg character even though he's playing former President John Quincy Adams. By that I mean he's so morally good it's hard not to like him. It helps that he's arguing for the black people who were aboard the slave ship Amistad to be declared free men and returned to Africa. I mean, what is more righteous than that? Therein lies the typical Spielberg character and Hopkins does a fine job of portraying that ideal. It's actually a really likable character without being too righteous and perfect. Hopkins plays the elderly Adams with some vim and vigor, constantly having him on the move and looking like a doddering old fool when he's far from it. He's still sharp as a tack as evidenced by his introduction where he's sleeping in the House of Representatives while a colleague talks to him thinking he's asleep but Adams rebuts with a stinging barb all while eyes closed and feet up. That's the kind of man and character and performance we are dealing with. Hopkins has great fun with it and in turn we get to laugh and smile along with him at his whimsical but serious role. He's great, too, at giving one of those Spielberg speeches about some good thing this one being a speech to the Supreme Court. Hopkins shines in this moment and flexes those acting muscles that already won him an Oscar. If he hadn't won an Oscar before, I could see there being a considerable amount of people pushing for this to be the winner. As it stands, he was still in the grace period after his win that he could get nominated for anything. In fact this would be his last nomination, but it definitely could have won because it's so fun and just good in general.
Greg Kinnear - As Good as It Gets
Kinnear plays a gay painter who lives in the same apartment building as Nicholson and seems to constantly catch Jack's ire. He gets attacked by burglars and is the catalyst so to speak for the film's events. If Kinnear's character wasn't gay in this film, would he have been nominated? I don't say that to bash gays or start trouble, just that if Kinnear was just a normal dude would the Academy have paid attention? The film was a big hit in 1997 so I think it could have been included because of the success of the film and the other actors. I only ask because without the personality quirks and foibles is this a strong character still? Kinnear does a good enough job in the role that I think it would have been a possibility. Anyway, I'm typing myself into a corner when my point was that the homosexual part of the role is what makes it memorable as opposed to if Kinnear played it straight. I know that can be a dumb question because changing that character changes the entire rest of the story so it's essentially a moot point. Kinnear does a fine job as Nicholson's whipping boy and brings some small laughs and has some emotional moments with which to toy around with but I'd rather have had an actual gay man play this role. Though, that's not to say Kinnear overacts the part at all, he's actually very subdued and only brings out the mannerisms when it suits the film. I think that might be partially an acting choice but also some lazy writing, too. It doesn't help that Nicholson dominates the film so any spotlight on a supporting character is quickly snuffed out. For me, this is just a performance that's there and gets swept up alongside the other nominations for the film. It's not bad and I'm glad Kinnear plays his character in a toned down version, but ultimately it doesn't do all that much for me.
Burt Reynolds - Boogie Nights
There was a lot going on with this nomination for Burt Reynolds. He actually fired most of his team of managers and agent and whatnot because he hated Boogie Nights and thought it was going to be awful. He also had on set issues with director Paul Thomas Anderson so go figure that he ended up winning the Golden Globe for this performance and was nominated here. It was thought that if Reynolds played ball and didn't have all this baggage surrounding him, he probably would have won the Oscar. I see his nomination as one like a slew of other actors in a similar predicament including Eddie Murphy, Mickey Rourke, Bill Murray, and probably others I'm forgetting. These are the veteran actors making a comeback after years of not being around who were at some point expected to win Oscars before something got derailed and another actor won. Reynolds was really good in his performance as the tawdry porn director who stays mostly even keeled through the whole film save for a dramatic, explosive fight near the end. But he is mostly a calming influence on the film and on his actors. He's a director who isn't perturbed by things he sees since he films sex all day and his stable of actors routinely do drugs at his parties. I mention this because while everyone else in the film has these emotional or somewhat psychotic breakdowns, Reynolds is quietly there doing his thing. He's also the father figure to his porn actors and he plays that part perfectly. He controls those around him not because he's the prototypical evil porn guy taking advantage of people but because he sincerely thinks of himself as a filmmaker and wants to make the best films he can. So there's this quiet determinism in Reynold's performance where things are more about the art than the sex, which is obviously the bonus. It was a really good performance and it's a shame that Reynolds himself didn't think so because he definitely could have won an Oscar for it.
Thank God for Best Supporting Actor, especially since it always comes after Supporting Actress. It's always a nice palate cleanser and usually the best part of each year. This year was very good as usual, with no one giving a bad performance at all. Kinnear brings up the rear just because he could have been so much better and used in a way better way. Then it becomes really hard. I'll go with Burt Reynolds as my 4th even when the guy probably could have won the whole thing if he hadn't been such a baby about the film. I like his performance but he's more of a quiet, father figure that doesn't wow too much. Forster is my 3rd because he's grown on me so much since I saw his performance only like 3 days ago. It's a pretty chill performance but I like it more and more after thinking about it. My 2nd would be Hopkins because his John Quincy Adams is so fun. You can't not like him. And my winner would be the same as the Academy with Williams. I think it's a very strong performance from him and I'm totally okay with the win. This year was really good and I hope next year can top it.
Oscar Winner: Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
My Winner: Robin Williams - Good Will Hunting
Anthony Hopkins
Robert Forster
Burt Reynolds
Greg Kinnear
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Supporting Actress 1997
I've seen most of these but it has been a long time since I have, so it's always good to see if my opinion of them still holds up. I'm always holding out hope that the one I haven't seen is going to blow me away and make my efforts worth it. We shall see.
1997 Best Supporting Actress
Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
It's easy to forget that Kim Basinger is an Oscar winner but here she is. Basinger plays a prostitute that looks like Veronica Lake and plays the love interest in the film. Basinger has the look and the sex appeal down pat and has a very coolly reserved demeanor. She is essentially the hooker with a heart of gold character and Basinger does a good job of making her character into a sympathetic one. She's a calming influence on some of the male characters like Russell Crowe's angry cop, who falls in love with her after a chance meeting. It seems that part of her purpose is to bring the sexual intrigue into a film that brings plenty of intrigue in from elsewhere in the story. Both Crowe and Guy Pearce sleep with her, yet we don't look at her like she's a prostitute thanks in large part to Basinger's performance. It's a very calm, breathy take on a woman who gets paid for sex but is much more than that as evidenced by the talks she has with Crowe. She's very sweet and mild tempered even when she's involved in things that are going out of control around her. Basinger provides that calming bit of sanity in an insane Los Angeles and even though her character doesn't do much, she nails what is asked of her. It's an easily likable performance because while Basinger is extremely sexy, she's able to hold her own against some real top notch acting performances. She doesn't look out of place in the film and doesn't look that out of place as an Oscar winner.
Joan Cusack - In & Out
I've been on record saying that I love seeing comedic roles get recognition from the Academy because it's a seriously untapped well for great performances. Cusack plays a comedic role but I wouldn't call it a great performance by any means. This film is a little strange as it is meant to lampoon the idea of being gay as an issue in our society. It pokes fun at Tom Hanks' acceptance speech for Philadelphia where he talked about his gay teacher and classmate. Something similar happens in this movie and Cusack plays the fiancee of Kevin Kline's possibly gay character. It's strange because the tone is very lighthearted yet it can be borderline offensive at times with it's jokes about gay people and gay stereotypes. I'm not sure this movie would fly at all in 2016 because it would probably be protested by all the social justice goobers. But I guess in 1997 it was kind of a big thing as one of the first mainstream movies to deal with the gay issue and had a long kiss between Tom Selleck and Kevin Kline. So okay, fine, I think the movie is weird in the handling of it's subject but how is Cusack? Well, she's in the movie for one thing. It's not a meaty part at all and the movie itself is pretty short at just 90 minutes. She gets to react to the news that her fiance is called out as gay on a worldwide telecast and then she gets jilted at the altar. Up until that point, she doesn't do a whole lot other than play the fiancee. Once jilted, she kinda hams it up (it is a comedy) and acts very loudly and broadly and kinda wallows in her misery. There's some funny moments in the movie and Cusack herself is funny at times but the performance just can't really sustain itself beyond her yelling and weeping. Then she gets together with her ex-student who won an Oscar and called out her fiance as gay because he is okay if she goes back to being fat. You can see what I mean by it being strange. I don't really think this is a very good nomination but maybe they wanted to reward this film in some small way. But hey, we could have gotten something much worse to watch, right?
Minnie Driver - Good Will Hunting
I have to say I'm disappointed with this character. Not because of anything Driver did, but because the character could have had so much more depth to her like the rest of her male co-stars. It seems unfair that she gets saddled with the love interest role and that's really the extent of her character. Yes, Driver was a conduit for showing Matt Damon's softer, gentler, human side but she didn't have to be so one dimensional. Driver plays the smart, pretty British chick who goes to Harvard and falls for the guy from the other side of the tracks. That's a generic role but Driver does do a lot to make it her own. She excels at being the lighthearted, care free, flirty chick that isn't the prototypical Harvard girl one would normally think of. She's the sexy nerd that can also hang with the boys and tell some dirty jokes, too. She's essentially the perfect woman/girlfriend/love interest. That all sounds cliche and it really sort of is, but Driver brings a spark to her performance. She lights up the banal character with some legit chemistry with herself. That sounds so pretentious to say but what I mean is, is that she's super comfortable as the character and it shows in the natural performance she gives. She and Damon are pretty terrific together even with her big square jaw getting in the way. Driver tries to do a little bit more with her unoriginal role even though the story let's her down and doesn't allow her to break out. Obviously the Academy loved it and allowed her to break out anyway. It's a good performance in an unfortunate role.
Julianne Moore - Boogie Nights
Here is the first of Moore's Oscar nominations, the one that set her down the path to be nominated every couple years and made her an Oscar darling. She plays a porn actress, the main girl for Burt Reynolds' stable of porn actors. Just like in a lot of her other films, Moore portrays a damaged woman who does porn and has a cocaine addiction but also longs for her kid (or kids, I was never clear on that) in a custody battle she loses. Moore plays the desperate, drug addled mother but on the flip side she is also this big porn star who takes Dirk Diggler under her wing like he is her child even though they have sex. She has this motherly component to her that comes out in dealing with the other porn stars on set and in real life because they look up to her like she's the head of the household. So Moore is balancing these two different versions of her character for the entire film and definitely pulls it off. I liked her performance but I also would have liked to see more screen time devoted to her story. That was never going to happen since it's all about Dirk Diggler but Moore gave a compelling performance that made you want to get a little deeper inside her character. The impressive thing is that Moore had a lot to do with limited screen time and makes her character stand out in a good way because of her efforts. It's a good performance in a really interesting film about family and being with people that accept you despite all their flaws.
Gloria Stuart - Titanic
This is what you would call a veteran nomination and honestly there's nothing wrong about that here. This definitely got swept up along with all the Titanic hype but at least Stuart's character and performance drives the story. She plays the older Rose in the present day and tells her story of what happened on the ship which is what we watch for three hours. She does a fine job as it would be really difficult to screw up being the catalyst for a film when all you have to do is set it up and narrate every now and then. She does have a little bit of charisma in the way that an old woman telling a story about her life should command attention, so it's not a completely wasted nomination. But it is what it is: a brief performance that any old lady could have done nominated solely because the film was so popular. I don't mind the nomination but hopefully this didn't keep out something more deserving. Interesting that this was the first time two actors were nominated for playing the same person but at different ages and Winslet did it again years later with Iris. She remains the oldest nominated person in the acting categories so I guess I can't be too harsh on her. So just chalk this one up to Titanic and leave it at that.
We go from 1998 being such a lackluster year to 1997 giving us some pretty good and interesting performances, which was much needed. I can't take going from awful year to awful year. The more I think about Basinger's performance, the more I like it for whatever reason that I can't quite describe. I think it just fits perfectly into that film. So I'm with the Academy on that one. Then would come Moore who was good in her role but if she would have had a bit more to do she might have ended up winning and that would have upset the apple cart years down the line for sure. Driver is in the middle because besides being the love interest, she doesn't get much chance to shine. The role lets her down but I still liked her in it. Stuart is probably where she should be for what amounts to a veteran cameo type nomination, which was not bad at all. My last spot is Cusack because I just didn't get that performance at all. She's loud and whiny and not really Oscar worthy to me. I'll take a year like this after what I got from 1998, I just hope 1996 will be even better.
Oscar Winner: Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
My Winner: Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
Julianne Moore
Minnie Driver
Gloria Stuart
Joan Cusack
1997 Best Supporting Actress
Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
It's easy to forget that Kim Basinger is an Oscar winner but here she is. Basinger plays a prostitute that looks like Veronica Lake and plays the love interest in the film. Basinger has the look and the sex appeal down pat and has a very coolly reserved demeanor. She is essentially the hooker with a heart of gold character and Basinger does a good job of making her character into a sympathetic one. She's a calming influence on some of the male characters like Russell Crowe's angry cop, who falls in love with her after a chance meeting. It seems that part of her purpose is to bring the sexual intrigue into a film that brings plenty of intrigue in from elsewhere in the story. Both Crowe and Guy Pearce sleep with her, yet we don't look at her like she's a prostitute thanks in large part to Basinger's performance. It's a very calm, breathy take on a woman who gets paid for sex but is much more than that as evidenced by the talks she has with Crowe. She's very sweet and mild tempered even when she's involved in things that are going out of control around her. Basinger provides that calming bit of sanity in an insane Los Angeles and even though her character doesn't do much, she nails what is asked of her. It's an easily likable performance because while Basinger is extremely sexy, she's able to hold her own against some real top notch acting performances. She doesn't look out of place in the film and doesn't look that out of place as an Oscar winner.
Joan Cusack - In & Out
I've been on record saying that I love seeing comedic roles get recognition from the Academy because it's a seriously untapped well for great performances. Cusack plays a comedic role but I wouldn't call it a great performance by any means. This film is a little strange as it is meant to lampoon the idea of being gay as an issue in our society. It pokes fun at Tom Hanks' acceptance speech for Philadelphia where he talked about his gay teacher and classmate. Something similar happens in this movie and Cusack plays the fiancee of Kevin Kline's possibly gay character. It's strange because the tone is very lighthearted yet it can be borderline offensive at times with it's jokes about gay people and gay stereotypes. I'm not sure this movie would fly at all in 2016 because it would probably be protested by all the social justice goobers. But I guess in 1997 it was kind of a big thing as one of the first mainstream movies to deal with the gay issue and had a long kiss between Tom Selleck and Kevin Kline. So okay, fine, I think the movie is weird in the handling of it's subject but how is Cusack? Well, she's in the movie for one thing. It's not a meaty part at all and the movie itself is pretty short at just 90 minutes. She gets to react to the news that her fiance is called out as gay on a worldwide telecast and then she gets jilted at the altar. Up until that point, she doesn't do a whole lot other than play the fiancee. Once jilted, she kinda hams it up (it is a comedy) and acts very loudly and broadly and kinda wallows in her misery. There's some funny moments in the movie and Cusack herself is funny at times but the performance just can't really sustain itself beyond her yelling and weeping. Then she gets together with her ex-student who won an Oscar and called out her fiance as gay because he is okay if she goes back to being fat. You can see what I mean by it being strange. I don't really think this is a very good nomination but maybe they wanted to reward this film in some small way. But hey, we could have gotten something much worse to watch, right?
Minnie Driver - Good Will Hunting
I have to say I'm disappointed with this character. Not because of anything Driver did, but because the character could have had so much more depth to her like the rest of her male co-stars. It seems unfair that she gets saddled with the love interest role and that's really the extent of her character. Yes, Driver was a conduit for showing Matt Damon's softer, gentler, human side but she didn't have to be so one dimensional. Driver plays the smart, pretty British chick who goes to Harvard and falls for the guy from the other side of the tracks. That's a generic role but Driver does do a lot to make it her own. She excels at being the lighthearted, care free, flirty chick that isn't the prototypical Harvard girl one would normally think of. She's the sexy nerd that can also hang with the boys and tell some dirty jokes, too. She's essentially the perfect woman/girlfriend/love interest. That all sounds cliche and it really sort of is, but Driver brings a spark to her performance. She lights up the banal character with some legit chemistry with herself. That sounds so pretentious to say but what I mean is, is that she's super comfortable as the character and it shows in the natural performance she gives. She and Damon are pretty terrific together even with her big square jaw getting in the way. Driver tries to do a little bit more with her unoriginal role even though the story let's her down and doesn't allow her to break out. Obviously the Academy loved it and allowed her to break out anyway. It's a good performance in an unfortunate role.
Julianne Moore - Boogie Nights
Here is the first of Moore's Oscar nominations, the one that set her down the path to be nominated every couple years and made her an Oscar darling. She plays a porn actress, the main girl for Burt Reynolds' stable of porn actors. Just like in a lot of her other films, Moore portrays a damaged woman who does porn and has a cocaine addiction but also longs for her kid (or kids, I was never clear on that) in a custody battle she loses. Moore plays the desperate, drug addled mother but on the flip side she is also this big porn star who takes Dirk Diggler under her wing like he is her child even though they have sex. She has this motherly component to her that comes out in dealing with the other porn stars on set and in real life because they look up to her like she's the head of the household. So Moore is balancing these two different versions of her character for the entire film and definitely pulls it off. I liked her performance but I also would have liked to see more screen time devoted to her story. That was never going to happen since it's all about Dirk Diggler but Moore gave a compelling performance that made you want to get a little deeper inside her character. The impressive thing is that Moore had a lot to do with limited screen time and makes her character stand out in a good way because of her efforts. It's a good performance in a really interesting film about family and being with people that accept you despite all their flaws.
Gloria Stuart - Titanic
This is what you would call a veteran nomination and honestly there's nothing wrong about that here. This definitely got swept up along with all the Titanic hype but at least Stuart's character and performance drives the story. She plays the older Rose in the present day and tells her story of what happened on the ship which is what we watch for three hours. She does a fine job as it would be really difficult to screw up being the catalyst for a film when all you have to do is set it up and narrate every now and then. She does have a little bit of charisma in the way that an old woman telling a story about her life should command attention, so it's not a completely wasted nomination. But it is what it is: a brief performance that any old lady could have done nominated solely because the film was so popular. I don't mind the nomination but hopefully this didn't keep out something more deserving. Interesting that this was the first time two actors were nominated for playing the same person but at different ages and Winslet did it again years later with Iris. She remains the oldest nominated person in the acting categories so I guess I can't be too harsh on her. So just chalk this one up to Titanic and leave it at that.
We go from 1998 being such a lackluster year to 1997 giving us some pretty good and interesting performances, which was much needed. I can't take going from awful year to awful year. The more I think about Basinger's performance, the more I like it for whatever reason that I can't quite describe. I think it just fits perfectly into that film. So I'm with the Academy on that one. Then would come Moore who was good in her role but if she would have had a bit more to do she might have ended up winning and that would have upset the apple cart years down the line for sure. Driver is in the middle because besides being the love interest, she doesn't get much chance to shine. The role lets her down but I still liked her in it. Stuart is probably where she should be for what amounts to a veteran cameo type nomination, which was not bad at all. My last spot is Cusack because I just didn't get that performance at all. She's loud and whiny and not really Oscar worthy to me. I'll take a year like this after what I got from 1998, I just hope 1996 will be even better.
Oscar Winner: Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
My Winner: Kim Basinger - L.A. Confidential
Julianne Moore
Minnie Driver
Gloria Stuart
Joan Cusack
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)