I've noticed that the last 2 years or so have all included films that I, for the most part, have really liked. There may be some that I'm not so keen on, but nothing that I outright hate. That's a good thing obviously and will stay mostly that way for 2014 (minus one film). I'm not sure if that means I'm warming up to more Oscar-type films or if Oscar is just meeting my tastes more in the recent years, but I like it! Maybe it's a shift in what Hollywood is putting out, and if so, I hope it continues because it's nice to root for favorites instead of against bad films. I suspect increasing the BP field to 5-10 helps and I hope they never go back to just 5. Anyway, let's finish up this year!
2013 Best Picture
12 Years a Slave
Wow. This is a tremendously powerful film and such a beautiful one at that. Director Steve McQueen has such an eye for insanely beautiful shots and some really inventive ones, too. The thing about those shots is that they don't stick out in a bad way or detract from the story. They serve to enhance and feel natural within the frame of the film, McQueen just has a great eye for aesthetics. Besides the landscape and scenes looking gorgeous, the acting is top notch with an incredibly moving performance by Chiwetel Ejiofor. Couple that with some wonderful supporting turns from Benedict Cumberbatch, Michael Fassbender, and Lupita Nyong'o and you can understand why the film is so good. Unfortunately Brad Pitt has a small part that is pretty bad and feels too much like a glorified cameo, plus it seems like he didn't really try with the whole Canadian accent thing. The music is also a nice little component to the film. It's both memorable and unobtrusive, everything a good score should be. I'd say my biggest complaint about 12 Years is the dialogue. I find it hard to believe that people talked in such a very proper manner as to almost be Shakespearean. It's a little jarring and can kinda take me out of the film at it's most awkward sounding terms. That's really just a minor quibble because the rest of the film is damn good. The direction is phenomenal and really deserved a Best Director win for McQueen even if Alfonso Cuaron was also pretty great. There's a scene halfway through the film where Northup is hanging from a tree with his toes just barely touching the ground and you see the rest of the slaves in the background proceeding with business as usual not even looking at Northup while we hear the cacophony of cicadas as the only sounds. McQueen lingers on that scene for a bit and it's just so evocative and powerful that it won me over right there.There are a few of those kind of scenes in this film and they are all amazing and worth the watch alone. I'm also really happy that the Academy got this year so right. There was some wavering on who was the front runner and who might end up winning but 12 Years a Slave is the obvious choice to me and I'm glad it won because it offers up the best of filmmaking and the Oscars.
American Hustle
I think the most obvious thing about American Hustle is that it's like an imitation Scorsese film but nowhere near as good. Which is funny that a Scorsese film with a similar vibe was also up for Best Picture this year. This film was a front runner or at least neck and neck for a good portion of the Oscar race that year. I didn't understand the hype then and I only kinda get it now. David O. Russell made a recent period piece that had a bunch of big, recognizable names and it mixed pop culture and comedy and drama all together in this big salad bowl of a film. You eat a big salad with a bunch of toppings on it and think it's healthy but in reality it has the same amount of calories as a burger. That's American Hustle. It's not really high cinema; it's just a fun, entertaining film that appeals to adults. That's definitely what AH has going for it is that it's fun and ridiculous and at times looks like a bunch of friends making a movie together. The acting is uneven but has it's hilarious moments. Individually the performances can be really good, sadly just not the women in this one. The songs can feel shoehorned in or even completely out of place (looking at you Live and Let Die sequence) but also offer up some of that classic Scorsese feel. The looks are absurd but funny and authentic. The plot, even if it's based on true events, is insane and all over the place. Which is a gripe for the film as a whole. It's like it meanders from skit to skit, showing off that 70s and 80s flair. Russell seems more intent on purely entertaining us rather than crafting a great film and honestly there's nothing wrong with that but it does open it up to nitpicks. There's a lot of things that don't work for me in this film but then it's humor and absurdity comes in and saves it. So while I didn't buy into the hype of it being a front runner, it's still a wildly entertaining flick that I probably wouldn't turn off on a lazy Saturday afternoon. Not exactly the highest of praise, I know, but it's worth a watch for sure.
Captain Phillips
I've discovered that I really, really like Paul Greengrass films. A couple Bourne movies and United 93 which is incredibly intense and it's no wonder he'd make a great film like Captain Phillips. And intense certainly describes this one. I like that Greengrass wastes no time on any superfluous shit. He keeps the wife thing to a 3 minute minimum and Cpt Phillips is well on his way to boarding the ship. It's the same way in his other films, he gets straight to the point and we get straight on his intense and crazy ride. So obviously, this film is about the hijacking of the container ship Maersk Alabama which from what I understand was the first American ship hijacked in 200 years! If true, that's amazing and impressive. So in turn we get an amazing and impressive film buoyed by an amazing and impressive Tom Hanks performance. Like seriously, I have no idea how Tom Hanks did not make the Best Actor nominees for this role. He is beyond terrific. He's indescribably perfect for this role and my god, his portrayal of the Cpt at the end while in shock is unbelievable. The most accurate portrayal of shock on film probably. Throughout, Greengrass gives us only what we need and that's why I love him as a director. The high jacking is intense, the Navy rescue is even more intense. Intense, intense, intense. That's how Greengrass operates. The other thing about his films is that he doesn't vilify the terrorists or bad guys. He presents them as is. We even see the Somalis from their town all the way to the end in this and it serves to give them an equal voice almost. Barkhad Abdi also allows the humanity of the hijackers to be presented and we definitely take note since his performance is really good. This is a film that I feel doesn't get enough love and gets overlooked way too much when we talk about great recent films. Captain Phillips is no doubt a great recent film.
Dallas Buyers Club
How did no one tell me for years that I failed to write a review for this film? Or at least failed to copy it over correctly or something. Damn, I guess no one actually reads this. I enjoyed the film a bunch because it touches on a subject that I bet most Texans would like to plug their ears for and pretend it doesn't exist. Even in 2022, you know there are people who wish the AIDS pandemic and HIV and whatever else disease would just go away by pretending it doesn't exist or that they prayed it away. Yet we had straight males figuring out how to get treatment so they could cure themselves or at least figure out how to do so. The courage of McConaughey's character to try and enact a solution is what makes this film so amazing. Forced into an impossible situation, he tries to make the most of it and help as many people as he can get the meds and medical attention they need. He fights the Feds to get those meds and get better. It's sad that this is the 80s and he is knocked down at every turn and can't get the meds he needs until the FDA approves of it which is too late. Just a sad film about how AIDS victims were so motivated to fight for their lives and their health and got shit for it at every turn. A film I love for being so truthful and modern.
Gravity
Gravity is an experience. One that is absolutely better watched in a big movie theater with a big screen and big sound with a big soda and popcorn. I'm not one to usually say the theater experience is better because usually it doesn't matter to me, but this is one of those exceptions. Gravity is intense right from the beginning and never let's you go for all of it's hour and a half. It has some of the best, if not the best, CGI I've ever seen. It's to the point where if someone told you this was filmed in space you'd probably believe them - it's that amazing. And this is one of the few films that can survive on pure spectacle alone. If there was no dialogue at all, I'd still be glued to the screen for the entirety of the film because it is so engrossing and mesmerizing. The story itself is bare bones and a bit far fetched but it does have a great leading female performance from Sandra Bullock and how many films these days on the level of Gravity can say that? I get that the story does veer into the absurd with the whole avoiding debris on the space walk then somehow managing to fly to two different space stations in the nick of time and continue surviving. It is absurd but I look at it like a science fiction film rather than any true life portrayal, this could really happen situational type thing. When I saw this in theaters, however, I did get frustrated at what I thought was a couple fake endings - or at least what felt like fake outs with Bullock seeming to give up only to keep going at the last second. I wondered if she had failed on reaching the Chinese space station or while piloting the Russian one, would it have made for a bad film? I think it would have been different but not bad. I don't think Bullock making it to Earth really made the difference honestly. It did create some symbolism with a creature emerging out of the water like it's an evolutionary thing (or rebirth) and the fetal position once Bullock reached the first airlock being like she was in the womb and a throw back to older science fiction films. Thinking about it more makes the ending fit a lot better to me but at the time I was kind of annoyed at what I thought were some cheesy fake outs. Anyway, run ons aside, Alfonso Cuaron crafted one heck of a film and one that fully deserves to be here.
Her
Her is a really interesting film. On the surface, it just looks like it's going to be another meet cute type film but with a little twist. But when you scratch the surface and look deeper, there's a lot more going on and a lot more it has to say about the world around us. There's also a lot to love about Her starting with the visual style which is calming yet engaging. The color palette suits the film so well and suits the near future technology obsessed society well, also. The best thing about Her, however, is Scarlett Johansson as the voice of the personal operating system thingy. I mean, she absolutely kills it in her role and does much more than be a kind of narrator or disembodied voice. She brings life to a character we never get see through her inflections and tone and style of talking. It's an amazing feat that an actress can establish her presence in a film with just her voice. It leaves everything up to our imagination so that we can create whatever version of her that we want almost like Phoenix's character can. Speaking of Phoenix, he does another masterful job with his performance capturing the charmingly nerdy yet sad hipster character to a tee. Compare this performance with his role in The Master the year before and you really start to understand the amount of talent the man has. Both men are loners to some degree but are portrayed in such opposite ways that you can't believe that both come from the same actor. The two actors also have great chemistry but are never on screen at the same time and from what I understand Scarlett's role was actually first completed by Samantha Morton before being scrapped which makes it even more amazing that the chemistry is so tangible. It feels lame to describe this film as sweet and gentle but Her really does evoke those adjectives while watching. It's a sensitive film that will appeal greatly to those in touch with their emotions and that's not a bad thing! It will make you think about lost loves and wish you had an entity to talk to whenever that would talk back and help analyze everything you're going through. Which sounds oddly like a best friend or significant other but I think my point is understood. Her is a devastatingly emotional film that will make you cherish your friendships. Her is simply a fantastic film about what could possibly be soon.
Nebraska
It is no secret that the Academy loves it some Alexander Payne. At first I'm always a bit wary or incredulous because every time I watch one of his films, I initially don't like it or am very ambivalent towards it. Then all of the sudden I keep thinking about it and it creeps into my mind and I suddenly find an appreciation for them and realize he's a pretty good director who makes films that offer up a bit more of a cerebral take on adult life. Nebraska was/is no different. First watched it and was a bit underwhelmed at the beginning but actually towards the end of watching the film I already started to make my usual turn in favor of it. You read the synopsis and it doesn't sound like it's going to be all that amazing and then you learn it's in black and white and you go oh, man this is going to be pretentious. Neither are accurate. The black and white aspect is magnificently shot and brings a wistful sense of days gone by. I think it's a good choice to capture that small town feel that the film has. It makes it intimate and cozy in a strange way. Payne is great at coaxing out great performances from his actors and this film is no different. June Squibb and Bruce Dern were both nominated but I thought Will Forte was excellent as the son and even Bob Odenkirk as the other son was wonderful. It's a road trip movie at it's heart but it's also about remembering the past and learning about your history. It has a very sad and melancholic feel at times, especially when the family visits Dern's boyhood home. It's a very tender moment that makes you think about your own family and your own past and makes you feel all the feels. I think Nebraska perfectly captures a lot of families in America who pounce on those who strike it rich and who gossip about each other and talk without saying anything of substance and who don't know that their dad was in a war and who bicker more than anything with each other. It encapsulates what is the heartland of America on film, which is a truly remarkable thing. And it's done in a very realistic way, almost has a documentary feel. I think I just like it because it does remind me so much of the past and about being close to family, and deep down that's what it's about - family. I'm eager to see what Payne does next.
Philomena
So this film fills the spot of random British film that no one saw yet somehow made it's way into the Oscar race and secured a bunch of nominations. And oh look, it's a Judi Dench film, joy! Except no, not joy, this is a film that upon second watch doesn't hold up despite it's tear jerker ending that's designed to persuade you it's actually a legit good film derrrr. If I sound a little bitter, it's because I'm tired of Dench in the Oscar reviews and I'm tired of middling films that pretend they are more important than they really are gaining a foothold among the Academy because they are British or by a certain director or feature a certain actor. Philomena fits because it's the British entry and while I can kinda understand it's inclusion, at this moment in time I'm fed the fuck up with it all. Maybe if I reviewed this tomorrow I'd be writing a more tame review but right now I just don't care. So Philomena is about an old Irish woman (Dench) who gets in contact with a journalist to find out where her son is. But she had the son in a nunnery where they made her work to pay off her debt and then sold her son to American parents in an adoption scheme because nothing good comes from nuns ever and it becomes a bit of an issue. I hate the religious types and certainly a film where the idiot Catholics sell babies to make money and then later stonewall the mother in locating where her son is is right up my alley but while it does wind up in that direction of being anti Church, the actual Philomena forgives the nuns and basically everyone ever and lives this ridiculous daft life where things seemingly don't have consequences because God or something. I hate the notion and I vehemently side with Steve Coogan's character who is the journalist and who is legitimately angry and tries to make the old nun answer to her sins and chides the current nunnery staff about how wrong they are. Steve Coogan is great in this and gives the film it's soul. The film itself is the basic British film that always finds its way over year after year so just imagine that and you've got this one. This film was done by the guy who did The Queen so it's a very matter of fact style with a bit over melodrama thrown in for good measure. Anyway, I think I'm just in a mood, but my dislike for this film is legit. Watch it twice so you don't get hoodwinked.
The Wolf of Wall Street
In many ways, this is the typical Martin Scorsese film of recent years: big, flashy, entertaining, great performances. Which of course sounds like the Martin Scorsese films of yesteryear, too. Point being his newer films feel a bit more fresh and flashy to me. And that's kinda what The Wolf of Wall Street is all about: sex, drugs, money, power, excess. I know it was meant to be a satirical take on that kind of lifestyle, about how absurd and insane and destructive it all is but I can understand those that say it glorifies all that excess, too. Because it absolutely does. It's a hilarious look into that lifestyle but when you're laughing and watching these guys have fun and bang lots of chicks and make money, you can't help but think that it's pretty cool and that man, I kinda wish my life was that fun and crazy. But you also have to be intelligent enough to understand that's Hollywood on the screen and while that might look fun would kill you quick or send you to jail even quicker. That was the big controversy surrounding this film and I just wanted to give my two cents in as well. The rest of the film is pure Scorsese with a great musical selection that doesn't overpower like in some other of his films. Great performances as per usual and maybe the best collaboration with DiCaprio so far. The story is pretty interesting even though it does follow a bunch of assholes as they get high and steal money, essentially. My big complaint is the same for most every Scorsese film I've seen: they are too damn long! With some more economical editing, his films might be even better. If they were a bit more focused or tighter and if the fat were trimmed, maybe he'd have another win at some point. But as they are now, they are too long which means parts of the film sags and some parts are boring and some parts are repetitive, which is all true in this film. Scorsese is so on top of his game, however, that he can survive things like that and still make a pretty awesome film that stands up to rest of his oeuvre. All in all, The Wolf of Wall Street is a wild, fun ride to enjoy.
This might be the best more than 5 nominee year I've seen so far. This year is very top end heavy which means I really like a couple of these films. That's all I ever want year to year is to like all the films and to find new favorites. 12 Years a Slave is a new favorite and a great flipping film. I fully believe it will be considered a modern classic very, very soon and possibly be on all those best of all time lists. I can't say enough great things about it and I kinda want to watch Chiwetel Ejiofor again right now. Next up would be Captain Phillips which is my underrated film of the last couple years because it's so, so good yet no one really talks about it yet everyone agrees it's good. Paul Greengrass has become a favorite of mine for his absolute honesty in his films and that's what sets Captain Phillips apart. I think I underrated Dallas Buyers Club and forgot how powerful it actually is. Obviously it has some great acting and was deservedly rewarded for that. Next is Gravity but that might change if I last saw it on a huge screen. It makes a difference but is still a strong film. Then it's kind of a toss up between Nebraska and Her which are both visually compelling with great performances. But I just kinda like the family dynamic of Nebraska just a bit more. Then we come to the fun craziness of Wolf of Wall Street. Just turn your brain off and enjoy the ride. Finally we get to the two that I don't really have a ton of love for. Philomena is buoyed by Steve Coogan and American Hustle is more like everyone got together after Silver Linings Playbook and decided to make a 70s-80s movie real quick. Both have some good performances but are lesser than the sum of their parts. A hell of a year though! One I'll probably come back to again and again to watch some good films.
Oscar Winner: 12 Years a Slave
My Winner: 12 Years a Slave
Captain Phillips
Dallas Buyers Club
Gravity
Nebraska
Her
The Wolf of Wall Street
Philomena
American Hustle
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Leading Actor 2013
This is another impressive Best Actor group. Plus, it leaves off Tom Hanks who could easily replace anyone on here without skipping a beat. What a great year for the men.
2013 Best Actor
Matthew McConaughey - Dallas Buyers Club
Ah yes, the culmination of the McConaissance! Look, no matter if you hated this performance for whatever weird reason, McConaughey had one hell of a run for about a year or two and fully deserved the Oscar for that alone. Now I might be hypocritical for saying that because I always think it should go to the best performance and not because someone is due or is old or has some sob story but this is an exception. McConaughey has always been a pretty good actor but got bogged down in doing lots of romcoms and then all of the sudden he exploded back onto the serious acting scene. Look at this list of films: The Lincoln Lawyer, Bernie, Killer Joe, Mud, The Paper Boy (awful film but he's great in it), Magic Mike, and The Wolf of Wall Street. All pretty great performances and all varied in their type of characters, which shows how amazing his couple years truly was. That's leaving out his best performance (in my opinion) from True Detective. So his win for Dallas Buyers Club was definitely the end result of a couple years of just completely amazing work. And I'm so glad he was rewarded and the Academy recognized that fact as well. That's not to take away anything from this performance, either! This is just another great one from McConaughey. Throw away the impressive weight loss aspect and you still have a heartfelt, intense, and important portrayal of a man riddled with HIV/AIDS fighting to stay alive despite the government's lack of concern. What impressed me so much about this one was that McConaughey seems so natural which makes sense as he is a Texan and Ron Woodruff is a Texan. But more than that it's the dialogue which feels improvised and honest. Sometimes films suffer from literary or awkward, unnatural speech from it's characters but not Ron Woodruff. He is entirely believable as a character even if he can be an asshole at times. I think we as the audience like that American spirit in Ron as he tries to stay alive while doing everything he can to subvert the government in getting AIDS medication from Mexico and Japan and doling it out to others who need it instead of taking AZT which is mostly lethal and doesn't much help. McConaughey plays Ron as honestly as he can and that's what makes DBC so good is the honesty in it's story and direction. A well deserved win for a great performance and a great 2 year run of films.
Christian Bale - American Hustle
I'm not sure if Bale or Cooper is the best part of American Hustle, but they are both pretty close. While Cooper is clearly having fun just hamming it up, Bale gives a very dedicated performance that at times seems far removed from all the craziness going on around him in the film. It really is like he's acting in a totally different film at times. You could say that's a bad thing but I think it works here because the film is so crazy itself. And that's not to say Bale doesn't have some great comedic moments, because he absolutely does. It's just that he's not so on the nose about it like Cooper or so clearly pandering and overacting in a bad way like Lawrence. It's as if because Bale is the main focus of the film that he has to ground it himself and bring a little reality and sanity to an otherwise insane film. I like the performance, though, because Bale is so dedicated to his character. Not only the weight gain and comb over look but just the passion of this grifter who has all these different sides pulling him in different directions wanting different things. He's a guy that continuously oversteps his bounds or at least bites off more than he can chew and it's fun to watch him weasel his way out of, or into, situations. I really just like Bale's earnestness in his portrayal of Irving, which is something we've come to expect from him. No different here even if his inclusion in this group was a minor surprise since Tom Hanks gave a pretty great performance and didn't get in. With the amount of fun performances in American Hustle, it's a shame the film itself wasn't any better. Bale gives an earnest, decent performance.
Bruce Dern - Nebraska
Of the three Nebraska reviews to write, this was the absolute hardest. I think that's due mainly to Dern's character being so blase and indifferent to life. His character is known for not saying much, he's grumpy and perturbed when people bug him, and just a guy that seems to want to stick to himself. He thinks he's won a million dollars in a sweepstakes through the mail even though it's a scam and his son offers to drive him to Nebraska to show him that. He's got a very sour demeanor and personality but I think that fits growing up in the heartland where there's not a lot happening and plus we also learn he was in the Korean War and came back affected. That right there would point to why he drank a lot and is so shut off and negative. Dern does a great job in portraying him as such a grump and does a great job with the affectations he has such as the limp, hearing difficulties, shuffling, etc. that define the elder Grant. It's all at once a sad and melancholic performance because after awhile of watching you wish he was a bit more open and a bit more loved. When Woody and his family go to his boyhood home and we get that very subdued look into his childhood and persona and mind, we start rooting for him to win the million dollars and to be happy and for the family to be alright. A lot of that I think is due to the viewer transposing their own life onto the characters and hoping for a good outcome. That's what the film and Dern's performance evokes from us and that's pretty incredible.The end with Woody driving by everyone in his new truck is heartwarming as well and speaks to the larger themes of the film. It's a quietly good performance by Dern.
Leonardo DiCaprio - The Wolf of Wall Street
Doesn't every new DiCaprio performance feel like it's the role he was born to play? I feel like you can say that about most of his roles because they feel like they were tailor made just for him and everyone was waiting for him to take them on. Wolf of Wall Street is no different. DiCaprio seems born to play Jordan Belfort and like his turn as Jay Gatsby was a dry run for this performance. By now, DiCaprio and Scorsese have such a good rapport with each other and can obviously bring out the best in each other that it's fun to watch these two work. It also appears that DiCaprio is just having tons of fun in this role which offers up a lot of crazy antics, situations, and scenes. The film itself is crazy and fun and a whirlwind of sex, drugs, money, drugs, women, drugs, and booze. DiCaprio seems more at ease in these kind of fun roles instead of his serious ones and it's more enjoyable to watch him when he's like that, at least for me. It's not as if he's gunning for that elusive Oscar so obviously like in some of his other performances. Just be the awesome DiCaprio we know you can be, ya know? And a lot of that awesome DiCaprio shows up in the couple different motivational speaker type scenes with his company. It's DiCaprio just taking over the scene and killing it, basically. His performance is just a lot of fun to watch and I know I've said that already but it really is. It's kind of like you can turn your brain off and just watch and laugh and admire the great work everyone is putting in. Is it DiCaprio's best? Probably not, but it's his most accessible and easy going, for sure. Did he deserve to win the Oscar this year? Not when compared to this group, but that's not a knock on him obviously. It's hard not to like DiCaprio here and in a weaker year he may just have won for a pretty interesting performance.
Chiwetel Ejiofor - 12 Years a Slave
I fell in love with Chiwetel Ejiofor's performance almost immediately while watching this film the first time. That love only grew the second time I watched it. He is the engine that drives the film, dependable and stalwart. He plays Solomon Northup, a free man from New York who was caught by slavers and sold into slavery in the South. There's a million adjectives I could use to describe why I love the performance so much but delicate and subdued, yet mighty and authoritative is a good start. Towards the very end when McQueen keeps the camera on Ejiofor staring off into space at dusk contemplating life and his predicament and then he looks towards the camera for a few seconds and it's eerily powerful. As if Northup himself is staring at us, the audience, with a plaintive, pleading, accusatory, hollow look that screams how could something like this ever happen in history - and continue to happen even now across the world. That may be reading a bit too much into that moment in an amazing film but Ejiofor conveys a look that speaks volumes in just a few short seconds. That's great acting drilled down to it's very essence and convinced me that Ejiofor was my favorite for the year among a very strong group. Ejiofor does so much with this performance throughout the film by being so restrained in a lot of moments where you'd expect, hell - where you WANT him to react violently or passionately but he doesn't. It's a masterclass in acting. He creates a very sympathetic character but never devolves into schlock or cheap acting to make us feel a certain way. He just presents Northup as a man and let's us see the humanity in his character. This is just an utterly brilliant performance by Ejiofor.
Again, if you included Tom Hanks here for Captain Phillips it would only improve an already great group. I'd have switched out Bale for Hanks but the Academy does what it wants. My winner would be Ejiofor who I believe gave a performance that will be remembered as great for years and years to come, one that is classic. McConaughey was deep in his McConaissance so I approve of his win since it's hard to not love his recent little explosion of awesome. Then I'd say Leo because he just looks to be having so much fun and gives an easy going, awesome performance at the same time. Dern was the one I was always unsure about going in but his delicate take on a man wanting to claim a lottery prize is touching. Bale brings up the rear because I'm not a fan of his film and he is easily the weakest of this group.
Oscar Winner: Matthew McConaughey - Dallas Buyers Club
My Winner: Chiwetel Ejiofor - 12 Years a Slave
Matthew McConaughey
Leonardo DiCaprio
Bruce Dern
Christian Bale
2013 Best Actor
Matthew McConaughey - Dallas Buyers Club
Ah yes, the culmination of the McConaissance! Look, no matter if you hated this performance for whatever weird reason, McConaughey had one hell of a run for about a year or two and fully deserved the Oscar for that alone. Now I might be hypocritical for saying that because I always think it should go to the best performance and not because someone is due or is old or has some sob story but this is an exception. McConaughey has always been a pretty good actor but got bogged down in doing lots of romcoms and then all of the sudden he exploded back onto the serious acting scene. Look at this list of films: The Lincoln Lawyer, Bernie, Killer Joe, Mud, The Paper Boy (awful film but he's great in it), Magic Mike, and The Wolf of Wall Street. All pretty great performances and all varied in their type of characters, which shows how amazing his couple years truly was. That's leaving out his best performance (in my opinion) from True Detective. So his win for Dallas Buyers Club was definitely the end result of a couple years of just completely amazing work. And I'm so glad he was rewarded and the Academy recognized that fact as well. That's not to take away anything from this performance, either! This is just another great one from McConaughey. Throw away the impressive weight loss aspect and you still have a heartfelt, intense, and important portrayal of a man riddled with HIV/AIDS fighting to stay alive despite the government's lack of concern. What impressed me so much about this one was that McConaughey seems so natural which makes sense as he is a Texan and Ron Woodruff is a Texan. But more than that it's the dialogue which feels improvised and honest. Sometimes films suffer from literary or awkward, unnatural speech from it's characters but not Ron Woodruff. He is entirely believable as a character even if he can be an asshole at times. I think we as the audience like that American spirit in Ron as he tries to stay alive while doing everything he can to subvert the government in getting AIDS medication from Mexico and Japan and doling it out to others who need it instead of taking AZT which is mostly lethal and doesn't much help. McConaughey plays Ron as honestly as he can and that's what makes DBC so good is the honesty in it's story and direction. A well deserved win for a great performance and a great 2 year run of films.
Christian Bale - American Hustle
I'm not sure if Bale or Cooper is the best part of American Hustle, but they are both pretty close. While Cooper is clearly having fun just hamming it up, Bale gives a very dedicated performance that at times seems far removed from all the craziness going on around him in the film. It really is like he's acting in a totally different film at times. You could say that's a bad thing but I think it works here because the film is so crazy itself. And that's not to say Bale doesn't have some great comedic moments, because he absolutely does. It's just that he's not so on the nose about it like Cooper or so clearly pandering and overacting in a bad way like Lawrence. It's as if because Bale is the main focus of the film that he has to ground it himself and bring a little reality and sanity to an otherwise insane film. I like the performance, though, because Bale is so dedicated to his character. Not only the weight gain and comb over look but just the passion of this grifter who has all these different sides pulling him in different directions wanting different things. He's a guy that continuously oversteps his bounds or at least bites off more than he can chew and it's fun to watch him weasel his way out of, or into, situations. I really just like Bale's earnestness in his portrayal of Irving, which is something we've come to expect from him. No different here even if his inclusion in this group was a minor surprise since Tom Hanks gave a pretty great performance and didn't get in. With the amount of fun performances in American Hustle, it's a shame the film itself wasn't any better. Bale gives an earnest, decent performance.
Bruce Dern - Nebraska
Of the three Nebraska reviews to write, this was the absolute hardest. I think that's due mainly to Dern's character being so blase and indifferent to life. His character is known for not saying much, he's grumpy and perturbed when people bug him, and just a guy that seems to want to stick to himself. He thinks he's won a million dollars in a sweepstakes through the mail even though it's a scam and his son offers to drive him to Nebraska to show him that. He's got a very sour demeanor and personality but I think that fits growing up in the heartland where there's not a lot happening and plus we also learn he was in the Korean War and came back affected. That right there would point to why he drank a lot and is so shut off and negative. Dern does a great job in portraying him as such a grump and does a great job with the affectations he has such as the limp, hearing difficulties, shuffling, etc. that define the elder Grant. It's all at once a sad and melancholic performance because after awhile of watching you wish he was a bit more open and a bit more loved. When Woody and his family go to his boyhood home and we get that very subdued look into his childhood and persona and mind, we start rooting for him to win the million dollars and to be happy and for the family to be alright. A lot of that I think is due to the viewer transposing their own life onto the characters and hoping for a good outcome. That's what the film and Dern's performance evokes from us and that's pretty incredible.The end with Woody driving by everyone in his new truck is heartwarming as well and speaks to the larger themes of the film. It's a quietly good performance by Dern.
Leonardo DiCaprio - The Wolf of Wall Street
Doesn't every new DiCaprio performance feel like it's the role he was born to play? I feel like you can say that about most of his roles because they feel like they were tailor made just for him and everyone was waiting for him to take them on. Wolf of Wall Street is no different. DiCaprio seems born to play Jordan Belfort and like his turn as Jay Gatsby was a dry run for this performance. By now, DiCaprio and Scorsese have such a good rapport with each other and can obviously bring out the best in each other that it's fun to watch these two work. It also appears that DiCaprio is just having tons of fun in this role which offers up a lot of crazy antics, situations, and scenes. The film itself is crazy and fun and a whirlwind of sex, drugs, money, drugs, women, drugs, and booze. DiCaprio seems more at ease in these kind of fun roles instead of his serious ones and it's more enjoyable to watch him when he's like that, at least for me. It's not as if he's gunning for that elusive Oscar so obviously like in some of his other performances. Just be the awesome DiCaprio we know you can be, ya know? And a lot of that awesome DiCaprio shows up in the couple different motivational speaker type scenes with his company. It's DiCaprio just taking over the scene and killing it, basically. His performance is just a lot of fun to watch and I know I've said that already but it really is. It's kind of like you can turn your brain off and just watch and laugh and admire the great work everyone is putting in. Is it DiCaprio's best? Probably not, but it's his most accessible and easy going, for sure. Did he deserve to win the Oscar this year? Not when compared to this group, but that's not a knock on him obviously. It's hard not to like DiCaprio here and in a weaker year he may just have won for a pretty interesting performance.
Chiwetel Ejiofor - 12 Years a Slave
I fell in love with Chiwetel Ejiofor's performance almost immediately while watching this film the first time. That love only grew the second time I watched it. He is the engine that drives the film, dependable and stalwart. He plays Solomon Northup, a free man from New York who was caught by slavers and sold into slavery in the South. There's a million adjectives I could use to describe why I love the performance so much but delicate and subdued, yet mighty and authoritative is a good start. Towards the very end when McQueen keeps the camera on Ejiofor staring off into space at dusk contemplating life and his predicament and then he looks towards the camera for a few seconds and it's eerily powerful. As if Northup himself is staring at us, the audience, with a plaintive, pleading, accusatory, hollow look that screams how could something like this ever happen in history - and continue to happen even now across the world. That may be reading a bit too much into that moment in an amazing film but Ejiofor conveys a look that speaks volumes in just a few short seconds. That's great acting drilled down to it's very essence and convinced me that Ejiofor was my favorite for the year among a very strong group. Ejiofor does so much with this performance throughout the film by being so restrained in a lot of moments where you'd expect, hell - where you WANT him to react violently or passionately but he doesn't. It's a masterclass in acting. He creates a very sympathetic character but never devolves into schlock or cheap acting to make us feel a certain way. He just presents Northup as a man and let's us see the humanity in his character. This is just an utterly brilliant performance by Ejiofor.
Again, if you included Tom Hanks here for Captain Phillips it would only improve an already great group. I'd have switched out Bale for Hanks but the Academy does what it wants. My winner would be Ejiofor who I believe gave a performance that will be remembered as great for years and years to come, one that is classic. McConaughey was deep in his McConaissance so I approve of his win since it's hard to not love his recent little explosion of awesome. Then I'd say Leo because he just looks to be having so much fun and gives an easy going, awesome performance at the same time. Dern was the one I was always unsure about going in but his delicate take on a man wanting to claim a lottery prize is touching. Bale brings up the rear because I'm not a fan of his film and he is easily the weakest of this group.
Oscar Winner: Matthew McConaughey - Dallas Buyers Club
My Winner: Chiwetel Ejiofor - 12 Years a Slave
Matthew McConaughey
Leonardo DiCaprio
Bruce Dern
Christian Bale
Leading Actress 2013
I was none too enthused about this group when the nominees were announced. I'm still none too enthused about this group 2 years later.
2013 Best Actress
Cate Blanchett - Blue Jasmine
I never, ever understood the hype for Blanchett in this film. I get that people were eager to see her in a Woody Allen written role but after watching it, I didn't get all the effusive love. Maybe it just never clicked with me, but I didn't think it was worth a second win for Blanchett. First of all, she plays the character so over the top that it was hard for me to really become invested in the character. Plus, Woody wrote her as such an insufferable character which also leads to not really caring about her. I get that the character was a bit over the top to begin with but I do think Blanchett just overplays it. It's too on the nose and too obviously acting. I was just as annoyed at Blanchett as the old lady in the beginning of the film who had to sit next to her character on the plane and she wouldn't shut up. Her story arc wasn't compelling in the least, it was way too short, and no one is gonna care about a very rich woman who loses her wealth only to lie to try and get it back and trick another man. There is no doubt that Blanchett is a great actress. That great acting ability shines through a lot in this performance but it doesn't save it unfortunately. The very end of the film is really some nice acting by Blanchett and felt like her Oscar moment. It also speaks to the whole mental illness thing which I've harped on a lot but her character clearly suffers from something and it's glossed over and used as a joke quite often. Maybe a more serious look at her problem would make for a better film, obviously that wouldn't be a very Woody Allen film, though. There just seems to be a lot lacking from Blanchett's character for me to really understand why this was so loved and why it won here. I think voters just really like Woody Allen female nominations for some reason and really liked the overacting from Blanchett. To me, I wanted a whole lot more from the performance.
Amy Adams - American Hustle
I really wanted to like Amy Adams in this performance, I really did. But unfortunately I really disliked it and this might be the first performance of hers that I haven't liked (at least Oscar nominations wise). For whatever reason it just never clicked with me. I felt her character was uninspired and Adams wasn't able to salvage anything from it with her performance. She was essentially there to look hot and be the meat for the male characters to ogle and fight over. And in a film where everyone is overacting and the plot is ridiculous (no matter how true) Adams doesn't really do much to stand out. It's frankly a boring performance, which is unfortunate because we all know Adams is incredibly talented. Probably doesn't help that I don't look at Adams as any kind of sex symbol, so when the sex appeal is all her character has then there is nothing else to save it. I'd say the one plus I can think of is that she has decent chemistry with Bale, which shouldn't come as much of a surprise. But other than that, I really can't muster up anything else to say about her performance. It's not very interesting and not one that I want to come back to any time soon.
Sandra Bullock - Gravity
I was pretty harsh on Bullock in the past for the abomination that was The Blindside, but damn if this isn't a really, really good performance. I know that she's capable of giving them but it's nice to actually see it and see it rewarded. This is kind of the quintessential strong female leading performance. One that should be pointed to when talking about how women don't get many leading roles in science fiction or big budget movies as an example of why they should be given that chance. Bullock is a good role model for young women to look up to with this role. A scientist who becomes an astronaut who, while faced with certain death and insurmountable adversity, prevails and successfully returns to Earth. Hell, that's someone everyone could look up to! Now, in the beginning Bullock is pretty annoying with her whole nervous, super newbie persona and you start to think oh no, they're making the woman astronaut out to be a complete joke. But eventually Bullock musters up her courage and training and pulls it together and gets things done. When I was first watching I was really worried she would stay this sort of bumbling wreck but I'm glad she didn't. Obviously the writers wanted her character to show growth and luckily Bullock is good in not making that transition seem insincere or forced. Bullock's performance is pretty strong as I said and I really enjoy seeing her persevere and figure out how to survive to the next obstacle. Maybe that's a little sadistic, I don't know, but I enjoyed seeing her overcome all the odds. I know this sounds like I'm underselling the performance or that I wasn't that into it but I was and her performance is the best to me out of this sad group.
Judi Dench - Philomena
I know it's unfair but, man, I'm tired of Judi Dench nominations, legit over them. I'm over them because they are all pretty much the same with some minor variations here and there and once you've seen one, you've basically seen the rest. I get that Dench is a great actress but I know for sure that some of her nominations aren't worth being included in the Oscar world. Yeah, that's harsh but I think people reading this can definitely understand where I'm coming from. So is Dench's performance in Philomena an example of what I'm talking about? Yes and no. It's the same sort of meek character that eventually proves to be this really strong woman underneath her surly/shy/whatever demeanor. This time she's an older woman whose daughter tells Steve Coogan (who I absolutely love by the way) about how a nunnery made her give her son away for an American couple to adopt so they could make money. Coogan is a journalist and writes an expose about the bullshit nunnery who hid behind religion to enact atrocities on underprivileged, desperate young women. However, Dench's character is this daft old lady who makes for a boring watch. Every time Dench was talking or the focus of the story, I got bored. Steve Coogan is the only saving grace of the film. And the only voice of reason as Dench's character is an idiot who doesn't press to know what happened to her son and when learning she was screwed out of meeting him potentially forgives the idiot, asshole religious people who kept it a secret. Just watching this a second time, I dislike it when before I was like ok, not bad. Nah, not anymore. Not a fan and the whole forgiveness angle rings hollow. Just another Dench performance I'm not that enthused about.
Meryl Streep - August: Osage County
Another year, another Meryl Streep nomination. A couple things about this one, though: this performance is in the wrong category to me. Switch out Julia Roberts for this one and make Meryl the Supporting and things would be way more accurate. They felt Roberts might have a better chance to win in Supporting but it just looks ridiculous. Meryl is clearly supporting to me and she should be in that category. The other thing is that this is actually a pretty decent Meryl performance, even by her standards. Sure, she gets the benefit of the doubt way too much (her nomination in the next year is an example of that) but this one is good. She plays the matriarch of a family in Oklahoma who has cancer but is still an ornery asshole. The whole family comes back to town for the father's funeral and we get a day in the life situation. Streep's character is very unlikable. She berates her kids and makes fun of them and calls them out for their shortcomings all the while she's had issues herself. It feels true to life with a matriarch ruining a family gathering because she is stuck on her own power trip. And that's what it is. A power trip. It's the mother not wanting to concede power just because she is sick and continuing to hound her family. There are moments where Streep can make the character feel sympathetic but then she immediately cancels it out with a mean remark and you go back to hating her. Streep nails the accent as usual and looks and walks the part with her missing hair and shuffling demeanor. She's really great as the matriarch putting down her progeny and is also good in the tender moments, few they may be. It's typical mid level Streep performance and is not a bad inclusion for Oscar if only it were in the right category!
I hated, HATED how this category turned out and how it was essentially over very early. It was Blanchett's to lose since the beginning really and it made for one boring year for Best Actress. No one else really came close. Maybe Bullock but not really. She was my winner and one I thought was more than deserved and if I could replace her win earlier for The Blindside, well, maybe I could right some wrongs. I guess Streep comes in second because she's the lesser of what's left even though she deserves to be in Supporting. But whatever. Blanchett, Dench, and Adams. Just blech. I'll never watch any of their performances again while I'm alive and if I do it's because someone is torturing me.
Oscar Winner: Cate Blanchett - Blue Jasmine
My Winner: Sandra Bullock - Gravity
Meryl Streep
Cate Blanchett
Judi Dench
Amy Adams
2013 Best Actress
Cate Blanchett - Blue Jasmine
I never, ever understood the hype for Blanchett in this film. I get that people were eager to see her in a Woody Allen written role but after watching it, I didn't get all the effusive love. Maybe it just never clicked with me, but I didn't think it was worth a second win for Blanchett. First of all, she plays the character so over the top that it was hard for me to really become invested in the character. Plus, Woody wrote her as such an insufferable character which also leads to not really caring about her. I get that the character was a bit over the top to begin with but I do think Blanchett just overplays it. It's too on the nose and too obviously acting. I was just as annoyed at Blanchett as the old lady in the beginning of the film who had to sit next to her character on the plane and she wouldn't shut up. Her story arc wasn't compelling in the least, it was way too short, and no one is gonna care about a very rich woman who loses her wealth only to lie to try and get it back and trick another man. There is no doubt that Blanchett is a great actress. That great acting ability shines through a lot in this performance but it doesn't save it unfortunately. The very end of the film is really some nice acting by Blanchett and felt like her Oscar moment. It also speaks to the whole mental illness thing which I've harped on a lot but her character clearly suffers from something and it's glossed over and used as a joke quite often. Maybe a more serious look at her problem would make for a better film, obviously that wouldn't be a very Woody Allen film, though. There just seems to be a lot lacking from Blanchett's character for me to really understand why this was so loved and why it won here. I think voters just really like Woody Allen female nominations for some reason and really liked the overacting from Blanchett. To me, I wanted a whole lot more from the performance.
Amy Adams - American Hustle
I really wanted to like Amy Adams in this performance, I really did. But unfortunately I really disliked it and this might be the first performance of hers that I haven't liked (at least Oscar nominations wise). For whatever reason it just never clicked with me. I felt her character was uninspired and Adams wasn't able to salvage anything from it with her performance. She was essentially there to look hot and be the meat for the male characters to ogle and fight over. And in a film where everyone is overacting and the plot is ridiculous (no matter how true) Adams doesn't really do much to stand out. It's frankly a boring performance, which is unfortunate because we all know Adams is incredibly talented. Probably doesn't help that I don't look at Adams as any kind of sex symbol, so when the sex appeal is all her character has then there is nothing else to save it. I'd say the one plus I can think of is that she has decent chemistry with Bale, which shouldn't come as much of a surprise. But other than that, I really can't muster up anything else to say about her performance. It's not very interesting and not one that I want to come back to any time soon.
Sandra Bullock - Gravity
I was pretty harsh on Bullock in the past for the abomination that was The Blindside, but damn if this isn't a really, really good performance. I know that she's capable of giving them but it's nice to actually see it and see it rewarded. This is kind of the quintessential strong female leading performance. One that should be pointed to when talking about how women don't get many leading roles in science fiction or big budget movies as an example of why they should be given that chance. Bullock is a good role model for young women to look up to with this role. A scientist who becomes an astronaut who, while faced with certain death and insurmountable adversity, prevails and successfully returns to Earth. Hell, that's someone everyone could look up to! Now, in the beginning Bullock is pretty annoying with her whole nervous, super newbie persona and you start to think oh no, they're making the woman astronaut out to be a complete joke. But eventually Bullock musters up her courage and training and pulls it together and gets things done. When I was first watching I was really worried she would stay this sort of bumbling wreck but I'm glad she didn't. Obviously the writers wanted her character to show growth and luckily Bullock is good in not making that transition seem insincere or forced. Bullock's performance is pretty strong as I said and I really enjoy seeing her persevere and figure out how to survive to the next obstacle. Maybe that's a little sadistic, I don't know, but I enjoyed seeing her overcome all the odds. I know this sounds like I'm underselling the performance or that I wasn't that into it but I was and her performance is the best to me out of this sad group.
Judi Dench - Philomena
I know it's unfair but, man, I'm tired of Judi Dench nominations, legit over them. I'm over them because they are all pretty much the same with some minor variations here and there and once you've seen one, you've basically seen the rest. I get that Dench is a great actress but I know for sure that some of her nominations aren't worth being included in the Oscar world. Yeah, that's harsh but I think people reading this can definitely understand where I'm coming from. So is Dench's performance in Philomena an example of what I'm talking about? Yes and no. It's the same sort of meek character that eventually proves to be this really strong woman underneath her surly/shy/whatever demeanor. This time she's an older woman whose daughter tells Steve Coogan (who I absolutely love by the way) about how a nunnery made her give her son away for an American couple to adopt so they could make money. Coogan is a journalist and writes an expose about the bullshit nunnery who hid behind religion to enact atrocities on underprivileged, desperate young women. However, Dench's character is this daft old lady who makes for a boring watch. Every time Dench was talking or the focus of the story, I got bored. Steve Coogan is the only saving grace of the film. And the only voice of reason as Dench's character is an idiot who doesn't press to know what happened to her son and when learning she was screwed out of meeting him potentially forgives the idiot, asshole religious people who kept it a secret. Just watching this a second time, I dislike it when before I was like ok, not bad. Nah, not anymore. Not a fan and the whole forgiveness angle rings hollow. Just another Dench performance I'm not that enthused about.
Meryl Streep - August: Osage County
Another year, another Meryl Streep nomination. A couple things about this one, though: this performance is in the wrong category to me. Switch out Julia Roberts for this one and make Meryl the Supporting and things would be way more accurate. They felt Roberts might have a better chance to win in Supporting but it just looks ridiculous. Meryl is clearly supporting to me and she should be in that category. The other thing is that this is actually a pretty decent Meryl performance, even by her standards. Sure, she gets the benefit of the doubt way too much (her nomination in the next year is an example of that) but this one is good. She plays the matriarch of a family in Oklahoma who has cancer but is still an ornery asshole. The whole family comes back to town for the father's funeral and we get a day in the life situation. Streep's character is very unlikable. She berates her kids and makes fun of them and calls them out for their shortcomings all the while she's had issues herself. It feels true to life with a matriarch ruining a family gathering because she is stuck on her own power trip. And that's what it is. A power trip. It's the mother not wanting to concede power just because she is sick and continuing to hound her family. There are moments where Streep can make the character feel sympathetic but then she immediately cancels it out with a mean remark and you go back to hating her. Streep nails the accent as usual and looks and walks the part with her missing hair and shuffling demeanor. She's really great as the matriarch putting down her progeny and is also good in the tender moments, few they may be. It's typical mid level Streep performance and is not a bad inclusion for Oscar if only it were in the right category!
I hated, HATED how this category turned out and how it was essentially over very early. It was Blanchett's to lose since the beginning really and it made for one boring year for Best Actress. No one else really came close. Maybe Bullock but not really. She was my winner and one I thought was more than deserved and if I could replace her win earlier for The Blindside, well, maybe I could right some wrongs. I guess Streep comes in second because she's the lesser of what's left even though she deserves to be in Supporting. But whatever. Blanchett, Dench, and Adams. Just blech. I'll never watch any of their performances again while I'm alive and if I do it's because someone is torturing me.
Oscar Winner: Cate Blanchett - Blue Jasmine
My Winner: Sandra Bullock - Gravity
Meryl Streep
Cate Blanchett
Judi Dench
Amy Adams
Saturday, November 7, 2015
Supporting Actor 2013
Favorite category time again! I know it won't let me down and I can't wait to watch these guys again.
2013 Best Supporting Actor
Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club
I think it's kind of easy to dismiss Leto as simply dressing up as a woman and that's about it. But his performance has way more depth than first meets the eye and that's all because of Leto's ability. He makes Rayon much more than just a costume or caricature. Rayon feels natural and lived in and doesn't seem like a walking exaggeration, which can always be a huge problem when portraying a trans person. It's easy to slip into making fun of them or portraying them as nothing but loud, dramatic queens which of course isn't representative of them as a whole. I think Leto's dedication in losing lots of weight and talking with lots of trans people to better understand them and represent them shows. His chemistry with McConaughey is very apparent even when Ron and Rayon are at odds with each other. It's like they are an old couple at times and certainly like they are good friends at other times. Leto's performance also allows the general public to see that trans people aren't these terrible, awful degenerates. They are people first and foremost and can be kind, caring, and just like people you know. I think that's why Leto's performance works is because it's a very honest one. And of course, the Academy loves a good transformation like weight loss and playing a woman, so that certainly helped Leto here, too. But Leto does give a great performance even without the transformation stuff and one that resonated with the voters.
Barkhad Abdi - Captain Phillips
This was a terrific performance out of nowhere. I mean when I first watched this film, I thought that damn, that hijacker guy was really fucking good and it would be so cool if he could get some recognition for being awesome. And get some recognition did he! Barkhad won a BAFTA which is no small feat. What I always liked about Abdi's performance was that he brought the human element to the terrorist/hijacker, something that we all too often don't get. We understood that they did this because of the hopelessness of their situation in Somalia. They probably never expected to get killed or captured and were definitely not trained to take lots of hostages or stand up to the US Navy. Another amazing thing about Abdi was that he ad libbed the "Look at me, I'm the Captain now" phrase. That phrase has been widely parodied, mocked, imitated, and lauded for it's badass nature. The fact that it was made up on the spot yet became a cinematic phrase on par with "Rosebud" and "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" is mind blowing. He brings an intimidating presence without being unrealistic. With all that said, this guy was a first time actor! He came from Somalia when little and never acted before which is just nuts to think about because he is so good. From the beginning and asserting dominance to the end where he realizes all hope is lost. Abdi gives a really impressive performance.
Bradley Cooper - American Hustle
I definitely wasn't the biggest fan of American Hustle, but I actually kinda liked Cooper in this role. I felt it was a lot more palatable than his turn in Silver Linings Playbook. It was evident to me that Cooper was having a lot of fun playing the FBI agent and was perfectly happy hamming it up in a very likable role. The performance itself is pretty uneven, but that's because the hamming it up thing doesn't work the entire time. Plus, the script and plot make his character look a bit ridiculous at times which Cooper struggles to overcome. It's way more hit than miss, however, and Cooper displays some great comedic chops. That's when it seems extremely evident that he's loving his character and loving acting with his pals. Every time his character is on screen you are guaranteed to laugh at something and his badgering of Louis CK is pretty hilarious. It's just a lot of fun to watch Cooper work in this role and his enthusiasm is contagious. I'd say he's having the most fun out of anyone in the film, honestly. Like playing with house money and getting an Oscar nomination out of it. It's kind of nice to see passion rewarded and I can't hate on this nomination very much. It's not the best but it is entertaining and all nominations should at least be that.
Michael Fassbender - 12 Years a Slave
I didn't remember Fassbender being as good as he is in this performance. I kinda remembered that he was a mean, drunk slave owner but he does bring a lot more depth to the role than I remember. It's obviously the most flashy role in the entire film and one that if done poorly, could be very, very bad. Fassbender does not do a poor job, however, and delivers a pretty convincing and decent performance. The easy route would have been to go over the top with a character like this, creating a caricature of what a loud, belligerent slave owner might look like. But Fassbender mixes in some thoughtfulness and humanity even if those emotions aren't readily apparent or even easy to see. He's a man set in his ways but has moments of weakness (or maybe you could call it strength) where he realizes that he's acting inhumane and you feel like you can see his brain debating whether to continue the ill treatment of his property/slaves. Fassbender is here to provide the fuel to an ever growing fire of disgust and hatred of the system and the culture of that time for the audience and he does a rather convincing job of stoking the flames. He's essentially a villain but he doesn't portray his character in a cartoony way, which I think some of that can be because of McQueen as well. It can be weird calling a character such as Epps a good performance but Fassbender is able to make me do just that. Hopefully we will see much more of Fassbender in the Oscars to come.
Jonah Hill - The Wolf of Wall Street
Jonah brings a lot more to this role than he did to his Moneyball role and that should come as no surprise. Apparently he begged Scorsese or the producers to let him take the role and even took really low pay to play the part. I guess if you're going to go to those extremes, you need to deliver a performance that is Oscar worthy, right? Hill brings the comedic chops to a supporting role that is basically comic relief, but really good comic relief. There's a lot of humor in this film so Hill fits right in and makes the character and performance work. He plays an obnoxious asshole stockbroker friend of Jordan Belfort and runs with it. It's over the top but the whole film is over the top so it doesn't stand out in a negative way. A lot of his antics are pretty hilarious so it's easy to see why Hill would be remembered and nominated. And that's really about all there is to it which isn't a bad thing. Sometimes it's nice to see comedy roles get nominated, even dark comedy roles such as this one.
Another great group for Supporting Actor. There's not one among these guys that I dislike or even remotely kinda, sorta only somewhat like. Nope. All of these dudes are pretty good and give some fun performances. And that seems to be the theme for this year: fun. I would give my win to Abdi as his performance came out of nowhere and rivaled Tom Hanks in that film, which is no easy feat. Then clearly Leto who I'm ok with winning the actual Oscar, followed by Fassbender bringing it in his film, then Cooper and Hill hamming it up. Everyone just seemed to be having fun in their roles and that's always great to see.
Oscar Winner: Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club
My Winner: Barkhad Abdi - Captain Phillips
Jared Leto
Michael Fassbender
Bradley Cooper
Jonah Hill
2013 Best Supporting Actor
Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club
I think it's kind of easy to dismiss Leto as simply dressing up as a woman and that's about it. But his performance has way more depth than first meets the eye and that's all because of Leto's ability. He makes Rayon much more than just a costume or caricature. Rayon feels natural and lived in and doesn't seem like a walking exaggeration, which can always be a huge problem when portraying a trans person. It's easy to slip into making fun of them or portraying them as nothing but loud, dramatic queens which of course isn't representative of them as a whole. I think Leto's dedication in losing lots of weight and talking with lots of trans people to better understand them and represent them shows. His chemistry with McConaughey is very apparent even when Ron and Rayon are at odds with each other. It's like they are an old couple at times and certainly like they are good friends at other times. Leto's performance also allows the general public to see that trans people aren't these terrible, awful degenerates. They are people first and foremost and can be kind, caring, and just like people you know. I think that's why Leto's performance works is because it's a very honest one. And of course, the Academy loves a good transformation like weight loss and playing a woman, so that certainly helped Leto here, too. But Leto does give a great performance even without the transformation stuff and one that resonated with the voters.
Barkhad Abdi - Captain Phillips
This was a terrific performance out of nowhere. I mean when I first watched this film, I thought that damn, that hijacker guy was really fucking good and it would be so cool if he could get some recognition for being awesome. And get some recognition did he! Barkhad won a BAFTA which is no small feat. What I always liked about Abdi's performance was that he brought the human element to the terrorist/hijacker, something that we all too often don't get. We understood that they did this because of the hopelessness of their situation in Somalia. They probably never expected to get killed or captured and were definitely not trained to take lots of hostages or stand up to the US Navy. Another amazing thing about Abdi was that he ad libbed the "Look at me, I'm the Captain now" phrase. That phrase has been widely parodied, mocked, imitated, and lauded for it's badass nature. The fact that it was made up on the spot yet became a cinematic phrase on par with "Rosebud" and "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" is mind blowing. He brings an intimidating presence without being unrealistic. With all that said, this guy was a first time actor! He came from Somalia when little and never acted before which is just nuts to think about because he is so good. From the beginning and asserting dominance to the end where he realizes all hope is lost. Abdi gives a really impressive performance.
Bradley Cooper - American Hustle
I definitely wasn't the biggest fan of American Hustle, but I actually kinda liked Cooper in this role. I felt it was a lot more palatable than his turn in Silver Linings Playbook. It was evident to me that Cooper was having a lot of fun playing the FBI agent and was perfectly happy hamming it up in a very likable role. The performance itself is pretty uneven, but that's because the hamming it up thing doesn't work the entire time. Plus, the script and plot make his character look a bit ridiculous at times which Cooper struggles to overcome. It's way more hit than miss, however, and Cooper displays some great comedic chops. That's when it seems extremely evident that he's loving his character and loving acting with his pals. Every time his character is on screen you are guaranteed to laugh at something and his badgering of Louis CK is pretty hilarious. It's just a lot of fun to watch Cooper work in this role and his enthusiasm is contagious. I'd say he's having the most fun out of anyone in the film, honestly. Like playing with house money and getting an Oscar nomination out of it. It's kind of nice to see passion rewarded and I can't hate on this nomination very much. It's not the best but it is entertaining and all nominations should at least be that.
Michael Fassbender - 12 Years a Slave
I didn't remember Fassbender being as good as he is in this performance. I kinda remembered that he was a mean, drunk slave owner but he does bring a lot more depth to the role than I remember. It's obviously the most flashy role in the entire film and one that if done poorly, could be very, very bad. Fassbender does not do a poor job, however, and delivers a pretty convincing and decent performance. The easy route would have been to go over the top with a character like this, creating a caricature of what a loud, belligerent slave owner might look like. But Fassbender mixes in some thoughtfulness and humanity even if those emotions aren't readily apparent or even easy to see. He's a man set in his ways but has moments of weakness (or maybe you could call it strength) where he realizes that he's acting inhumane and you feel like you can see his brain debating whether to continue the ill treatment of his property/slaves. Fassbender is here to provide the fuel to an ever growing fire of disgust and hatred of the system and the culture of that time for the audience and he does a rather convincing job of stoking the flames. He's essentially a villain but he doesn't portray his character in a cartoony way, which I think some of that can be because of McQueen as well. It can be weird calling a character such as Epps a good performance but Fassbender is able to make me do just that. Hopefully we will see much more of Fassbender in the Oscars to come.
Jonah Hill - The Wolf of Wall Street
Jonah brings a lot more to this role than he did to his Moneyball role and that should come as no surprise. Apparently he begged Scorsese or the producers to let him take the role and even took really low pay to play the part. I guess if you're going to go to those extremes, you need to deliver a performance that is Oscar worthy, right? Hill brings the comedic chops to a supporting role that is basically comic relief, but really good comic relief. There's a lot of humor in this film so Hill fits right in and makes the character and performance work. He plays an obnoxious asshole stockbroker friend of Jordan Belfort and runs with it. It's over the top but the whole film is over the top so it doesn't stand out in a negative way. A lot of his antics are pretty hilarious so it's easy to see why Hill would be remembered and nominated. And that's really about all there is to it which isn't a bad thing. Sometimes it's nice to see comedy roles get nominated, even dark comedy roles such as this one.
Another great group for Supporting Actor. There's not one among these guys that I dislike or even remotely kinda, sorta only somewhat like. Nope. All of these dudes are pretty good and give some fun performances. And that seems to be the theme for this year: fun. I would give my win to Abdi as his performance came out of nowhere and rivaled Tom Hanks in that film, which is no easy feat. Then clearly Leto who I'm ok with winning the actual Oscar, followed by Fassbender bringing it in his film, then Cooper and Hill hamming it up. Everyone just seemed to be having fun in their roles and that's always great to see.
Oscar Winner: Jared Leto - Dallas Buyers Club
My Winner: Barkhad Abdi - Captain Phillips
Jared Leto
Michael Fassbender
Bradley Cooper
Jonah Hill
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Supporting Actress 2013
Almost current! Not gonna waste any more time and will get right to it. A good group that should be fun to revisit.
2013 Best Supporting Actress
Lupita Nyong'o - 12 Years a Slave
I'll be honest, when I first watched this I didn't even know which character was Lupita. I knew she was being mentioned as a possible nominee but I guess I just overlooked her. This was the first time I've watched it since she won so I was keen to see if she really deserved a win and wasn't just a token win. Having now watched it again, I'm a bit divided and uncertain. She plays Patsey, a slave who has caught the eye of Master Epps and suffers because of it. And suffer does she! That's essentially what the whole performance is, showing the extremes of the female perspective of ill treatment of the time. She is raped by Epps who lauds her for outworking the men in the fields, but Epps' wife hates her because she knows he fancies Patsey over her and makes her life a hell on earth. She is savagely beaten and doesn't seem to be close with the other slaves. It's a pitiful existence and Lupita is able to express that pain very well in her performance. Patsey doesn't get much opportunity to talk and we see her in spurts and I feel like Lupita never is able to let Patsey shine. I can see why everyone loved it and voted for it but I'm just slightly unsure if it being a slave film and part had any reasoning in that. It's a very physical role for Lupita since her character doesn't do that much talking and she uses that chance to let her acting show the hellish circumstances of her character. There's a certain amount of bravery in the performance and she really is a conduit for a whole generation of slave women. I'm just not sure if there was enough to the performance for me to want it to win. I may have to let it sink in a while to really evaluate it but for now just being in pain and suffering a lot isn't enough for me.
Sally Hawkins - Blue Jasmine
I really like this performance. It's purely supporting in the best way. But, I would have preferred if Woody Allen focused on Hawkins' character instead of Blanchett's. It's more interesting and more natural and that's all thanks to Hawkins. Her storyline is a bit overly simplified, but I think that's because it's pushed to the background. If the entire movie was about her character it might have been more fleshed out. Either way, Hawkins is entertaining in her role and makes me want to see her more. It doesn't help that Blanchett's character is insufferable and her performance is over the top. Hawkins brings a natural ability to her role and fits really well within the Woody Allen female archetype. This isn't any sort of overwhelming, amzing performance - it's just good. But when you don't like the main character and find your mind wandering to what would a full movie for Hawkins be like, well, that's a pretty good performance indeed. At least Allen is able to write some pretty decent female roles even if his films are so hit and miss with me. The thing about this nomination is that it made me want to check out more films from Hawkins, so I count that as a win.
Jennifer Lawrence - American Hustle
Ugh. There's actually a lot to not like about this performance. For one, it feels like the Academy is unreasonably infatuated with her and are going to nominate her no matter what like she's some kind of young Meryl Streep. She definitely doesn't deserve that type of love (yet) and this role certainly doesn't. So obviously they want to keep rewarding her for whatever reason - fine. But Lawrence in this role is way too young. She doesn't fit the character AT ALL. She sticks out like a sore thumb for me and she overacts in response. Maybe that's due to her trying to keep up with her co-stars but she just does not look like she belongs in this film. And then you have the cringe worthy Live and Let Die sequence which is just stupid. But really the whole time you're just thinking how out of place Lawrence looks compared to everyone else and it's all that stands out about her performance. There was some real buzz that Lawrence would repeat as a winner and I can't understand why. Even if you throw out the youth factor what are you left with exactly? Her character is the snotty, annoying, abrasive wife of Bale's character and is loud and overbearing in all of her scenes. The character and film itself is essentially just like Lawrence's character but that just means it's easy to act with no refinement (I realize how pretentious I sound). It's similar to her winning performance the year earlier and that makes sense given it's the same writer/director again. With it being similar, there's nothing to set it apart and make it special. An underwhelming and frustrating performance from Lawrence.
Julia Roberts - August: Osage County
This is straight up category fraud and I have no idea why The Weinstein Company put Julia here instead of in Leading and put Streep here instead. I guess they figured she could win here instead of going up against the Cate Blanchett juggernaut. I think it's some lame power play BS but Roberts is most definitely a Leading role in this film. And she's really flipping good. I loved this performance so much. It was very raw and powerful and real and just damn good. She's really the only sensible person in her screwed up family and the only one to stand up to Streep's overbearing mother. She is the glue that holds the family together and that sort of strong role obviously suits Roberts very well. This performance also lacks most, if not all, of the Julia quirks and annoyances. She dives 100% into the character and doesn't give off her America's Sweetheart charm you can find in lots of her roles. She is a realist and plainly tired of her mother's and family's shit. Roberts does well with being the strong daughter not taking any gruff from Streep, but she also shines in the tender moments that are true to life for families. You can go from telling your mother off to caring deeply and commiserating about her cancer diagnosis. Roberts is a veteran actress and easily switches between the extremes without losing any truth in the performance. I also have to say that it was nice to see Julia back in a legit film, in a legit role just bringing a great performance to the screen again. She's been missing for too long and I feel she can give more Oscar worthy turns like this in the future.
June Squibb - Nebraska
The first time I watched this film and performance, I didn't much like Squibb's portrayal of her character. Just thought she was ornery and vulgar for no reason other than some laughs and didn't really do much else. But as with all of Alexander Payne's films, they sort of creep into my subconscious and I realize they are actually a lot better than what my initial reaction thinks. Same goes for Squibb here. I grew to appreciate her character a lot more and thought a bit more highly of it than just comic relief. She actually has a badass moment where she tells the family off for wanting hand outs from her husband who they think struck it rich and reminding them that he's helped them in so many ways. It's a very true to life portrayal that is way more than just funny because she says fuck and shows a gravestone her hooha. She has a real love for her family even if she bitches at them non-stop, acting like a tigress when some outside force threatens them. She reminds me of the sassy grandma or aunt who says whatever about anyone or anything because she just doesn't care what anyone thinks. I feel like I kinda wish Squibb was related to me somehow so she could have my back and then I could also here her hilarious quips all the time. I like how feisty she is and apparently Oscar did too and I can't blame them. I'm glad Squibb got this nomination.
Another year, another Supporting Actress group. This year is at least waaaaaay better than usual. They all offer up something interesting and makes this one of the better Supporting Actress groups I've done. Julia Roberts is easily my winner probably by virtue of being a Leading role placed in this category. But from there it gets interesting. June Squibb skyrocketed up my rankings because she's just so damn charming in a gruff sort of way. And I would have preferred watching a movie focused on Sally Hawkins instead of Cate Blanchett so that's why she's a close 3. Lupita won the Oscar but didn't win me over and, well, I hated Lawrence's performance in her film. All in all not a bad year for my most hated category! Things are looking up!
Oscar Winner: Lupita Nyong'o - 12 Years a Slave
My Winner: Julia Roberts - August: Osage County
June Squibb
Sally Hawkins
Lupita Nyong'o
Jennifer Lawrence
2013 Best Supporting Actress
Lupita Nyong'o - 12 Years a Slave
I'll be honest, when I first watched this I didn't even know which character was Lupita. I knew she was being mentioned as a possible nominee but I guess I just overlooked her. This was the first time I've watched it since she won so I was keen to see if she really deserved a win and wasn't just a token win. Having now watched it again, I'm a bit divided and uncertain. She plays Patsey, a slave who has caught the eye of Master Epps and suffers because of it. And suffer does she! That's essentially what the whole performance is, showing the extremes of the female perspective of ill treatment of the time. She is raped by Epps who lauds her for outworking the men in the fields, but Epps' wife hates her because she knows he fancies Patsey over her and makes her life a hell on earth. She is savagely beaten and doesn't seem to be close with the other slaves. It's a pitiful existence and Lupita is able to express that pain very well in her performance. Patsey doesn't get much opportunity to talk and we see her in spurts and I feel like Lupita never is able to let Patsey shine. I can see why everyone loved it and voted for it but I'm just slightly unsure if it being a slave film and part had any reasoning in that. It's a very physical role for Lupita since her character doesn't do that much talking and she uses that chance to let her acting show the hellish circumstances of her character. There's a certain amount of bravery in the performance and she really is a conduit for a whole generation of slave women. I'm just not sure if there was enough to the performance for me to want it to win. I may have to let it sink in a while to really evaluate it but for now just being in pain and suffering a lot isn't enough for me.
Sally Hawkins - Blue Jasmine
I really like this performance. It's purely supporting in the best way. But, I would have preferred if Woody Allen focused on Hawkins' character instead of Blanchett's. It's more interesting and more natural and that's all thanks to Hawkins. Her storyline is a bit overly simplified, but I think that's because it's pushed to the background. If the entire movie was about her character it might have been more fleshed out. Either way, Hawkins is entertaining in her role and makes me want to see her more. It doesn't help that Blanchett's character is insufferable and her performance is over the top. Hawkins brings a natural ability to her role and fits really well within the Woody Allen female archetype. This isn't any sort of overwhelming, amzing performance - it's just good. But when you don't like the main character and find your mind wandering to what would a full movie for Hawkins be like, well, that's a pretty good performance indeed. At least Allen is able to write some pretty decent female roles even if his films are so hit and miss with me. The thing about this nomination is that it made me want to check out more films from Hawkins, so I count that as a win.
Jennifer Lawrence - American Hustle
Ugh. There's actually a lot to not like about this performance. For one, it feels like the Academy is unreasonably infatuated with her and are going to nominate her no matter what like she's some kind of young Meryl Streep. She definitely doesn't deserve that type of love (yet) and this role certainly doesn't. So obviously they want to keep rewarding her for whatever reason - fine. But Lawrence in this role is way too young. She doesn't fit the character AT ALL. She sticks out like a sore thumb for me and she overacts in response. Maybe that's due to her trying to keep up with her co-stars but she just does not look like she belongs in this film. And then you have the cringe worthy Live and Let Die sequence which is just stupid. But really the whole time you're just thinking how out of place Lawrence looks compared to everyone else and it's all that stands out about her performance. There was some real buzz that Lawrence would repeat as a winner and I can't understand why. Even if you throw out the youth factor what are you left with exactly? Her character is the snotty, annoying, abrasive wife of Bale's character and is loud and overbearing in all of her scenes. The character and film itself is essentially just like Lawrence's character but that just means it's easy to act with no refinement (I realize how pretentious I sound). It's similar to her winning performance the year earlier and that makes sense given it's the same writer/director again. With it being similar, there's nothing to set it apart and make it special. An underwhelming and frustrating performance from Lawrence.
Julia Roberts - August: Osage County
This is straight up category fraud and I have no idea why The Weinstein Company put Julia here instead of in Leading and put Streep here instead. I guess they figured she could win here instead of going up against the Cate Blanchett juggernaut. I think it's some lame power play BS but Roberts is most definitely a Leading role in this film. And she's really flipping good. I loved this performance so much. It was very raw and powerful and real and just damn good. She's really the only sensible person in her screwed up family and the only one to stand up to Streep's overbearing mother. She is the glue that holds the family together and that sort of strong role obviously suits Roberts very well. This performance also lacks most, if not all, of the Julia quirks and annoyances. She dives 100% into the character and doesn't give off her America's Sweetheart charm you can find in lots of her roles. She is a realist and plainly tired of her mother's and family's shit. Roberts does well with being the strong daughter not taking any gruff from Streep, but she also shines in the tender moments that are true to life for families. You can go from telling your mother off to caring deeply and commiserating about her cancer diagnosis. Roberts is a veteran actress and easily switches between the extremes without losing any truth in the performance. I also have to say that it was nice to see Julia back in a legit film, in a legit role just bringing a great performance to the screen again. She's been missing for too long and I feel she can give more Oscar worthy turns like this in the future.
June Squibb - Nebraska
The first time I watched this film and performance, I didn't much like Squibb's portrayal of her character. Just thought she was ornery and vulgar for no reason other than some laughs and didn't really do much else. But as with all of Alexander Payne's films, they sort of creep into my subconscious and I realize they are actually a lot better than what my initial reaction thinks. Same goes for Squibb here. I grew to appreciate her character a lot more and thought a bit more highly of it than just comic relief. She actually has a badass moment where she tells the family off for wanting hand outs from her husband who they think struck it rich and reminding them that he's helped them in so many ways. It's a very true to life portrayal that is way more than just funny because she says fuck and shows a gravestone her hooha. She has a real love for her family even if she bitches at them non-stop, acting like a tigress when some outside force threatens them. She reminds me of the sassy grandma or aunt who says whatever about anyone or anything because she just doesn't care what anyone thinks. I feel like I kinda wish Squibb was related to me somehow so she could have my back and then I could also here her hilarious quips all the time. I like how feisty she is and apparently Oscar did too and I can't blame them. I'm glad Squibb got this nomination.
Another year, another Supporting Actress group. This year is at least waaaaaay better than usual. They all offer up something interesting and makes this one of the better Supporting Actress groups I've done. Julia Roberts is easily my winner probably by virtue of being a Leading role placed in this category. But from there it gets interesting. June Squibb skyrocketed up my rankings because she's just so damn charming in a gruff sort of way. And I would have preferred watching a movie focused on Sally Hawkins instead of Cate Blanchett so that's why she's a close 3. Lupita won the Oscar but didn't win me over and, well, I hated Lawrence's performance in her film. All in all not a bad year for my most hated category! Things are looking up!
Oscar Winner: Lupita Nyong'o - 12 Years a Slave
My Winner: Julia Roberts - August: Osage County
June Squibb
Sally Hawkins
Lupita Nyong'o
Jennifer Lawrence
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Best Picture 2012
So after finally starting to get caught up with the current awards, I've noticed that there seems to be a lack of diversity for the films among the different acting/picture groups. Watching Supporting Actress and Actor almost finishes up all the different films I need to see. It's like the Academy is not looking at anything else besides the 9 or so films that get nominated for Best Picture. Of course, there are more films nominated instead of the 5 we had for so long, but it just seems all those smaller performances aren't getting seen. I dunno but 2013 gets even worse from what I can tell. I'd have to look at 2014 again but that trend needs to stop. I want more diversity in the number of films that get nominated. Anyway, on to this year's group.
2012 Best Picture
Argo
Argo is a crowdpleaser. Depending on who you ask, that can be a good or bad thing. Usually when it comes to Oscar it's a bad thing, especially if the crowdpleaser is a winner. I'm surprised they haven't actually made or tried to make the actual Argo movie because I'm sure there would be lots of interest, no matter how bad it might be! One of the main reasons I personally think Argo won here, is because it's one of the biggest representations of Hollywood helping out the world. So it winning is basically Hollywood or Oscar patting itself on the back. Let's be for real, Oscar loves rewarding itself, especially lately! So no doubt a movie about Hollywood saving some Americans from Iran in the 80s would get enough votes for Best Picture. Throw in the whole Ben Affleck not being nominated for Best Director controversy and there are plenty of reasons why people wanted Argo to win. Argo is decent at raising the tension for some of it's crucial scenes. The thing is we all know that things came out alright and those little bits of tension aren't enough to sustain the film for me. It's an easily likable crowdpleaser, like I said, but it's a little too safe. There's a couple brief scenes with the Canadian residence housemaid (who is Iranian) or whatever where she lies to the Iranian authorities about there being any other people in the home and you're not sure if she's gonna tell or not. More of those moments that involve the sacrifice of the Iranians to help this escape go down would have been great. Instead we do get a bit of rah rah Americans are great showcase. And while Argo is a satisfying film to watch and isn't a bad choice for a nominee, it just lacks that certain something that makes it a winner. There's a couple other films in this group that are frankly way better than this one. Even just a couple years later, I still don't think it holds up all that well as a winner. To me, it's just an uninspiring pat on the back for Oscar.
Amour
I was dreading having to watch this one again. A 2 plus hour French movie about old people dying - exciting! I know that's simplifying it way too much but honestly that's what sticks out when thinking about having to watch it again. This was the last film I watched prior to the Oscar ceremony that year. I finished it during the second commercial break so that I could say that I'd seen all the nominees prior to the awards being given out. So part of me was wondering if I gave this Palme d'Or winner a legit chance. It was widely praised and will most likely be one of those films on best of all time lists that have a ton of foreign films (which I do like!) you've never seen or heard of, so I should at least give it a real chance. I guess I didn't appreciate it before, but I really quite like the static shots that watch the lives of the characters play out from across the room for a few minutes or so without cutting or moving the camera. It makes the film feel really intimate and like you're a part of these peoples' lives. Plus, it's just nice to watch something that doesn't have a million jump cuts and angles trying to make up for a lack of plot. Amour is very real and awkward at times and I think that's part of the great love many people have for it - it shows life as it is, warts and all. But at times it does feel insincere. The couple seem selfish in their own ways, Georges for not wanting to have his daughter around to see her mother and Anne for giving up on life. It does feel a little on the extremes at times but overall it works. The acting is natural and the leads are definitely compelling. While this style could be cold and clinical it's nice that it manages to include the humane touch, as well. Is it something I want to watch again? No, especially not after a long day at work and this is what is awaiting me. It's a film to see and say you saw and appreciate it.
Beasts of the Southern Wild
This film can be a little tough to follow. I had to read the wikipedia entry to make sense of it and that was while watching it for the second time. This film exploded onto the scene after winning Sundance and just stayed in the collective conscious of the voters for the rest of year - something most Sundance films don't do. Normally they lose steam and fade by the time summer rolls around all the big Hollywood movies start coming out and then we start getting the Oscar films after that. Kudos to Beasts, I guess, but I still don't find what everyone thought was so compelling about it. I know Wallis was well liked but I thought the acting showed just how amateur it actually was. The metaphors and deeper meaning stuff was something that was uninteresting to me. I didn't care about any of that and critics seemed to latch onto it in treating it as something more important than it really was. Overall, I simply found the film to be boring. The first time I was interested because of all the hype and I wanted to see exactly what everyone saw in it to keep it alive through awards season and get it nominated. The second time was even worse because I knew what I was getting myself into. I guess some films just really speak to some people and some films don't. This one certainly doesn't speak to me on any level. The positive is that southern Louisiana does look pretty great and I kinda dig the direction style. It gives an otherwise boring film some energy and does it's best to keep me into it. The nomination is its own reward and this film got plenty of rewards I'm not sure it should have.
Django Unchained
There's an awful lot to like about this Tarantino film, which ticks off all the usual great things about Tarantino films. It has fantastic musical choices. From the theme song which is from another movie but fits well here to all the other music used, it's one of the the typical highlights of Tarantino films. There's always one song that is instantly recognizable as being from his films. His dedication to the old techniques with using film instead of digital and his use of certain aspect ratios really do pay off in the end product. They may not be as noticeable to everyone but they sure do make for a very, very pretty film. Tarantino also is able to capture so many great looking locations, scenes, and compositions that watching his films is a visual treat. Even if you don't like the violence or blood or whatever, you can't say his films don't look good. And as usual, Tarantino gets great performances out of everyone, including all the random cameos in this. You can tell people want to come be a part of his films so they bring their A game and have fun while doing so which translates to the scenes. The writing and dialogue are of course top notch and very fun. He makes some scene crackle with his words and watching them unfold is just a lot of pure cinematic entertainment. He is absolutely an auteur. Where he stumbles, and ultimately where this film fails, is that Django is just way too damn long. It's about 30 minutes too long and unfortunately it seems that auteurs seem to make more and more bloated films as they get more respect and age in years and there is no one to reign them in or to at least say no to them. This film is almost 3 hours long and there's no reason it should be. The ending is so convoluted and tacked on that if you end it much earlier, you might be talking about Tarantino's first Best Picture win. Sadly, we get a film that enjoys the excess which includes a lot of needless shit at the end. There is no doubt if this was better edited and trimmed down, this would possibly be considered his best which would be high praise. Unfortunately we are only left with what could have been for what is a really good film.
Les Miserables
Now this is a pretty good musical, although it does have it's faults. It must be pretty hard to make a movie version of Les Mis because it's so beloved and well known by most people. You have to live up to everyone's expectation of what Les Mis is and ought to be. As much as I didn't like his Best Picture win for The King's Speech, Tom Hooper delivers a pretty good movie here. Hugh Jackman was a great choice as was Samantha Barks. The rest of the cast was alright and did their parts nobly but those two stood out head and shoulders above everyone else. Much was made about how the actors sang live on film instead of recording it later and it getting dubbed in, which is frankly an amazing an admirable thing. That could have been absolutely disastrous. Instead it really works for the movie and we get those raw songs and performances like Jackman's in the beginning of the movie. Much is to be said about capturing the realness of the emotions especially in a musical because it gives it such a genuine quality. There was a lot said also about how Hooper used a lot of extreme close up when the actors were singing. To me, that concept was hit and miss. There are times when it really works and adds to the intensity of the performances and makes the songs hit that much harder. Yet there are other times where it just gets annoying and awkward. I'm just impressed that such an epic musical was done in such a reverential but also original way. That's pretty key to a successful movie and musical. Add something new to Les Mis because we sure have seen a whole bunch of iterations of it through the years. It keeps it fresh and really made for an entertaining watch right to the end, well, mostly to the end. I think that it starts to putter out after the big battle scenes and gets stretched a little thin there. But as a whole, Les Mis is really well done and I can't find much to hate on. I've grown to love musicals more and more as I've grown up thanks to ex-girlfriends and this one ranks right up there for me just based on effort and execution alone.
Life of Pi
Every time I watch Life of Pi, I get so happy and hopeful. It's a very uplifting film and is how a feel good movie should be done. It never talks down to it's viewer and has a nice earnestness to it. The story it tells is quite something. It's fantastical but doesn't ever feel too unbelievable. I think that's due a bit to the acting and the storyteller and Ang Lee's dedication to the whole concept. It's also a very spiritual film. It absolutely talks about a higher power and believing in something. It's message is easy to digest but also not over the top which makes it not annoying. Basically when I watch it I feel better as a person, like I can do anything and help out others. There are other mediums that do the same thing for me like the book Siddhartha, I read it and want to change the world. I think that's why I like the film so much is that it makes me feel so good inside. It also has some absolutely incredible special effects. The tiger is mostly CGI and you cannot tell the difference between a real tiger and the CGI one, it's that good. All the animals and probably most of the ocean scenes are effects but it doesn't detract from the story instead adding to it and making it so much better. The film itself is also buoyed by the one man show of Suraj Sharma. He is amazing and does what many actors can't do - and that's carry a film by themselves. It's sad that he's an Indian kid because he should have been among the leading actor nominees. He was the perfect choice for Pi and really helped elevate the film. Also, I wanted to give a shout out to Irrfan Khan who is the grown up Pi who tells the tale because he is a really talented actor. I just really like him. Anyway, Life of Pi is a great, well done feel good movie that expertly uses CGI to tell a really interesting story.
Lincoln
Lincoln started out making me almost puke in my mouth. It starts off with two black soldiers who are joined by two white soldiers who start reciting the Gettysburg Address to Lincoln himself and I thought for sure we would get some sanctimonious Spielberg bullshit but thankfully that didn't happen. What we get is legitimately one of Spielberg's best works and he's made some great films. It tells of Lincoln's attempt to get the 13th Amendment passed. It's easy for your film to look good when your actor gives one of the best performances I've ever seen. When that man is Lincoln everything else is just relative. This film has so many good cameos and supporting turns. Yeah, Tommy Lee Jones is good but the triplet line of John Hawkes, Tim Blake Nelson, and especially James Spader are fantastic. Spader should be a national treasure but that's a different discussion. Lincoln offers up an intimate look at the President and excels at showing those moments when he's most human: telling a joke, interacting with a citizen, talking to his wife, or getting angry at his Cabinet. Spielberg's success is staying unobtrusive in those moments and not making everything so neatly wrapped up or manipulatively saccharine. He just lets things unfold and allows DDL to carry the scene and film. I also like that Lincoln didn't cover his whole life or whole presidency because that's just too much. Focusing on this one thing with everything else as a backdrop was incredibly smart. It allows for so much more focus and intensity without compromising huge swaths of time. It's a great looking film, with great acting, covering a great man. What more could you ask for?
Silver Linings Playbook
Just like some of the other films this year, I'm kinda burnt out when it comes to writing about the film itself. Having 3 or 4 acting nominees and writing about all of them can really drain you! I feel like I've got nothing left to say by the time I get to Best Picture. I'm thinking I might keep some of these short for that reason or I'll never finish this year. I never understood the hype this film got and definitely didn't understand all the Oscar love it got with all the nominations. To me, it's just an alright film. I wasn't a big fan of Lawrence or the supporting players, but I did like Cooper. I thought it bringing mental illness into the public eye was a good thing. Though, many criticized it as being too flippant with the subject. I disagree because mental illness films can get bogged down in showing just how crazy people can be and this focused on Cooper trying to overcome his illness in a measured way and dealing with it in an adult way. There were some silly moments that didn't seem to vibe with the rest of the story and the big dance at the end was very anti-climactic and rushed to me. I like to see more mature dramedies like this because that's a very under served genre but I don't think SLP holds up very well under scrutiny. That's why I think it's just alright and not the amazing film people seemed to think it was. Not a film I'll come back to very much or at all.
Zero Dark Thirty
I love watching this film. I mean absolutely love it. Once I start, I can't stop and that's a sign of a great film to me. This is my clear cut winner for this group and with The Master would offer up an awesome 1-2 punch, in either order (my two favorites). It really is hard to believe even just a couple years later that this amazing work of art was beaten by Argo. This film does everything Argo wants and tries to do a million times better. The tension is palpable. The characters, especially Chastain's Maya, are phenomenal. The story is more interesting, though the conceit of Argo is pretty fantastic. The visuals and action and tone and importance are all far beyond anything Argo can muster. Argo won because it's about Hollywood and because everyone wanted Affleck to win after his Directing snub. Part of it too might be that Kathryn Bigelow already had a war movie win Best Picture very recently and the Academy didn't want to go back to that well. ZDT, however, is a way better film overall than The Hurt Locker which unfortunately devolved into a bullshit fantasy of what the writer thought being a soldier was like. This film is a complete film unlike her winner and that was all due to a stroke of luck. Bin Laden was killed during the making of the film or at least right before filming began. So I think that's why the film almost works as two different movies. The first is the hunt for information and the grueling, slow pace at which our top intel people try to find UBL. It's this really jarring and sobering look behind the curtain at just how much work and pain and work and frustration and work and effort goes in to finding UBL and what actually goes on in the intel world. It's not all Jason Bourne type stuff with super satellites and immediate info and pictures and all that. I worked as an intel analyst just like Maya when I was in Afghanistan (obviously nowhere near the same level though) and it's a very unsexy job. Lot's of miscommunication and dead ends and too much information to sift through and no one listening to your ideas and superiors wanting results even though that means a ton of work to be done by a few people. That's part of the reason I love this film so much, is that to me it's an accurate representation of what intel gathering and analyzing is actually like. It's a lot of hard work done by some very dedicated people. That film right there is already compelling enough, even if it ended with Maya not finding UBL and still looking. That dedication and frustration is something easily relatable to, almost universal. The second part is the assault on UBL's compound and makes for some of the best war film action scenes ever. Even if the beginning doesn't much interest you, that last hour is some of the most engrossing cinema I've ever seen. It grabs you by the throat and doesn't let go for an hour and it's completely exhilarating. It introduces a couple even more intriguing characters in the SEAL guys and doesn't skip a beat going from the first part to the second. The two could come off as being very disparate but they work in tandem and tell a story that deserves to be told in that way. The hunt and then the kill. Bigelow makes a very primal film at it's core but also a film that embraces a strong female lead without hitting us over the head that she's a female. There's so many good things I could keep saying about this film but I just want it to be known I love it. This is definitely one of the best American films ever.
The Master would have been my winner if I wrote this right around the time of the ceremony. That film was intoxicating to me and still is. It's going to be remembered as one of those great films when we look back in a few years and it makes all these lists and we wonder why the fuck Argo won and this wasn't even nominated. Makes no sense to me, especially with Beasts on this list. But since one of my favorites wasn't even included what should win from this group? That's an easy answer: Zero Dark Thirty. Which after watching it again makes me want to rank above even The Master! I think that's a case of whichever one I've seen last gets the nod. Can't really go wrong with either one, though. From there, Lincoln is an easy second on the strength of DDL's performance alone. Throw in the fact that it's one of Spielberg's best films along with Munich since Saving Private Ryan, well that's a no brainer. Life of Pi is so inspiring and such a wonderful story and a visual treat that it makes for a close third. Then we get into the more flawed films like Les Mis which has some bad singing and goes on a bit too long followed by Django which loses lots of points for it's awful last 30 minutes. Finally we get to the Oscar winner in Argo, which is just meh followed by more meh in SLP followed by a film that's obviously great for critics and best of lists but one I don't want to watch again in Amour followed by the film that doesn't belong Beasts. The top half is a very strong group and if The Master was included this would have been a nice 10 nominees. Alas, it wasn't and this year gets weighed down by the bottom few.
Oscar Winner: Argo
My Winner: Zero Dark Thirty
Lincoln
Life of Pi
Les Miserables
Django Unchained
Argo
Silver Linings Playbook
Amour
Beasts of the Southern Wild
2012 Best Picture
Argo
Argo is a crowdpleaser. Depending on who you ask, that can be a good or bad thing. Usually when it comes to Oscar it's a bad thing, especially if the crowdpleaser is a winner. I'm surprised they haven't actually made or tried to make the actual Argo movie because I'm sure there would be lots of interest, no matter how bad it might be! One of the main reasons I personally think Argo won here, is because it's one of the biggest representations of Hollywood helping out the world. So it winning is basically Hollywood or Oscar patting itself on the back. Let's be for real, Oscar loves rewarding itself, especially lately! So no doubt a movie about Hollywood saving some Americans from Iran in the 80s would get enough votes for Best Picture. Throw in the whole Ben Affleck not being nominated for Best Director controversy and there are plenty of reasons why people wanted Argo to win. Argo is decent at raising the tension for some of it's crucial scenes. The thing is we all know that things came out alright and those little bits of tension aren't enough to sustain the film for me. It's an easily likable crowdpleaser, like I said, but it's a little too safe. There's a couple brief scenes with the Canadian residence housemaid (who is Iranian) or whatever where she lies to the Iranian authorities about there being any other people in the home and you're not sure if she's gonna tell or not. More of those moments that involve the sacrifice of the Iranians to help this escape go down would have been great. Instead we do get a bit of rah rah Americans are great showcase. And while Argo is a satisfying film to watch and isn't a bad choice for a nominee, it just lacks that certain something that makes it a winner. There's a couple other films in this group that are frankly way better than this one. Even just a couple years later, I still don't think it holds up all that well as a winner. To me, it's just an uninspiring pat on the back for Oscar.
Amour
I was dreading having to watch this one again. A 2 plus hour French movie about old people dying - exciting! I know that's simplifying it way too much but honestly that's what sticks out when thinking about having to watch it again. This was the last film I watched prior to the Oscar ceremony that year. I finished it during the second commercial break so that I could say that I'd seen all the nominees prior to the awards being given out. So part of me was wondering if I gave this Palme d'Or winner a legit chance. It was widely praised and will most likely be one of those films on best of all time lists that have a ton of foreign films (which I do like!) you've never seen or heard of, so I should at least give it a real chance. I guess I didn't appreciate it before, but I really quite like the static shots that watch the lives of the characters play out from across the room for a few minutes or so without cutting or moving the camera. It makes the film feel really intimate and like you're a part of these peoples' lives. Plus, it's just nice to watch something that doesn't have a million jump cuts and angles trying to make up for a lack of plot. Amour is very real and awkward at times and I think that's part of the great love many people have for it - it shows life as it is, warts and all. But at times it does feel insincere. The couple seem selfish in their own ways, Georges for not wanting to have his daughter around to see her mother and Anne for giving up on life. It does feel a little on the extremes at times but overall it works. The acting is natural and the leads are definitely compelling. While this style could be cold and clinical it's nice that it manages to include the humane touch, as well. Is it something I want to watch again? No, especially not after a long day at work and this is what is awaiting me. It's a film to see and say you saw and appreciate it.
Beasts of the Southern Wild
This film can be a little tough to follow. I had to read the wikipedia entry to make sense of it and that was while watching it for the second time. This film exploded onto the scene after winning Sundance and just stayed in the collective conscious of the voters for the rest of year - something most Sundance films don't do. Normally they lose steam and fade by the time summer rolls around all the big Hollywood movies start coming out and then we start getting the Oscar films after that. Kudos to Beasts, I guess, but I still don't find what everyone thought was so compelling about it. I know Wallis was well liked but I thought the acting showed just how amateur it actually was. The metaphors and deeper meaning stuff was something that was uninteresting to me. I didn't care about any of that and critics seemed to latch onto it in treating it as something more important than it really was. Overall, I simply found the film to be boring. The first time I was interested because of all the hype and I wanted to see exactly what everyone saw in it to keep it alive through awards season and get it nominated. The second time was even worse because I knew what I was getting myself into. I guess some films just really speak to some people and some films don't. This one certainly doesn't speak to me on any level. The positive is that southern Louisiana does look pretty great and I kinda dig the direction style. It gives an otherwise boring film some energy and does it's best to keep me into it. The nomination is its own reward and this film got plenty of rewards I'm not sure it should have.
Django Unchained
There's an awful lot to like about this Tarantino film, which ticks off all the usual great things about Tarantino films. It has fantastic musical choices. From the theme song which is from another movie but fits well here to all the other music used, it's one of the the typical highlights of Tarantino films. There's always one song that is instantly recognizable as being from his films. His dedication to the old techniques with using film instead of digital and his use of certain aspect ratios really do pay off in the end product. They may not be as noticeable to everyone but they sure do make for a very, very pretty film. Tarantino also is able to capture so many great looking locations, scenes, and compositions that watching his films is a visual treat. Even if you don't like the violence or blood or whatever, you can't say his films don't look good. And as usual, Tarantino gets great performances out of everyone, including all the random cameos in this. You can tell people want to come be a part of his films so they bring their A game and have fun while doing so which translates to the scenes. The writing and dialogue are of course top notch and very fun. He makes some scene crackle with his words and watching them unfold is just a lot of pure cinematic entertainment. He is absolutely an auteur. Where he stumbles, and ultimately where this film fails, is that Django is just way too damn long. It's about 30 minutes too long and unfortunately it seems that auteurs seem to make more and more bloated films as they get more respect and age in years and there is no one to reign them in or to at least say no to them. This film is almost 3 hours long and there's no reason it should be. The ending is so convoluted and tacked on that if you end it much earlier, you might be talking about Tarantino's first Best Picture win. Sadly, we get a film that enjoys the excess which includes a lot of needless shit at the end. There is no doubt if this was better edited and trimmed down, this would possibly be considered his best which would be high praise. Unfortunately we are only left with what could have been for what is a really good film.
Les Miserables
Now this is a pretty good musical, although it does have it's faults. It must be pretty hard to make a movie version of Les Mis because it's so beloved and well known by most people. You have to live up to everyone's expectation of what Les Mis is and ought to be. As much as I didn't like his Best Picture win for The King's Speech, Tom Hooper delivers a pretty good movie here. Hugh Jackman was a great choice as was Samantha Barks. The rest of the cast was alright and did their parts nobly but those two stood out head and shoulders above everyone else. Much was made about how the actors sang live on film instead of recording it later and it getting dubbed in, which is frankly an amazing an admirable thing. That could have been absolutely disastrous. Instead it really works for the movie and we get those raw songs and performances like Jackman's in the beginning of the movie. Much is to be said about capturing the realness of the emotions especially in a musical because it gives it such a genuine quality. There was a lot said also about how Hooper used a lot of extreme close up when the actors were singing. To me, that concept was hit and miss. There are times when it really works and adds to the intensity of the performances and makes the songs hit that much harder. Yet there are other times where it just gets annoying and awkward. I'm just impressed that such an epic musical was done in such a reverential but also original way. That's pretty key to a successful movie and musical. Add something new to Les Mis because we sure have seen a whole bunch of iterations of it through the years. It keeps it fresh and really made for an entertaining watch right to the end, well, mostly to the end. I think that it starts to putter out after the big battle scenes and gets stretched a little thin there. But as a whole, Les Mis is really well done and I can't find much to hate on. I've grown to love musicals more and more as I've grown up thanks to ex-girlfriends and this one ranks right up there for me just based on effort and execution alone.
Life of Pi
Every time I watch Life of Pi, I get so happy and hopeful. It's a very uplifting film and is how a feel good movie should be done. It never talks down to it's viewer and has a nice earnestness to it. The story it tells is quite something. It's fantastical but doesn't ever feel too unbelievable. I think that's due a bit to the acting and the storyteller and Ang Lee's dedication to the whole concept. It's also a very spiritual film. It absolutely talks about a higher power and believing in something. It's message is easy to digest but also not over the top which makes it not annoying. Basically when I watch it I feel better as a person, like I can do anything and help out others. There are other mediums that do the same thing for me like the book Siddhartha, I read it and want to change the world. I think that's why I like the film so much is that it makes me feel so good inside. It also has some absolutely incredible special effects. The tiger is mostly CGI and you cannot tell the difference between a real tiger and the CGI one, it's that good. All the animals and probably most of the ocean scenes are effects but it doesn't detract from the story instead adding to it and making it so much better. The film itself is also buoyed by the one man show of Suraj Sharma. He is amazing and does what many actors can't do - and that's carry a film by themselves. It's sad that he's an Indian kid because he should have been among the leading actor nominees. He was the perfect choice for Pi and really helped elevate the film. Also, I wanted to give a shout out to Irrfan Khan who is the grown up Pi who tells the tale because he is a really talented actor. I just really like him. Anyway, Life of Pi is a great, well done feel good movie that expertly uses CGI to tell a really interesting story.
Lincoln
Lincoln started out making me almost puke in my mouth. It starts off with two black soldiers who are joined by two white soldiers who start reciting the Gettysburg Address to Lincoln himself and I thought for sure we would get some sanctimonious Spielberg bullshit but thankfully that didn't happen. What we get is legitimately one of Spielberg's best works and he's made some great films. It tells of Lincoln's attempt to get the 13th Amendment passed. It's easy for your film to look good when your actor gives one of the best performances I've ever seen. When that man is Lincoln everything else is just relative. This film has so many good cameos and supporting turns. Yeah, Tommy Lee Jones is good but the triplet line of John Hawkes, Tim Blake Nelson, and especially James Spader are fantastic. Spader should be a national treasure but that's a different discussion. Lincoln offers up an intimate look at the President and excels at showing those moments when he's most human: telling a joke, interacting with a citizen, talking to his wife, or getting angry at his Cabinet. Spielberg's success is staying unobtrusive in those moments and not making everything so neatly wrapped up or manipulatively saccharine. He just lets things unfold and allows DDL to carry the scene and film. I also like that Lincoln didn't cover his whole life or whole presidency because that's just too much. Focusing on this one thing with everything else as a backdrop was incredibly smart. It allows for so much more focus and intensity without compromising huge swaths of time. It's a great looking film, with great acting, covering a great man. What more could you ask for?
Silver Linings Playbook
Just like some of the other films this year, I'm kinda burnt out when it comes to writing about the film itself. Having 3 or 4 acting nominees and writing about all of them can really drain you! I feel like I've got nothing left to say by the time I get to Best Picture. I'm thinking I might keep some of these short for that reason or I'll never finish this year. I never understood the hype this film got and definitely didn't understand all the Oscar love it got with all the nominations. To me, it's just an alright film. I wasn't a big fan of Lawrence or the supporting players, but I did like Cooper. I thought it bringing mental illness into the public eye was a good thing. Though, many criticized it as being too flippant with the subject. I disagree because mental illness films can get bogged down in showing just how crazy people can be and this focused on Cooper trying to overcome his illness in a measured way and dealing with it in an adult way. There were some silly moments that didn't seem to vibe with the rest of the story and the big dance at the end was very anti-climactic and rushed to me. I like to see more mature dramedies like this because that's a very under served genre but I don't think SLP holds up very well under scrutiny. That's why I think it's just alright and not the amazing film people seemed to think it was. Not a film I'll come back to very much or at all.
Zero Dark Thirty
I love watching this film. I mean absolutely love it. Once I start, I can't stop and that's a sign of a great film to me. This is my clear cut winner for this group and with The Master would offer up an awesome 1-2 punch, in either order (my two favorites). It really is hard to believe even just a couple years later that this amazing work of art was beaten by Argo. This film does everything Argo wants and tries to do a million times better. The tension is palpable. The characters, especially Chastain's Maya, are phenomenal. The story is more interesting, though the conceit of Argo is pretty fantastic. The visuals and action and tone and importance are all far beyond anything Argo can muster. Argo won because it's about Hollywood and because everyone wanted Affleck to win after his Directing snub. Part of it too might be that Kathryn Bigelow already had a war movie win Best Picture very recently and the Academy didn't want to go back to that well. ZDT, however, is a way better film overall than The Hurt Locker which unfortunately devolved into a bullshit fantasy of what the writer thought being a soldier was like. This film is a complete film unlike her winner and that was all due to a stroke of luck. Bin Laden was killed during the making of the film or at least right before filming began. So I think that's why the film almost works as two different movies. The first is the hunt for information and the grueling, slow pace at which our top intel people try to find UBL. It's this really jarring and sobering look behind the curtain at just how much work and pain and work and frustration and work and effort goes in to finding UBL and what actually goes on in the intel world. It's not all Jason Bourne type stuff with super satellites and immediate info and pictures and all that. I worked as an intel analyst just like Maya when I was in Afghanistan (obviously nowhere near the same level though) and it's a very unsexy job. Lot's of miscommunication and dead ends and too much information to sift through and no one listening to your ideas and superiors wanting results even though that means a ton of work to be done by a few people. That's part of the reason I love this film so much, is that to me it's an accurate representation of what intel gathering and analyzing is actually like. It's a lot of hard work done by some very dedicated people. That film right there is already compelling enough, even if it ended with Maya not finding UBL and still looking. That dedication and frustration is something easily relatable to, almost universal. The second part is the assault on UBL's compound and makes for some of the best war film action scenes ever. Even if the beginning doesn't much interest you, that last hour is some of the most engrossing cinema I've ever seen. It grabs you by the throat and doesn't let go for an hour and it's completely exhilarating. It introduces a couple even more intriguing characters in the SEAL guys and doesn't skip a beat going from the first part to the second. The two could come off as being very disparate but they work in tandem and tell a story that deserves to be told in that way. The hunt and then the kill. Bigelow makes a very primal film at it's core but also a film that embraces a strong female lead without hitting us over the head that she's a female. There's so many good things I could keep saying about this film but I just want it to be known I love it. This is definitely one of the best American films ever.
The Master would have been my winner if I wrote this right around the time of the ceremony. That film was intoxicating to me and still is. It's going to be remembered as one of those great films when we look back in a few years and it makes all these lists and we wonder why the fuck Argo won and this wasn't even nominated. Makes no sense to me, especially with Beasts on this list. But since one of my favorites wasn't even included what should win from this group? That's an easy answer: Zero Dark Thirty. Which after watching it again makes me want to rank above even The Master! I think that's a case of whichever one I've seen last gets the nod. Can't really go wrong with either one, though. From there, Lincoln is an easy second on the strength of DDL's performance alone. Throw in the fact that it's one of Spielberg's best films along with Munich since Saving Private Ryan, well that's a no brainer. Life of Pi is so inspiring and such a wonderful story and a visual treat that it makes for a close third. Then we get into the more flawed films like Les Mis which has some bad singing and goes on a bit too long followed by Django which loses lots of points for it's awful last 30 minutes. Finally we get to the Oscar winner in Argo, which is just meh followed by more meh in SLP followed by a film that's obviously great for critics and best of lists but one I don't want to watch again in Amour followed by the film that doesn't belong Beasts. The top half is a very strong group and if The Master was included this would have been a nice 10 nominees. Alas, it wasn't and this year gets weighed down by the bottom few.
Oscar Winner: Argo
My Winner: Zero Dark Thirty
Lincoln
Life of Pi
Les Miserables
Django Unchained
Argo
Silver Linings Playbook
Amour
Beasts of the Southern Wild
Saturday, October 17, 2015
Leading Actress 2012
When you really look at this group, it doesn't look like it would be that strong. And unfortunately it really isn't. I have a clear cut winner and then the rest. Let's get on with this.
2012 Best Actress
Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook
The Academy, for whatever reason, was looking to give this award to Lawrence no matter what. It's like the Academy just fell in love with her (which is easy to do admittedly) and wanted to anoint her America's Next Sweetheart regardless of anything or anyone else. Lawrence was one of the youngest actresses ever to win this award and while this will probably be somewhat vindicated as time goes on, I'm not sure this was the right time to reward her. She almost won the next year in 2013 and is being touted for 2015 also, so there's no doubt she'll end up with another if her career holds up. But what do I think of her performance in Silver Linings Playbook? I'm not as enamored with it as everyone else seemed to be. She plays a young woman whose husband died and hasn't dealt with that in the best way and she matches up with Cooper's fragile character. She's supposed to be this wild child who reacted to her husband's death by sleeping with a bunch of guys and being labeled the local slut but even when Lawrence says it in the film, it just isn't believable at all. Even her surly demeanor rings hollow. She has really good chemistry with Cooper (this was their first of 3 films together, so far) and they play off each other really well. I just don't buy her as the crass, say whatever she wants woman who doesn't care what anyone else thinks of her. When she and Cooper are acting together, that's when she's pretty good in the film. You want to watch the two interact and see how their relationship develops. I like the directness and asshole nature of Lawrence's character, I just don't think she is able to get it across believably. Lawrence doesn't sell the character enough to me to consider her the best performance of the year. There is a lot left to be desired and I just don't see what everyone else sees in it.
Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
It still pisses me off that Chastain didn't win. Her Maya is one of the strongest and best female characters I've ever seen, no exaggeration. What I love the most about the performance is that Chastain builds the character along with the film. Meaning in the beginning Maya is this timid new to the Pakistan beat woman who needs to learn and find her footing. She grows as the story goes on and becomes this incredibly strong and important and forthright female character. She is able to react to the ever changing intel world and all the torture the same way a man would, which is part of why I like Chastain's performance so much. She doesn't get bogged down in being a female in a male dominated world or anything like that. She plays the character straight and we see this badass who also happens to be a female and who gets shit done. While watching you quickly forget Maya is a woman and just focus on what she's able to do and her strength in her convictions that she will find UBL and you never doubt that she will. What we get is Maya plugging along and going step by step up the ladder to find her guy. She's determined and headstrong and feisty and brave as hell. She suffers a lot but grows in the process. All of that is so intriguing to watch unfold that we forget we are watching Chastain and certainly forget we are watching a woman. The SEALS love her confidence, her station chiefs know not to fuck with her, the bad guys want to kill her, and we all respect her as a gifted intelligence analyst. I think this is Chastain's best role and best performance. I feel like she grew right along with her character and became even better at being an actress. I think when it's all said and done, Chastain will be able to hold this performance up as her best one and we as the audience will hold it up as being light years better than Lawrence's dreck. Every time I watch Zero Dark Thirty, I get really inspired and motivated and hopeful that we will continue to get great female characters and lead roles such as this one. I get happy that I'm watching greatness and the same cannot be said for Lawrence and the awful SLP junk she was in. I think Chastain's performance is a watershed moment for women characters in film and I hope that she can continue to pump out similar performances.
Emmanuelle Riva - Amour
Riva became the oldest Best Actress nominee ever which is somewhat fitting since we also got the youngest Best Actress nominee this year, too. I'm not sure if that's synergy or what but I think it's pretty telling that the Academy was really thinking out of the box for this year's group. This is absolutely one of those career nominations where just being picked is the prize but I'll say this performance was also nominated on it's merits, as well. Meaning without the sympathy/career vote, Riva probably would have still been in the group. Critics fawned all over her and I do think some of that is due to her being an old French actress that's been in some highly regarded films throughout her career and being in another very highly regarded film at the end of it. With all that being said, her performance is very natural which fits the style that the Director Michael Haneke was going for. Riva plays an older woman who suffers a stroke and is incapacitated and then gets worse very quickly. It's a very sad and bleak film about the realities of all the sudden losing a loved one and the burden it puts on everyone involved. It's a very heavy, solemn subject and Riva plays it perfectly. It's a realistic portrayal of a woman who declines rapidly and realizes it and doesn't want people to see her as she is and who would rather just end it on her terms instead of becoming an invalid. I guess you could call it a brave performance but I think real and natural work better. Riva doesn't overact or play up any moment in some grand fashion to have her Oscar moment. She just quietly portrays a woman who can't help but be a burden even though she doesn't want to be. It's a very non-glamorous role which Riva succeeds in. When you watch the film, it's as if you're peeking into the lives of these characters and quietly observing from afar. These people go about their life even with the difficulties it brings. I think that alone is a refreshing take on Oscar films and Riva's performance is part of that. I may not want to ever watch Amour again and I may not be all that moved by what Riva accomplishes but it certainly is a strong piece of acting.
Quvenzhane Wallis - Beasts of the Southern Wild
Wallis was/is the youngest female acting nominee ever which brings up a lot of issues for me. I think it's pretty awesome that a 9 year old (who was even younger when the film was being made) could not only be in a position to be nominated but actually BE nominated. I mean, how many little girls' dream is it to win an Oscar and be there at the ceremony? Tons! And Wallis got to live that dream, so that's pretty cool. My beef with her nomination is whether or not it's actual acting. I read something from the director of this film that said he was basically just telling Wallis what to do and where to stand and all that, so how much of her performance is acting and not just being in a certain spot and doing as told? Does she bring anything to the role that is actually hers? Does she make a cognizant choice to play the character in a certain way? There's a lot of narration that tries to double itself as acting, too, in this film and that seems a bit cheap to me. She's absolutely the heart and soul of the film but it's like watching a documentary of sorts and seeing this precocious girl run around and do things. And that's about all you can say about her performance, really. There's not much to it after her precocious act wears thin. I'm not sure why it was championed so much and I don't think it needed an Oscar nomination on top of that. Maybe I'm being a little too harsh on a kid but I expect more from Oscar.
Naomi Watts - The Impossible
Oh man, a Naomi Watts nomination - ugh. I've let it be known on this blog before that I really dislike most of Watts' performances that I've seen. I find her to be incredibly overrated and talked about way too much as someone who should win and every role of hers should be nominated by super fans online. And that's no different for her turn here as a mother who gets caught up in the tsunami of 2004. I'm not sure what anyone saw in this one, honestly. Critics lauded her with adjectives like brave, vulnerable, emotional, and devastating. Barf, spare me please. In the beginning we are getting to know the family and it's all pretty standard stuff, certainly nothing there that packs an emotional wallop or sets her apart. Then the tsunami hits which is extremely intense but that means we get Watts screaming for a while and, well, that's not very interesting and could be done by anyone. The physical part of it is somewhat impressive. Having to swim around and scream and look terrified certainly takes some acting ability. I'd call it emotional but we as an audience are already amped up from the insane tsunami scenes so it's not like Watts is the one building the emotion or sustaining it - she's just screaming. In fact, her son who is with her is way more impressive and is able to drive the story more as she lays about injured. That is all in the first 30 minutes or so and after that she basically lays around in a hospital moaning and not really doing much for most of the movie. I don't think you can nominate her based on that 15 minutes or so of the aftermath of the tsunami, it just isn't enough. For a Leading performance, I want a lot more than Watts laying around moaning for the whole damn movie. This is a prime example of critics seeing whatever they want to fit their predictions and agendas. This is not an Oscar worthy performance.
I feel like Lawrence was too on the nose in her role. Like someone told her halfway through filming or even before that she will win an Oscar if she really plays it up to what the Academy likes. I think she was too young to be rewarded now and I don't think she gave the best performance at all. I'm not against older or younger women winning here, it's just that it all felt too preordained, for whatever reason. And honestly, that performance is too fucking unsatisfactory to be a winner. It was the Lawrence hype train and nothing else that won her that award. Chastain is the rightful winner. I'd love for the Academy to come out and give it to her and yank Lawrence's win away from her. That sounds as if I hate Lawrence, but I don't. I just hate the win. And her nomination the next year was garbage, too, but whatever. Chastain 4 Life. I've contemplated putting Riva 2nd and you know what, I will. It's a hauntingly beautiful turn as a woman dying, essentially. Wallis is an easy 4th but she would be last in any other year. She is saved from that spot by one of the actresses I dislike the most and feel is super overrated: Naomi Watts. I'm sure she's a lovely woman to meet and I know she's done some good acting work, but not here. This nomination was atrocious. I'm not sure the next year offers much more hope, sadly.
Oscar Winner: Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook
My Winner: Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
Emmanuelle Riva
Jennifer Lawrence
Quvenzhane Wallis
Naomi Watts
2012 Best Actress
Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook
The Academy, for whatever reason, was looking to give this award to Lawrence no matter what. It's like the Academy just fell in love with her (which is easy to do admittedly) and wanted to anoint her America's Next Sweetheart regardless of anything or anyone else. Lawrence was one of the youngest actresses ever to win this award and while this will probably be somewhat vindicated as time goes on, I'm not sure this was the right time to reward her. She almost won the next year in 2013 and is being touted for 2015 also, so there's no doubt she'll end up with another if her career holds up. But what do I think of her performance in Silver Linings Playbook? I'm not as enamored with it as everyone else seemed to be. She plays a young woman whose husband died and hasn't dealt with that in the best way and she matches up with Cooper's fragile character. She's supposed to be this wild child who reacted to her husband's death by sleeping with a bunch of guys and being labeled the local slut but even when Lawrence says it in the film, it just isn't believable at all. Even her surly demeanor rings hollow. She has really good chemistry with Cooper (this was their first of 3 films together, so far) and they play off each other really well. I just don't buy her as the crass, say whatever she wants woman who doesn't care what anyone else thinks of her. When she and Cooper are acting together, that's when she's pretty good in the film. You want to watch the two interact and see how their relationship develops. I like the directness and asshole nature of Lawrence's character, I just don't think she is able to get it across believably. Lawrence doesn't sell the character enough to me to consider her the best performance of the year. There is a lot left to be desired and I just don't see what everyone else sees in it.
Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
It still pisses me off that Chastain didn't win. Her Maya is one of the strongest and best female characters I've ever seen, no exaggeration. What I love the most about the performance is that Chastain builds the character along with the film. Meaning in the beginning Maya is this timid new to the Pakistan beat woman who needs to learn and find her footing. She grows as the story goes on and becomes this incredibly strong and important and forthright female character. She is able to react to the ever changing intel world and all the torture the same way a man would, which is part of why I like Chastain's performance so much. She doesn't get bogged down in being a female in a male dominated world or anything like that. She plays the character straight and we see this badass who also happens to be a female and who gets shit done. While watching you quickly forget Maya is a woman and just focus on what she's able to do and her strength in her convictions that she will find UBL and you never doubt that she will. What we get is Maya plugging along and going step by step up the ladder to find her guy. She's determined and headstrong and feisty and brave as hell. She suffers a lot but grows in the process. All of that is so intriguing to watch unfold that we forget we are watching Chastain and certainly forget we are watching a woman. The SEALS love her confidence, her station chiefs know not to fuck with her, the bad guys want to kill her, and we all respect her as a gifted intelligence analyst. I think this is Chastain's best role and best performance. I feel like she grew right along with her character and became even better at being an actress. I think when it's all said and done, Chastain will be able to hold this performance up as her best one and we as the audience will hold it up as being light years better than Lawrence's dreck. Every time I watch Zero Dark Thirty, I get really inspired and motivated and hopeful that we will continue to get great female characters and lead roles such as this one. I get happy that I'm watching greatness and the same cannot be said for Lawrence and the awful SLP junk she was in. I think Chastain's performance is a watershed moment for women characters in film and I hope that she can continue to pump out similar performances.
Emmanuelle Riva - Amour
Riva became the oldest Best Actress nominee ever which is somewhat fitting since we also got the youngest Best Actress nominee this year, too. I'm not sure if that's synergy or what but I think it's pretty telling that the Academy was really thinking out of the box for this year's group. This is absolutely one of those career nominations where just being picked is the prize but I'll say this performance was also nominated on it's merits, as well. Meaning without the sympathy/career vote, Riva probably would have still been in the group. Critics fawned all over her and I do think some of that is due to her being an old French actress that's been in some highly regarded films throughout her career and being in another very highly regarded film at the end of it. With all that being said, her performance is very natural which fits the style that the Director Michael Haneke was going for. Riva plays an older woman who suffers a stroke and is incapacitated and then gets worse very quickly. It's a very sad and bleak film about the realities of all the sudden losing a loved one and the burden it puts on everyone involved. It's a very heavy, solemn subject and Riva plays it perfectly. It's a realistic portrayal of a woman who declines rapidly and realizes it and doesn't want people to see her as she is and who would rather just end it on her terms instead of becoming an invalid. I guess you could call it a brave performance but I think real and natural work better. Riva doesn't overact or play up any moment in some grand fashion to have her Oscar moment. She just quietly portrays a woman who can't help but be a burden even though she doesn't want to be. It's a very non-glamorous role which Riva succeeds in. When you watch the film, it's as if you're peeking into the lives of these characters and quietly observing from afar. These people go about their life even with the difficulties it brings. I think that alone is a refreshing take on Oscar films and Riva's performance is part of that. I may not want to ever watch Amour again and I may not be all that moved by what Riva accomplishes but it certainly is a strong piece of acting.
Quvenzhane Wallis - Beasts of the Southern Wild
Wallis was/is the youngest female acting nominee ever which brings up a lot of issues for me. I think it's pretty awesome that a 9 year old (who was even younger when the film was being made) could not only be in a position to be nominated but actually BE nominated. I mean, how many little girls' dream is it to win an Oscar and be there at the ceremony? Tons! And Wallis got to live that dream, so that's pretty cool. My beef with her nomination is whether or not it's actual acting. I read something from the director of this film that said he was basically just telling Wallis what to do and where to stand and all that, so how much of her performance is acting and not just being in a certain spot and doing as told? Does she bring anything to the role that is actually hers? Does she make a cognizant choice to play the character in a certain way? There's a lot of narration that tries to double itself as acting, too, in this film and that seems a bit cheap to me. She's absolutely the heart and soul of the film but it's like watching a documentary of sorts and seeing this precocious girl run around and do things. And that's about all you can say about her performance, really. There's not much to it after her precocious act wears thin. I'm not sure why it was championed so much and I don't think it needed an Oscar nomination on top of that. Maybe I'm being a little too harsh on a kid but I expect more from Oscar.
Naomi Watts - The Impossible
Oh man, a Naomi Watts nomination - ugh. I've let it be known on this blog before that I really dislike most of Watts' performances that I've seen. I find her to be incredibly overrated and talked about way too much as someone who should win and every role of hers should be nominated by super fans online. And that's no different for her turn here as a mother who gets caught up in the tsunami of 2004. I'm not sure what anyone saw in this one, honestly. Critics lauded her with adjectives like brave, vulnerable, emotional, and devastating. Barf, spare me please. In the beginning we are getting to know the family and it's all pretty standard stuff, certainly nothing there that packs an emotional wallop or sets her apart. Then the tsunami hits which is extremely intense but that means we get Watts screaming for a while and, well, that's not very interesting and could be done by anyone. The physical part of it is somewhat impressive. Having to swim around and scream and look terrified certainly takes some acting ability. I'd call it emotional but we as an audience are already amped up from the insane tsunami scenes so it's not like Watts is the one building the emotion or sustaining it - she's just screaming. In fact, her son who is with her is way more impressive and is able to drive the story more as she lays about injured. That is all in the first 30 minutes or so and after that she basically lays around in a hospital moaning and not really doing much for most of the movie. I don't think you can nominate her based on that 15 minutes or so of the aftermath of the tsunami, it just isn't enough. For a Leading performance, I want a lot more than Watts laying around moaning for the whole damn movie. This is a prime example of critics seeing whatever they want to fit their predictions and agendas. This is not an Oscar worthy performance.
I feel like Lawrence was too on the nose in her role. Like someone told her halfway through filming or even before that she will win an Oscar if she really plays it up to what the Academy likes. I think she was too young to be rewarded now and I don't think she gave the best performance at all. I'm not against older or younger women winning here, it's just that it all felt too preordained, for whatever reason. And honestly, that performance is too fucking unsatisfactory to be a winner. It was the Lawrence hype train and nothing else that won her that award. Chastain is the rightful winner. I'd love for the Academy to come out and give it to her and yank Lawrence's win away from her. That sounds as if I hate Lawrence, but I don't. I just hate the win. And her nomination the next year was garbage, too, but whatever. Chastain 4 Life. I've contemplated putting Riva 2nd and you know what, I will. It's a hauntingly beautiful turn as a woman dying, essentially. Wallis is an easy 4th but she would be last in any other year. She is saved from that spot by one of the actresses I dislike the most and feel is super overrated: Naomi Watts. I'm sure she's a lovely woman to meet and I know she's done some good acting work, but not here. This nomination was atrocious. I'm not sure the next year offers much more hope, sadly.
Oscar Winner: Jennifer Lawrence - Silver Linings Playbook
My Winner: Jessica Chastain - Zero Dark Thirty
Emmanuelle Riva
Jennifer Lawrence
Quvenzhane Wallis
Naomi Watts
Leading Actor 2012
This Best Actor group is seriously one of the strongest I've encountered so far. From top to bottom it's pretty amazing. I'll enjoy this group immensely.
2012 Best Actor
Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
I don't know how much more I can gush about DDL but I'll try. It's hard to decide which role of his is better and more iconic: Daniel Plainview, Bill the Butcher, or Abraham Lincoln? And that's not including his earlier work that he was nominated and won an Oscar for! This man is the greatest living actor going and he will never not be amazing to me. When I say that I have a tough time choosing what his best performance is, I mean it. His Lincoln is just immeasurably good. I've marveled in the past about his inhabiting a character and his mastery of different accents and that all holds true here. He IS Lincoln. I can't think of anyone else as being him ever again. His soft voice is mind blowing. It's just so anti DDL that you wonder if he's not some shape-shifting alien or something because he is that good. And when he has a serious moment yet still has that soft voice, it's flipping intense! I love Spielberg's intimate look at Lincoln because DDL shines in making him human and not appear as such a mythological figure. Every other version of Lincoln is the same: a stiff representation of a cliche spouting guy offers nothing unique or that you wouldn't find in an elementary school play. DDL changes all that by giving us a look at a real man and not just a legend. I'm not sure what else can be said because DDL looks the part, sounds great, has the gravitas to pull off a super important US President, and the appeal to make that man human. It's literally one of the greatest performances ever which I know I've said about DDL before but still holds true. He is truly gifted and I can't wait to see what he does next.
Bradley Cooper - Silver Linings Playbook
When I first watched this film, I think Cooper got drowned out. I mean, just look at his competition! DDL is a legend, Denzel is Denzel. Joaquin was fucking amazing and Jackman exceeded expectations. Then you have newbie Cooper and it's easy to overlook him and say yeah, whatever, flavor of the week. But this is really when Cooper caught fire. And it's very easy to see why that happened. He's extremely charming in this film and incredibly likable. That is all despite his mental illness which is the subject of the entire film. He's bipolar and suffered a break that had him committed by the courts and he's returning home and trying to cope with his dysfunctional family. Mental illness doesn't get talked about enough, so it's good to see it tackled here. It can be a rough thing, especially the bipolar disease. It's great that this film shows that one can overcome the setbacks of the disease and live a somewhat normal life, or at least find others that don't make you feel so alone and fucked up. And when it comes to mental illness, it's very easy for an actor to take it to the extremes and overact. But it's typically more subtle than that in regular life. There's probably a lot of people you interact with daily that are dealing with something and you don't even know. That's where Cooper shines for me in this film. Yes, it has comedic elements and when Cooper gets focused on meeting his wife again or getting her a letter it's funny in a sad way. But he brings a human element to the character as well. He makes the mental illness part of the story and character feel a bit more real than it otherwise could have ended up. Cooper shoulders the heaviest load of carrying the film and is mostly up to it. All film we are told Cooper's character was fat and mean and different prior to his stent in the institute but none of that seems believable when you see Cooper. None of that change is effectively shown, it's only told to us over and over. I think that's a misstep for the film since it's supposed to be all about change. Cooper does a good enough job in his first nomination but I feel there are still some glaring faults in the performance. And when you compare it to the 4 other guys nominated here, it just doesn't quite stand up to them.
Hugh Jackman - Les Miserables
This role seems like the one Jackman was born to play, not counting Wolverine, of course. But he just slips into the character so effortlessly that watching him on screen is truly mesmerizing. Upon re-watch, I actually liked it even more because you can just sense the pleasure and pride and comfort radiating off of him throughout the film. He just looks so at home and happy playing Jean Valjean, like he finally found his release. I think you could make a case for his inclusion as a nominee solely based off his song right in the beginning of the film where he sings the shit out of it and creates more feeling in that one song than many bands can do over a career. It's that good to me. It's just raw and powerful and angry and hopeful and sad and determined and a million other adjectives. It doesn't matter that he's not the greatest singer because that's part of the appeal to me. The song and the way he sings it and plays the character doesn't work with a typical Broadway big time singer. He embodies that downtrodden, poor man persona - and it works for him. It's kind of funny that in a musical, I'm not very concerned with the lead actor's singing ability but instead focus on how much he seems to enjoy inhabiting the character. I think that speaks to the acting and how important it can be even in a musical. Jackman really made the most of this heavy role - making it his own and making it look like it was written just for him. To make Jean Valjean your own is certainly no easy feat. What a great performance and nomination.
Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
I am still really surprised that this film didn't get a Best Picture nomination because it more than deserved one. It was my favorite film of the year and this might just be my favorite performance of the year. I know I gushed about DDL but my God, Phoenix is incredible as Freddie Quell. This is to me a performance for the ages and easily the best thing Phoenix has ever done and probably will ever do. It's just so good and such a fully realized character. Phoenix plays Quell, a veteran home from the war trying to adjust back into society. He's a booze hound that seems to only care about next drink and screw he can find. From the beginning you can tell that he's not really normal and we begin to experience just how much of a pathetic loser he is. It's somewhat of a sympathetic character but it's a repulsive sympathy. We look at him with disgust and sadness and feel the palpable awkward tension he emits. That's all from Phoenix who fully inhabits Quell and turns him into this odd little sorry man. Quell works odd jobs and gets drunk on his own concoctions and finally drifts into PSH's cult. The two have amazing chemistry and feed off each other in every scene they have together and really give us some memorable scenes like the jail and the interrogation/interviews. Part of what makes the performance so amazing is how much detail Phoenix has put into quell. His sneer, his bad posture, his inappropriate laughing, his fiery anger, his speech pattern. All of it strengthens a character that is already unique and made the film beyond compelling to watch. The first time I saw it on the big screen, I was mesmerized and in awe the entire time. Part of that reason was because of Phoenix. There's so much subtlety and explosiveness in this performance that seeing the balance from Phoenix is a treat to watch. I could go on and on about this one but I think my point has been made pretty clear - I love this performance! There's so many complex emotions being expressed by Phoenix at one time that it's incredible. Quell is a loner but intrigued by the Master and sees himself in him but doesn't get hooked into the cult because he doesn't believe but he wants to so he can belong and be loved and be wanted but he thinks they are crazy or at least as crazy as he is and on and on. Phoenix can shift between those feelings in one scene and one look with ease. It truly is a great performance and one I highly recommend checking out.
Denzel Washington - Flight
Let's face it, the big appeal of Flight was the big upside down plane sequence. That's in the very beginning and I'm sure there were some upset people that wanted more of that throughout the film. But this is a look at the troubles of addiction and it takes an intimate look that's very compelling. Zemeckis does these sort of adult dramas really well and does the big spectacle such as a plane crash extremely well. He also gets the most out of his actors and it helps that Denzel is world class. Denzel brings his usual bravado to the role where it is well served in smaller doses and at key moments. This isn't just a rehash of his other badass tough guy, super stud roles. No, Denzel brings an honesty to his pilot character in the performance of the addict. He plays a great drunk and shows just how strong the struggle is even if you're a successful pilot who pulled off this impossible maneuver to save a plane full of people and that those people can have demons that are constantly warring inside them. I think we forget just how well Denzel can act because he's had a lot of action roles and those tough guy roles where he can be all gangsta. But he still excels at delivering a thoughtful performance and Flight allows him to do just that. It's not a performance that overwhelms you when you're watching it but when it's over and you think about it, you realize just how good it was. He can make a dickhead addict sympathetic and that's no easy task. Denzel rounds out what came to be a really incredibly strong group of Best Actor nominees and he fully belongs here.
What a hell of a group! Two performances that I think are flat out great and three that I think are pretty damn solid. I'm not sure I can pick a winner between DDL and Phoenix but I think I'd give the nanometer edge to Phoenix because it blew me away and DDL already has two other wins and probably will have more as I go back in time more. From there, the next three are a jumble but I'd go Jackman - Denzel - Cooper as my final three. Jackman was born for that imagining of that role and gave it his all. Denzel gives a solid, but not-so-flashy performance and Cooper throws his hat into the ring and announces his arrival to Oscar with a pretty good performance of his own. Really an incredible group of actors and one that was pretty fun to watch and review. More of these please!
Oscar Winner: Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
My Winner: Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
Daniel Day-Lewis
Hugh Jackman
Denzel Washington
Bradley Cooper
2012 Best Actor
Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
I don't know how much more I can gush about DDL but I'll try. It's hard to decide which role of his is better and more iconic: Daniel Plainview, Bill the Butcher, or Abraham Lincoln? And that's not including his earlier work that he was nominated and won an Oscar for! This man is the greatest living actor going and he will never not be amazing to me. When I say that I have a tough time choosing what his best performance is, I mean it. His Lincoln is just immeasurably good. I've marveled in the past about his inhabiting a character and his mastery of different accents and that all holds true here. He IS Lincoln. I can't think of anyone else as being him ever again. His soft voice is mind blowing. It's just so anti DDL that you wonder if he's not some shape-shifting alien or something because he is that good. And when he has a serious moment yet still has that soft voice, it's flipping intense! I love Spielberg's intimate look at Lincoln because DDL shines in making him human and not appear as such a mythological figure. Every other version of Lincoln is the same: a stiff representation of a cliche spouting guy offers nothing unique or that you wouldn't find in an elementary school play. DDL changes all that by giving us a look at a real man and not just a legend. I'm not sure what else can be said because DDL looks the part, sounds great, has the gravitas to pull off a super important US President, and the appeal to make that man human. It's literally one of the greatest performances ever which I know I've said about DDL before but still holds true. He is truly gifted and I can't wait to see what he does next.
Bradley Cooper - Silver Linings Playbook
When I first watched this film, I think Cooper got drowned out. I mean, just look at his competition! DDL is a legend, Denzel is Denzel. Joaquin was fucking amazing and Jackman exceeded expectations. Then you have newbie Cooper and it's easy to overlook him and say yeah, whatever, flavor of the week. But this is really when Cooper caught fire. And it's very easy to see why that happened. He's extremely charming in this film and incredibly likable. That is all despite his mental illness which is the subject of the entire film. He's bipolar and suffered a break that had him committed by the courts and he's returning home and trying to cope with his dysfunctional family. Mental illness doesn't get talked about enough, so it's good to see it tackled here. It can be a rough thing, especially the bipolar disease. It's great that this film shows that one can overcome the setbacks of the disease and live a somewhat normal life, or at least find others that don't make you feel so alone and fucked up. And when it comes to mental illness, it's very easy for an actor to take it to the extremes and overact. But it's typically more subtle than that in regular life. There's probably a lot of people you interact with daily that are dealing with something and you don't even know. That's where Cooper shines for me in this film. Yes, it has comedic elements and when Cooper gets focused on meeting his wife again or getting her a letter it's funny in a sad way. But he brings a human element to the character as well. He makes the mental illness part of the story and character feel a bit more real than it otherwise could have ended up. Cooper shoulders the heaviest load of carrying the film and is mostly up to it. All film we are told Cooper's character was fat and mean and different prior to his stent in the institute but none of that seems believable when you see Cooper. None of that change is effectively shown, it's only told to us over and over. I think that's a misstep for the film since it's supposed to be all about change. Cooper does a good enough job in his first nomination but I feel there are still some glaring faults in the performance. And when you compare it to the 4 other guys nominated here, it just doesn't quite stand up to them.
Hugh Jackman - Les Miserables
This role seems like the one Jackman was born to play, not counting Wolverine, of course. But he just slips into the character so effortlessly that watching him on screen is truly mesmerizing. Upon re-watch, I actually liked it even more because you can just sense the pleasure and pride and comfort radiating off of him throughout the film. He just looks so at home and happy playing Jean Valjean, like he finally found his release. I think you could make a case for his inclusion as a nominee solely based off his song right in the beginning of the film where he sings the shit out of it and creates more feeling in that one song than many bands can do over a career. It's that good to me. It's just raw and powerful and angry and hopeful and sad and determined and a million other adjectives. It doesn't matter that he's not the greatest singer because that's part of the appeal to me. The song and the way he sings it and plays the character doesn't work with a typical Broadway big time singer. He embodies that downtrodden, poor man persona - and it works for him. It's kind of funny that in a musical, I'm not very concerned with the lead actor's singing ability but instead focus on how much he seems to enjoy inhabiting the character. I think that speaks to the acting and how important it can be even in a musical. Jackman really made the most of this heavy role - making it his own and making it look like it was written just for him. To make Jean Valjean your own is certainly no easy feat. What a great performance and nomination.
Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
I am still really surprised that this film didn't get a Best Picture nomination because it more than deserved one. It was my favorite film of the year and this might just be my favorite performance of the year. I know I gushed about DDL but my God, Phoenix is incredible as Freddie Quell. This is to me a performance for the ages and easily the best thing Phoenix has ever done and probably will ever do. It's just so good and such a fully realized character. Phoenix plays Quell, a veteran home from the war trying to adjust back into society. He's a booze hound that seems to only care about next drink and screw he can find. From the beginning you can tell that he's not really normal and we begin to experience just how much of a pathetic loser he is. It's somewhat of a sympathetic character but it's a repulsive sympathy. We look at him with disgust and sadness and feel the palpable awkward tension he emits. That's all from Phoenix who fully inhabits Quell and turns him into this odd little sorry man. Quell works odd jobs and gets drunk on his own concoctions and finally drifts into PSH's cult. The two have amazing chemistry and feed off each other in every scene they have together and really give us some memorable scenes like the jail and the interrogation/interviews. Part of what makes the performance so amazing is how much detail Phoenix has put into quell. His sneer, his bad posture, his inappropriate laughing, his fiery anger, his speech pattern. All of it strengthens a character that is already unique and made the film beyond compelling to watch. The first time I saw it on the big screen, I was mesmerized and in awe the entire time. Part of that reason was because of Phoenix. There's so much subtlety and explosiveness in this performance that seeing the balance from Phoenix is a treat to watch. I could go on and on about this one but I think my point has been made pretty clear - I love this performance! There's so many complex emotions being expressed by Phoenix at one time that it's incredible. Quell is a loner but intrigued by the Master and sees himself in him but doesn't get hooked into the cult because he doesn't believe but he wants to so he can belong and be loved and be wanted but he thinks they are crazy or at least as crazy as he is and on and on. Phoenix can shift between those feelings in one scene and one look with ease. It truly is a great performance and one I highly recommend checking out.
Denzel Washington - Flight
Let's face it, the big appeal of Flight was the big upside down plane sequence. That's in the very beginning and I'm sure there were some upset people that wanted more of that throughout the film. But this is a look at the troubles of addiction and it takes an intimate look that's very compelling. Zemeckis does these sort of adult dramas really well and does the big spectacle such as a plane crash extremely well. He also gets the most out of his actors and it helps that Denzel is world class. Denzel brings his usual bravado to the role where it is well served in smaller doses and at key moments. This isn't just a rehash of his other badass tough guy, super stud roles. No, Denzel brings an honesty to his pilot character in the performance of the addict. He plays a great drunk and shows just how strong the struggle is even if you're a successful pilot who pulled off this impossible maneuver to save a plane full of people and that those people can have demons that are constantly warring inside them. I think we forget just how well Denzel can act because he's had a lot of action roles and those tough guy roles where he can be all gangsta. But he still excels at delivering a thoughtful performance and Flight allows him to do just that. It's not a performance that overwhelms you when you're watching it but when it's over and you think about it, you realize just how good it was. He can make a dickhead addict sympathetic and that's no easy task. Denzel rounds out what came to be a really incredibly strong group of Best Actor nominees and he fully belongs here.
What a hell of a group! Two performances that I think are flat out great and three that I think are pretty damn solid. I'm not sure I can pick a winner between DDL and Phoenix but I think I'd give the nanometer edge to Phoenix because it blew me away and DDL already has two other wins and probably will have more as I go back in time more. From there, the next three are a jumble but I'd go Jackman - Denzel - Cooper as my final three. Jackman was born for that imagining of that role and gave it his all. Denzel gives a solid, but not-so-flashy performance and Cooper throws his hat into the ring and announces his arrival to Oscar with a pretty good performance of his own. Really an incredible group of actors and one that was pretty fun to watch and review. More of these please!
Oscar Winner: Daniel Day-Lewis - Lincoln
My Winner: Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
Daniel Day-Lewis
Hugh Jackman
Denzel Washington
Bradley Cooper
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Supporting Actor 2012
Not sure what to say other than this is my favorite category. I already know my winner so let's see if any of these guys can change my mind.
2012 Best Supporting Actor
Christoph Waltz - Django Unchained
Quentin Tarantino does it again, delivering another Oscar winning Supporting Actor role for Christoph Waltz. It's obvious that the two are a perfect match because it seems as if Tarantino's writing was tailor made for Waltz to perform. It's a natural fit and Waltz looks at home in his role here as a bounty hunter of sorts. Of course, with this second win the question that one needs to ask is just how similar are the roles and should Waltz have won for a role that is pretty similar to his first win? To me, both winning roles DO feel very similar and I think a lot of that is due to Tarantino's writing and to Waltz's acting ability. His way of delivering lines isn't going to change all that much. We see Waltz's easy confidence when he's first introduced riding up in a dentist cart in the middle of night in a dark forest that feels very much like his intro in Inglourious Basterds at the farm house. It's that sort of chipper friendliness that belies the evil or ulterior motive underneath. He's able to move around in scenes doing as he pleases as everyone else reacts to his performance whether it's drinking milk or freeing slaves. That comfortability within the character makes for a very strong performances for sure. I also think comparing the two wins is fine because it is the same director and because they are both just so fun and insane and perfect Tarantino characters. So it depends on how much you like this one for it to be nominated AND win. I like this one a lot. But I also like Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson in this one as supporting players. In fact, there was a ton of buzz about Leo getting nominated and if he did, finally winning his elusive Oscar. I was on board with that because Waltz already had a similar win and rewarding Leo or Jackson for these roles would have been some inspired, fun choices from the Academy. They went with what they knew and Waltz is another Tarantino film away from a third win.
Alan Arkin - Argo
Sorry, but I'm not sure if this or his win for Little Miss Sunshine is the bigger waste of time. I say that because these two nominations are essentially for the same thing! In his winning performance, Arkin portrayed an asshole who happened to love his granddaughter but here he plays an asshole who loves the movies. But the thing is Arkin is just playing himself. The Academy thought his win was going to be the cap on a successful career and a nice pat on the back, yet Arkin kept making movies and delivered the same performance in Argo which confused voters because they are old and love anything having to do with Hollywood and voted for it again. I'm not sure Arkin would have won his Oscar if they felt he was going to continue to give Oscar worthy performances. I like his turn here in Argo. He's like a grumpy old man that curses and gets shit done and it's all part of his every day life. He's a bullshitter. But he understands he's trusted and can make an important change to world history. It's a performance that's well liked within the film, Arkin certainly knows how to play his character. He's very likable in this film and you can't really dislike what he brings. Even if it's just Arkin being Arkin, it's a fun supporting if a bit familiar.
Robert De Niro - Silver Linings Playbook
Alright, so let's talk about Robert De Niro. He's obviously a legendary actor and someone to be revered. But what does he bring to this nomination exactly? When I first watched this film a couple years ago I didn't have much love. But upon second watch, I found a bit more humanistic qualities in his performance. That sounds like a load of bullshit, and probably is, but honestly I just thought he was more legit this time around. He's a bookie that's lost his job and returned to the bookie lifestyle. He loves all things Philly and that's pretty much his contribution. He loves the Eagles and he loves criticizing his son. When they mix, things get brushed off with love. He's sort of the typical tough love dad that has a softer side deep down somewhere. I'm not sure if this was anyone other than De Niro, that they would have been nominated so this is very obviously a veteran nom on the strength of the film as a whole. I can't really get too upset about this because it is Robert De Niro after all. He does a fine job with the role and doesn't look out of place or ham it up. Also I love his hair since it reminds me of my grandpa's, so he's got that going for him. Obviously this one won't go down as one of De Niro's best but it's not bad.
Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master
It's crazy that he is in Supporting because he is very much the second Lead to me! Despite that, Holy Shit is PSH so fucking good or what?! He has not so impressive competition and I still can't believe he didn't win. Maybe it is because he was basically a Lead? This is the strongest PSH performance I've ever seen/reviewed. It's that good! He inhabits and makes Lancaster Dodd his own character and his own non-character. Everything is so planned that everything PSH does or doesn't do is damn brilliant. All of his choices are fantastic. His role is essentially the faux-Scientology leader and his interaction and infatuation with Phoenix's character. But PSH makes the Master into a wholly unique character and honestly makes this film so damn watchable. I'm not sure I can keep my love for this film under control! Hoffman is amazing and unequaled. I'm sad this is the last Hoffman review I'll ever do and I won't do it any justice. This is seriously one of the greatest films of all time and here I am trying to explain why one of the main characters makes it so. I can't do that. You just have to sit back and realize it's a great performance. I wish I could say about a thousand words more on why it's great, but it just is. PSH delivers a knockout and I'm sad he wasn't rewarded for it.
Tommy Lee Jones - Lincoln
Jones plays Thaddeus Stevens, a Representative from Pennsylvania that's a staunch abolitionist and can help Lincoln pass his 13th Amendment. There's a lot to like about this performance. It's rather hilarious but not in a strictly comedic way. It's more of an intellectually funny way. Jones' character uses big words of the time to insult his fellow Congressmen and it's pretty funny when he lays into them with the old timey burns. But beneath that crusty exterior is an interior who is fervent in the belief that black folk are just as equal as white folk and need that equal protection as guaranteed by the Constitution in an amendment, not just the 13th. It's a pretty admirable role from the start but Jones inject his color into it to make it that much more memorable. The slight issue is that you've seen this same crusty Jones character in many movies before. He plays the same variation of this character to differing degrees of success and it works here. I would like to see Jones bring a different aspect to his acting and roles other than mean old man because we know he can do so much more, he just chooses not to. Regardless of all that, the mean old Thaddeus works for the film and stands out as being the beacon of what is right. The film as a whole treats both sides somewhat equally, meaning the Republicans (Stevens) and Democrats as being steadfast in their views and no exactly saying the Democrats are vile, devil scum. You just get guys that are arguing for what they truly believe in and it's interesting to see. Jones does exactly what he's supposed to with his role and he does it extremely well.
I don't understand why The Master got so much non-love. PSH was brilliant in his role. I did like Waltz but it was too reminiscent of his first win! From there you get a great Tommy Lee Jones nomination and the typical angry Arkin one, as well. Gotta say I hated that De Niro nom because it's so expected and so damn boring. This was a pretty good group, as usual, but more time is needed to write these blurbs and asses these noms.
Oscar Winner: Christoph Waltz - Django Unchained
My Winner: Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master
Christoph Waltz
Tommy Lee Jones
Alan Arkin
Robert De Niro
2012 Best Supporting Actor
Christoph Waltz - Django Unchained
Quentin Tarantino does it again, delivering another Oscar winning Supporting Actor role for Christoph Waltz. It's obvious that the two are a perfect match because it seems as if Tarantino's writing was tailor made for Waltz to perform. It's a natural fit and Waltz looks at home in his role here as a bounty hunter of sorts. Of course, with this second win the question that one needs to ask is just how similar are the roles and should Waltz have won for a role that is pretty similar to his first win? To me, both winning roles DO feel very similar and I think a lot of that is due to Tarantino's writing and to Waltz's acting ability. His way of delivering lines isn't going to change all that much. We see Waltz's easy confidence when he's first introduced riding up in a dentist cart in the middle of night in a dark forest that feels very much like his intro in Inglourious Basterds at the farm house. It's that sort of chipper friendliness that belies the evil or ulterior motive underneath. He's able to move around in scenes doing as he pleases as everyone else reacts to his performance whether it's drinking milk or freeing slaves. That comfortability within the character makes for a very strong performances for sure. I also think comparing the two wins is fine because it is the same director and because they are both just so fun and insane and perfect Tarantino characters. So it depends on how much you like this one for it to be nominated AND win. I like this one a lot. But I also like Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L. Jackson in this one as supporting players. In fact, there was a ton of buzz about Leo getting nominated and if he did, finally winning his elusive Oscar. I was on board with that because Waltz already had a similar win and rewarding Leo or Jackson for these roles would have been some inspired, fun choices from the Academy. They went with what they knew and Waltz is another Tarantino film away from a third win.
Alan Arkin - Argo
Sorry, but I'm not sure if this or his win for Little Miss Sunshine is the bigger waste of time. I say that because these two nominations are essentially for the same thing! In his winning performance, Arkin portrayed an asshole who happened to love his granddaughter but here he plays an asshole who loves the movies. But the thing is Arkin is just playing himself. The Academy thought his win was going to be the cap on a successful career and a nice pat on the back, yet Arkin kept making movies and delivered the same performance in Argo which confused voters because they are old and love anything having to do with Hollywood and voted for it again. I'm not sure Arkin would have won his Oscar if they felt he was going to continue to give Oscar worthy performances. I like his turn here in Argo. He's like a grumpy old man that curses and gets shit done and it's all part of his every day life. He's a bullshitter. But he understands he's trusted and can make an important change to world history. It's a performance that's well liked within the film, Arkin certainly knows how to play his character. He's very likable in this film and you can't really dislike what he brings. Even if it's just Arkin being Arkin, it's a fun supporting if a bit familiar.
Robert De Niro - Silver Linings Playbook
Alright, so let's talk about Robert De Niro. He's obviously a legendary actor and someone to be revered. But what does he bring to this nomination exactly? When I first watched this film a couple years ago I didn't have much love. But upon second watch, I found a bit more humanistic qualities in his performance. That sounds like a load of bullshit, and probably is, but honestly I just thought he was more legit this time around. He's a bookie that's lost his job and returned to the bookie lifestyle. He loves all things Philly and that's pretty much his contribution. He loves the Eagles and he loves criticizing his son. When they mix, things get brushed off with love. He's sort of the typical tough love dad that has a softer side deep down somewhere. I'm not sure if this was anyone other than De Niro, that they would have been nominated so this is very obviously a veteran nom on the strength of the film as a whole. I can't really get too upset about this because it is Robert De Niro after all. He does a fine job with the role and doesn't look out of place or ham it up. Also I love his hair since it reminds me of my grandpa's, so he's got that going for him. Obviously this one won't go down as one of De Niro's best but it's not bad.
Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master
It's crazy that he is in Supporting because he is very much the second Lead to me! Despite that, Holy Shit is PSH so fucking good or what?! He has not so impressive competition and I still can't believe he didn't win. Maybe it is because he was basically a Lead? This is the strongest PSH performance I've ever seen/reviewed. It's that good! He inhabits and makes Lancaster Dodd his own character and his own non-character. Everything is so planned that everything PSH does or doesn't do is damn brilliant. All of his choices are fantastic. His role is essentially the faux-Scientology leader and his interaction and infatuation with Phoenix's character. But PSH makes the Master into a wholly unique character and honestly makes this film so damn watchable. I'm not sure I can keep my love for this film under control! Hoffman is amazing and unequaled. I'm sad this is the last Hoffman review I'll ever do and I won't do it any justice. This is seriously one of the greatest films of all time and here I am trying to explain why one of the main characters makes it so. I can't do that. You just have to sit back and realize it's a great performance. I wish I could say about a thousand words more on why it's great, but it just is. PSH delivers a knockout and I'm sad he wasn't rewarded for it.
Tommy Lee Jones - Lincoln
Jones plays Thaddeus Stevens, a Representative from Pennsylvania that's a staunch abolitionist and can help Lincoln pass his 13th Amendment. There's a lot to like about this performance. It's rather hilarious but not in a strictly comedic way. It's more of an intellectually funny way. Jones' character uses big words of the time to insult his fellow Congressmen and it's pretty funny when he lays into them with the old timey burns. But beneath that crusty exterior is an interior who is fervent in the belief that black folk are just as equal as white folk and need that equal protection as guaranteed by the Constitution in an amendment, not just the 13th. It's a pretty admirable role from the start but Jones inject his color into it to make it that much more memorable. The slight issue is that you've seen this same crusty Jones character in many movies before. He plays the same variation of this character to differing degrees of success and it works here. I would like to see Jones bring a different aspect to his acting and roles other than mean old man because we know he can do so much more, he just chooses not to. Regardless of all that, the mean old Thaddeus works for the film and stands out as being the beacon of what is right. The film as a whole treats both sides somewhat equally, meaning the Republicans (Stevens) and Democrats as being steadfast in their views and no exactly saying the Democrats are vile, devil scum. You just get guys that are arguing for what they truly believe in and it's interesting to see. Jones does exactly what he's supposed to with his role and he does it extremely well.
I don't understand why The Master got so much non-love. PSH was brilliant in his role. I did like Waltz but it was too reminiscent of his first win! From there you get a great Tommy Lee Jones nomination and the typical angry Arkin one, as well. Gotta say I hated that De Niro nom because it's so expected and so damn boring. This was a pretty good group, as usual, but more time is needed to write these blurbs and asses these noms.
Oscar Winner: Christoph Waltz - Django Unchained
My Winner: Philip Seymour Hoffman - The Master
Christoph Waltz
Tommy Lee Jones
Alan Arkin
Robert De Niro
Supporting Actress 2012
At last, 2012! I've wanted to get back to the more present day ceremonies for awhile since they are all still so fresh in my head. I can finally get out all these thoughts I've had on all the various people and films. I feel like this might be a little therapeutic for me and should be a lot of fun. But! My only qualms about doing the newer years now is that there are so many looooong films, like close to 3 hour films, especially in this year. And the amount of nominees from different films is less than in the past. Meaning more films have multiple nominees (2-3-4) for the acting categories so the likelihood of me getting burnt out after only watching say 3 or 4 films is very high. Although there is the fact that I've had some of these reviews written in my head for years so it shouldn't take me as long to write some of them.
2012 Best Supporting Actress
Anne Hathaway - Les Miserables
So when I watched this back in 2013 before the ceremony that year, I didn't buy into the hype that this was a powerful and amazing surefire Oscar winner. When that did finally happen I was left scratching my head as to why. I felt it got through on the strength of one song in the film and that was it. And I didn't think her singing of the song (which is obviously a very iconic song) was all that great. It frustrated me beyond belief and is something I've grown more accustomed to from having rooting interests in the Oscar ceremonies now. So the question is how do I feel about her performance now? I've had a couple years to think on it and I've now watched it again. Pretty much the same, honestly. I still don't think it's all that great and she basically won on the strength of the iconic 'I Dreamed A Dream' song. That's really not fair because it's the most well known from the musical and among the general public. Yeah, she belts it out and cries some tears but it felt like it was the high school theater girl who goes all out and thinks she's super great but is just trying way too hard. It didn't move me like some people seemed to be. I thought that Eponine (Samantha Barks) was not only a better singer but a better actress, as well. I would have preferred to see her get the nomination but she didn't have any name recognition and didn't get to sing a no brainer Oscar song, though the song she sang was fantastic. Barks leaves more of an impression on me than Hathaway did and that tells me this was the wrong choice for a nomination AND a win. I'm just not feeling this one.
Amy Adams - The Master
So this was my winner before I rewatched everything here. It really doesn't have much competition if you're not some huge Hathaway fan and I think it's still my winner. After watching The Master for the second time, I think Adams slips a bit honestly. I remembered her being the driving force behind Lancaster Dodd and this huge presence and that's not exactly the case. Adams is more the supportive wife who doesn't want her cult leader husband to lose power or lose a subject and then influences him to stick with it. Maybe my second watch isn't accurate but Adams does seem to be the supportive wife who has a very powerful role in Dodd's life. That's why I loved this performance so much the first time. It felt like a woman who knew her man was a very influential man but did it in a different way to try and protect her man however she can. That's why I thought her version of Dodd's wife was so great because she was actively trying to a bunch of different things at once. She's almost ever present in the scenes and sort of gradually finds herself more involved in the film and it felt so right for her character. Her grip on Dodd is so light that you won't notice it until too late and she's no longer in the picture. Basically, Adams' character is that strong woman behind every guy trope brought to life.
Sally Field - Lincoln
There's not a lot to this nomination sadly. And many were touting this as a possible winner. It received a big push for a bit but that died down once Hathaway started winning everything. Field plays Mrs. Lincoln and is the quintessential worrisome wife who wishes her husband would think more about his family than what's going on in the country. She only shows up to play the irritated wife/mother role and I don't think she has any stand out moments. She's not a pleasant character, which is fine, but she's very one dimensional. I know that she suffered greatly at the time but there's nothing too redeemable about her character. It's like the nagging wife and no one likes that. There's unfortunately not much else to the performance. It's really not something you can root for unless you really, really like Sally Field, but she has enough Oscars as it is so no dice. And that's about all I can say about Field here. There's not much to it and it gets overshadowed by DDL's towering performance.
Helen Hunt - The Sessions
The easy joke to make is what got Helen Hunt nominated this year: her performance or her tits? Because it felt like she spent half of the movie naked! Hunt plays a sex surrogate who I assume helps all kinds of people experience sex but here she focuses on John Hawkes' character who is in an iron lung. It's a pretty bold role to take on because being naked that much is no easy feat. You never see a dude exposing his junk for half a movie yet women are fully expected to do so without hesitation. So bravo to Helen for that (and I realize I was pretty harsh on Kate Winslet for a similar type of role but I didn't think she was good AND she won for it so yeah) because I know it's not easy. She plays a therapist so she is very warm and a bit endearing and eventually starts to form feelings for her subject. Nothing is fully realized emotionally but the two form a bond. This is a role that's more demanding physically rather than showing a wide range of emotions or feelings. It seems women really fall easily for John Hawkes' pitiable character and Hunt's character sort of goes through the motions of that. She falls for him, questions those feelings, and then leaves but still loves him. So I feel that the role was nominated more for the constant nudity and the fact that Hunt is pretty good at the therapist and confused housewife. The two alone don't make a good enough nominee but I guess together it's not so bad. Certainly not the worst of the this year.
Jacki Weaver - Silver Linings Playbook
Alright so I'm not gonna have much to say about this one. There's just nothing to this nomination at all. Weaver does nothing. NOTHING. She is the wife/mother that is in the background the entire time and if she wasn't in the film would not be missed. Replace her with a man or an alien or a rock and it doesn't look bad at all. This nomination was included only because the UK/Australian peeps of the Academy joined forces because there is no other reason why she should be here. She's taking away a deserving spot for someone and that's awful. The nomination also rode the Silver Linings Playbook wave to some goodwill but obviously didn't deserve it. The film has likable characters but Weaver's character was non-existent and brought nothing to the forefront. Easily one of the worst nominations I've seen from the Academy yet.
My enemy! Short reviews because, well, I disliked many of these ladies! Hathaway was a joke. Legit. Like, I can't understand why she won at all. It's stupid. So Adams is my winner with Hunt as my runner up because if you're gonna get totally naked for so long in a mainstream movie you get my kudos. Sally Field and Weaver just simply had nothing much to do and that's sad. Like I could criticize more but I won't. I'll just say Adams and her film are way better than anything listed below!
Oscar Winner: Anne Hathaway - Les Miserables
My Winner: Amy Adams - The Master
Helen Hunt
Anne Hathaway
Sally Field
Jacki Weaver
2012 Best Supporting Actress
Anne Hathaway - Les Miserables
So when I watched this back in 2013 before the ceremony that year, I didn't buy into the hype that this was a powerful and amazing surefire Oscar winner. When that did finally happen I was left scratching my head as to why. I felt it got through on the strength of one song in the film and that was it. And I didn't think her singing of the song (which is obviously a very iconic song) was all that great. It frustrated me beyond belief and is something I've grown more accustomed to from having rooting interests in the Oscar ceremonies now. So the question is how do I feel about her performance now? I've had a couple years to think on it and I've now watched it again. Pretty much the same, honestly. I still don't think it's all that great and she basically won on the strength of the iconic 'I Dreamed A Dream' song. That's really not fair because it's the most well known from the musical and among the general public. Yeah, she belts it out and cries some tears but it felt like it was the high school theater girl who goes all out and thinks she's super great but is just trying way too hard. It didn't move me like some people seemed to be. I thought that Eponine (Samantha Barks) was not only a better singer but a better actress, as well. I would have preferred to see her get the nomination but she didn't have any name recognition and didn't get to sing a no brainer Oscar song, though the song she sang was fantastic. Barks leaves more of an impression on me than Hathaway did and that tells me this was the wrong choice for a nomination AND a win. I'm just not feeling this one.
Amy Adams - The Master
So this was my winner before I rewatched everything here. It really doesn't have much competition if you're not some huge Hathaway fan and I think it's still my winner. After watching The Master for the second time, I think Adams slips a bit honestly. I remembered her being the driving force behind Lancaster Dodd and this huge presence and that's not exactly the case. Adams is more the supportive wife who doesn't want her cult leader husband to lose power or lose a subject and then influences him to stick with it. Maybe my second watch isn't accurate but Adams does seem to be the supportive wife who has a very powerful role in Dodd's life. That's why I loved this performance so much the first time. It felt like a woman who knew her man was a very influential man but did it in a different way to try and protect her man however she can. That's why I thought her version of Dodd's wife was so great because she was actively trying to a bunch of different things at once. She's almost ever present in the scenes and sort of gradually finds herself more involved in the film and it felt so right for her character. Her grip on Dodd is so light that you won't notice it until too late and she's no longer in the picture. Basically, Adams' character is that strong woman behind every guy trope brought to life.
Sally Field - Lincoln
There's not a lot to this nomination sadly. And many were touting this as a possible winner. It received a big push for a bit but that died down once Hathaway started winning everything. Field plays Mrs. Lincoln and is the quintessential worrisome wife who wishes her husband would think more about his family than what's going on in the country. She only shows up to play the irritated wife/mother role and I don't think she has any stand out moments. She's not a pleasant character, which is fine, but she's very one dimensional. I know that she suffered greatly at the time but there's nothing too redeemable about her character. It's like the nagging wife and no one likes that. There's unfortunately not much else to the performance. It's really not something you can root for unless you really, really like Sally Field, but she has enough Oscars as it is so no dice. And that's about all I can say about Field here. There's not much to it and it gets overshadowed by DDL's towering performance.
Helen Hunt - The Sessions
The easy joke to make is what got Helen Hunt nominated this year: her performance or her tits? Because it felt like she spent half of the movie naked! Hunt plays a sex surrogate who I assume helps all kinds of people experience sex but here she focuses on John Hawkes' character who is in an iron lung. It's a pretty bold role to take on because being naked that much is no easy feat. You never see a dude exposing his junk for half a movie yet women are fully expected to do so without hesitation. So bravo to Helen for that (and I realize I was pretty harsh on Kate Winslet for a similar type of role but I didn't think she was good AND she won for it so yeah) because I know it's not easy. She plays a therapist so she is very warm and a bit endearing and eventually starts to form feelings for her subject. Nothing is fully realized emotionally but the two form a bond. This is a role that's more demanding physically rather than showing a wide range of emotions or feelings. It seems women really fall easily for John Hawkes' pitiable character and Hunt's character sort of goes through the motions of that. She falls for him, questions those feelings, and then leaves but still loves him. So I feel that the role was nominated more for the constant nudity and the fact that Hunt is pretty good at the therapist and confused housewife. The two alone don't make a good enough nominee but I guess together it's not so bad. Certainly not the worst of the this year.
Jacki Weaver - Silver Linings Playbook
Alright so I'm not gonna have much to say about this one. There's just nothing to this nomination at all. Weaver does nothing. NOTHING. She is the wife/mother that is in the background the entire time and if she wasn't in the film would not be missed. Replace her with a man or an alien or a rock and it doesn't look bad at all. This nomination was included only because the UK/Australian peeps of the Academy joined forces because there is no other reason why she should be here. She's taking away a deserving spot for someone and that's awful. The nomination also rode the Silver Linings Playbook wave to some goodwill but obviously didn't deserve it. The film has likable characters but Weaver's character was non-existent and brought nothing to the forefront. Easily one of the worst nominations I've seen from the Academy yet.
My enemy! Short reviews because, well, I disliked many of these ladies! Hathaway was a joke. Legit. Like, I can't understand why she won at all. It's stupid. So Adams is my winner with Hunt as my runner up because if you're gonna get totally naked for so long in a mainstream movie you get my kudos. Sally Field and Weaver just simply had nothing much to do and that's sad. Like I could criticize more but I won't. I'll just say Adams and her film are way better than anything listed below!
Oscar Winner: Anne Hathaway - Les Miserables
My Winner: Amy Adams - The Master
Helen Hunt
Anne Hathaway
Sally Field
Jacki Weaver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)