One of the weakest line ups ever, Jones wins by default, but there were many performances in JFK just as good as his like John Candy, Gary Oldman, Donald Sutherland
I agree with Anonymous, but Tommy Lee Jones was quite mysterious in a good way, Keitel was better than Kingsley, Harvey Keitel I feel so sry for because he is a great actor but Bugsy is crap1.Tommy Lee Jones2.Michael Lerner3.Jack Palance4.Harvey Keitel5.Ben Kingsley
I agree with Anonymous (x2) HORRIBLE year only saved by Jones.
I look forward to these reviews =D haha
Who would you say deserves to be destroyed the most Sage? =D
I think John Goodman should've been nominated over Lerner. Also, Ted Levine should have got in for Silence of the Lambs as well as Donald Sutherland (and maybe Gary Oldman) for JFK. I agree that Jones wins by default.
Palance's Oscar win could very well be the worst of all time
I don't mind Lerner or Jones but his role is too tiny,Sutherland was better,Keitel was nominated for the wrong film,no idea why Kingsley is there or Palance,i liked Steven Hill in Billy Bathgate and John Goodman as mentioned & Samuel L Jackson in jungle fever then Keitel for Thelma and Loiuse and Michael Lerner - my top 5.
I agree: a pretty weak year. Jones was good, Palance was reasonably good fun, but all of the following performances are better than the other nominees:Elliott Gould in Bugsy (the only good performance in the film)Harvey Keitel in Thelma & LouiseTed Levine in The Silence of the LambsGary Oldman in JFKJoe Pesci in JFKDonald Sutherland in JFK
I'd have nominated half the cast of JFK and given it to Oldman, this is a shit year.
Not a very good year; of the nominees, I choose Michael Lerner, and yes,Gary Oldman should have been in the running (I would have given it to Harvey Keitel in Thelma and Louise).Eddie
Post a Comment