Best Actor

Best Supporting Actor 2011: Albert Brooks in Drive

2012-02-17T06:47:00.000-05:00

Albert Brooks should have received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Bernie Rose in Drive. (Well since it might be a bit before I get a chance to see Branagh, I am reviewing him here anyway)

Drive is a great thriller about an unnamed stunt driver (Ryan Gosling) who also moonlights as a getaway driver for criminals which inadvertently causes him serious problems.

Albert Brooks really should have gone down with the likes of Robert Montgomery for portraying the most different of character between his first and second nomination, since his great performance as Aaron Altman in Broadcast News has basically nothing in common with his performance here. Bernie and Aaron basically have nothing in common other than the fact that it shows off that Albert Brooks is an incredible actor if given the chance to be. From beginning to end Brooks gives a completely uncompromising performance as Bernie Rose that proves just what he is capable of.

Albert Brooks makes the absolute most out of Bernie Rose who is a mobster who is not exactly on the top of the heap, but still he does not answer to anyone. He has his specific place, and specific spot in the crime world that he is relatively happy in. Brooks is terrific from his first moment on screen as he establishes Bernie. In his earlier scenes he does not seem to be an entirely unreasonable man, there is always the sense that you definitely do not want to tick him off, but there is a certain degree of a strange sort of friendliness.

Brooks has a perfect matter of fact quality in Bernie that he uses effectively throughout. Brooks shows that is almost is that Bernie reached this place in his life by cutting through the crap and always saying things are exactly how sees them. There is a dominance Brooks has that suggests exactly where Bernie came from, and how he became exactly the way he is now. Brooks is excellent though because he never shows Bernie as a bad man exactly rather a man firstly, who does bad things only when he is forced to.

When Bernie's violent side finally appears Brooks is terrifying aided greatly by the fact that he didn't overplay Rose's negative side early on. Brooks makes Bernie moments of violence especially disconcerting and intense because of the way he brings it out. What I love about his two killing scene is how he actually shows a great deal of who Bernie is when he does this. Brooks does not simple kill them as a completely dissociative reaction that he has no emotional attachment to.

Brooks shows that Rose kills because of business entirely, but it is a very personal thing when he does it. The first person he kills he clearly has not respect for in the least, and does basically consider it pretty much taking out the trash, yet Brooks still shows Bernie disgusted to so almost blaming the his cause for disgust on the man he is killing. Brooks creates a fascinating killer who doesn't like to do it, but will do it when he needs to even though he doesn't mind blaming the victim for why he must do it.

The second person he kills though Brooks again shows a very different side of Rose, although it still reflects the idea that Rose only does it when needed and takes no joy in it. The second person he kills though is different because he actually likes the man, and really never had any desire to murder the man. It is of course a brutal violent moment, but Brooks inserts a degree of humanity in the scene. During the killing and afterwards he actually makes it sad necessity for Bernie that he most certainly feels very regretful and guilty of. The killing itself even Brooks portrays it as Bernie trying to kill a man in the nicest way he knows how.

Brooks is absolutely brilliant in his ability to suggest Bernie's small humane side while still staying absolutely imposing as well. Brooks is amazing in his final threatening speech to the Driver. It actually is very easy to overact a scene like this, or simply seem just nonthreatening as well, but Brooks is outstanding. Albert Brooks doesn't overplay the scene but lays it out on the line in the scene in a realistic and fierce manner. It is an incredible performance that turns what could have been a forgettable part, into a powerful memorable villain.

Best Supporting Actor 2011: Max von Sydow in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

2012-02-15T22:41:00.002-05:00

Max von Sydow received his second Oscar nomination for portraying The Renter in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close about a boy Oskar trying to find the purpose of a key his father had after his father died in the September 11 attacks maybe could have been okay if it were not the way the lead character is written, directed, and portrayed. Thomas Horn gives an obnoxious inconsistent characterization that pretty much sinks the film. He just gives an awful performance that does not make you care about this kid or his journey in the least in fact you wish something bad would happen to him he is that intolerable. Now some have defended this performance saying his character is suppose have aspergers, and that is why he is insufferable.

First of all Thomas Horn seems to have confused aspergers with HAMbergers (Yes I know that pun was worthy of Fozzie Bear). Secondly just because is suppose to be annoying doesn't mean that makes the character a good character, or any less intolerable to spend the film with. Thirdly there are performances that can make likable characters even if they are suppose to be insufferable, Albert Brooks in Broadcast News for example (See I didn't mention his film this year), but Thomas Horn is just an awful far too self aware actor to accomplish something like that.

Now I should probably get off Horn as this review is about Max von Sydow who is the mystery renter who rents a room from Oskar's grandmother, but Horn comes into play with Sydow's performance, not since Tom Cruise annoyed Paul Newman in The Color of Money, has a Oscar nominated performance had to deal with such a cloying obnoxious one. Max von Sydow deserves all the credit he can get though for putting up with this lesser performer, and actually managing to come out on top despite his lackluster co-star.

As the mysterious renter Max von Sydow never speaks a single word, and simply refuses to speak. He rather chooses to communicate with a note pad and a yes and a no that is written upon his hands. Sydow performance than relies completely in the aged actor's face, which Sydow certainly makes the most of. Sydow effectively creates a mysterious portrait of the man, carefully letting us in on some knowledge of his past. Sydow is able to show a rather sad man who clearly has had a troubling past solely through physical reactions.

Sydow who comes into the film about an hour in actually acts as a breath of fresh air, and the film which was becoming intolerable in Horn's hands at least finally has something good in it. Sydow actually brings emotional weight to his role, therefore bringing a little bit of emotional weight to the journey at the center of the film. Sydow interactions throughout his journey actually are quite moving realizing the joy and sadness in his performance, something the film on a whole is unable to achieve almost anywhere besides with Sydow's performance.

The film mostly made me cringe than anything else, but Sydow's few moments in the film actually made something for to enjoy. He created a warm presence very much needed for the film, and he has some very strong moments even though they are shared with Horn. I think particularly in one scene where Horn's character plays the messages left by his father to the renter. The scene is very poorly directed, and played by Horn since it seems like the kid is trying to torture the renter frankly, but Sydow stays above the problems of the scene giving honestly devastating reaction to what he hears.

I liked the entirety of what Sydow did in the film actually creating an emotionally convincing performance of this sad man. Although it is true he has to deal with a frankly terrible co-star Sydow overcomes those problems with his honestly moving performance. He makes the Renter likable as well as as one of the few character's whose point isn't bashed over your head. Sydow instead uses subtly to actually make the tenter into the right sort of enigma who is also quite endearing in the end. Although considering Sydow's filmography this is not his greatest performance it is a good one even if the film is not.

Best Supporting Actor 2011: Christopher Plummer in Beginners

2012-02-15T08:16:00.000-05:00

Christopher Plummer received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Hal Fields in Beginners.

Beginners tells of Oliver (Ewan McGregor) who deals with his current relationship with woman, and remembering his deceased mother, and father the latter who came out as gay after the death of his wife.

Christopher Plummer has been described often as overdue surrounding his awards potential for this Oscar year, although I personally would call that a bit of an overstatement. He was only nominated once before for his unremarkable work in The Last Station, and really how many performances has he been snubbed for. He certainly was not for the Sound of Music, in fact besides that his earlier work is rarely ever mentioned. His only performance anyone really considers to be is his fine work in the Insider, but even that performance does not come up with the greatest performances not nominated for an Oscar.

This is not to say Plummer isn't a fine character actor, and a great narrator, but he is not Peter O'Toole when it comes to being overdue. In the end though the Oscar should go to the actual best performance, so how is actually in Beginners. Plummer certainly has an especially Oscar baiting role here portraying a man who comes out as gay as well as you see through the course of the film dying from cancer, as well as it is very much against Plummer's usual type. This as well does not mean this is a good or bad performance, but it most certainly is a very different type of role for Plummer.

Plummer's has the initial challenge in this role for portraying a gay man which can easily be trouble for any actor, since overacting can certainly be the first option taken. Plummer actually handles his character very well in this respect since he doesn't devolve into obvious mannerisms. That is not to say he does not use mannerisms, but Plummer actually shows that his character of Hal actually tries to sort of create these mannerisms to join in with the gay community. Plummer is actually pretty good in showing a subtle awkwardness Hal has in trying to become part of this group.

Plummer certainly establishes his character well, but I must say the way the film is setup hinders the strength of his performance. It never simply tell his story, but rather the way McGregor's character reacts to him. Plummer does not even get his part of the film all at once but rather drifts in and out of that tale that really mutes emotional impact of the performance. We only are elements of the man, and the full portrait is not establishes as well as it really could have been.

Due to the way Hal is used in the film much of Plummer's performance is unfortunately a repetitive. We see him with his sort of mannerisms as well as a genuine joy that isn't as moving as it could be due the film's editing. We also see plenty of moments of him being tired, and sickly looking, these expressions and reactions are also repeated throughout the film. They are well enough portrayed by Plummer once again, but done in a fashion that never becomes much more than that.

Christopher Plummer performance also rides on two key relationships in the film. One with Hal's boyfriend played rather oddly by Goran Visnjic. This relationship never quite works because of bizarre nature of Visnjic's performance. Plummer tries to make something out of it, but again it never amounts to much. His other pivotal relationship stands with Ewan McGregor's as his son. This is also limited by the film more than it should be, but their few pivotal moments together are Plummer's standout moments in his performance.

Plummer portrays these moments well as he does not make it into an overly warm performance as although they have a good enough relationship, they are not that close. The two actors create just the right amount of distance between each other to make a believable relationship that also establishes their history, since McGregor's Oliver was suppose to have been closer to his mother than his father. Plummer is quite strong though in a single scene where he tells about Hal's the difficult relationship to his wife. It is a moving moment where Plummer shows the pain from Hal's situation very well, and he almost creates this into a great moment, if even this moment seems a little cut short.

This stands as a good performance surely, but not quite a great one. It lacks enough moments where Plummer really stands out with a truly emotionally powerful moment. He has a few strong moments, but overall the effect of his performance is less than it should have been. Plummer is fine throughout of course, but the performance is used in a repetitive fashion that makes even his stronger moments seem less than could have been. Plummer is of course never bad, and does realize Hal's character quite well, but there is not the drive that really brings right into his character's life.

Best Supporting Actor 2011: Nick Nolte in Warrior

2012-02-14T16:31:00.000-05:00

Nick Nolte received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Paddy Conlon in Warrior.

Warrior details a winner take all mixed martial art tournament whose two main combatants are estranged brothers (Tom Hardy, Joel Edgerton) fighting for their own difficult reasons.

Nolte is not an actor I can ever finding myself really liking. His performances usually can be functional but for me he is always lacking that extra quality that really brings you into his character making his performance into something special. Nick Nolte here portrays the formally drunken father of the two brothers, who has a strained relationship with both of them. I suppose his role sort of has Oscar all written over it, as well as seems to have Nolte all written over it as seems certainly cast correctly for the former drunk Paddy Conlon.

Nick Nolte certainly fits the haggard history of his character with his aged face, and his raspy voice that you can almost barely hear at times. Nolte though shows mostly a man who trying to be a reformed man, and is trying to get back what he lost in his bad years. This certainly could have been an extremely flashy role, but for the most part Nolte actually downplays his performance for the most part. He shows mostly his pain rather quietly, but in way to show that Paddy has in a way accepted what he has done.

A great deal of Paddy's character though is shown in his attempts to reconnect with his sons, which he never fully does throughout the course of the film. In scenes with both sons he is always at a distance in their scenes together. Nolte is good in these scenes but I am hard pressed to say he is amazing. He puts a great deal of effort into his performance, but as always with his performances his emotions are right but his performance never becomes as heartbreaking as it should be frankly.

Nolte simply never quite has the emotional impact one would want from a performance like this even in what should be the moving scenes such as when he wants to see his grand children. In this scene Nolte is good enough in that he realistic in his depiction of the scene, but it just never has the extra quality that would have made the scene something truly special. This is really how I felt about the performance as a whole, not bad, even good , but never special.

The film also throws in an Oscar scene unfortunately where Paddy gets drunk again after a troubling scene with his son. Firstly Nolte really did not show Paddy to be that upset after his talk with his son to cause him to have such a break down, secondly the break down seemed unneeded really in the end, and almost seemed to be there to let Nolte show off. Again Nolte isn't bad in this scene though, but it rather just satisfactory enough, but not more than that.

Nolte tries to be the heart of the film, and does give a great deal of effort in his attempt at this, but in the end it he just never comes alive to the extent I would want from a performance like this. It is an entirely descent performance from Nolte, he never has a bad scene or even really bad moment. His performance never really had an especially memorable scene or moment either though.

Best Supporting Actor 2011: Jonah Hill in Moneyball

2012-02-12T19:25:00.001-05:00

Jonah Hill received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Peter Brand in Moneyball.

Jonah Hill's nomination as the meek numbers cruncher who works for Brad Pitt's General Manger Billy Beane in Moneyball is one of those confusing sort of nominations. It could be looked upon as simply a bonus nomination for the film which was nominated for Best Picture as well as Hill sort of tagged along with Brad Pitt's lead nomination. The only problem is somehow he was recognized multiple places and ended being nominated over the far superior performance by Albert Brooks in Drive. All I can say is simply what do they see in this performance that is so special? Well all I can say is there isn't anything special about it.

This is not to say he is bad though, but it is not a particularly remarkable performance. He plays the number cruncher as one would expect the number cruncher he has rather unimpressive presence all throughout and Pitt dominates every scene they are in together. Hill basically keeps Peter Brand as the fairly unassuming individual of the two who tells Beane what he needs to know, but never really does more than that. Hill remains functional most certainly, and is as Brand should be what that is is not anything notable. He only ever offers ammunition to the overall plot, and to Pitt, but never really takes a shot himself.

I suppose most of the performance really is what his chemistry with Pitt is but really their relationship is not really two sided in the film. As I said Pitt dominates every scene, Hill just does as he needs to for Brand nothing more. His scenes with Pitt I never found to be the standout in the scene, and if they were effective scenes that was really all do to Pitt. Hill performance simply is pretty much repetition of Peter Brand's simple manner of telling what he knows and nothing more. Really though I think Peter Brand actually could have been more under different hands than Hill's, as he could have stood out more if he actually took a scene from the film's leading actor but Hill never does.

Hill does have two scenes where he is suppose could have been used to show a different side other than the solely number crunching side of Brand. One he makes a deal over the phone for Beane and has a reaction when he succeeds. I have to say Hill again is very standard with this moment, and reacts as one would expect but he really does not show any particularly special joy, or passion in this scene to make it of note. His other scene is his final scene where he basically tries to cheer up Beane, but again Hill does not do anything special here. It might have been a little more meaningful if he showed Brand to be more supportive, of a character throughout, or perhaps showed growth of some really passion for Beane's cause, but the simple truth is Hill never does this.

In the end I really did not feel like Hill's performance ever gave Peter Brand much of a purpose other than to just set up the plot of the film. I suppose Peter Brand could have been a far more humorous and frankly more interesting if he had been portrayed by a stronger performer, but as is it just a standard standard part as portrayed by Hill. I still won't say that Hill is awful really, but this is not a strong performance by any means in anyway. I am just amazed really that anyone could find this performance to be something substantial, and something that just has to be awarded over far superior from far better actors, particularly one funnier comedian who also is a far more talented actor. Also I should note I promise not to bring up Brooks' snub in any more of my reviews of the other performances.

Best Supporting Actor 2011

2012-02-11T11:28:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Are:

Max Von Sydow in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

Kenneth Branagh in My Week With Marilyn

Christopher Plummer in Beginners

Jonah Hill in Moneyball

Nick Nolte in Warrior

Best Supporting Actor 1970: Results

2012-02-10T23:59:00.003-05:00

5. Richard S. Catellano in Lovers and Other Strangers- Castellano is good even though his role is needlessly gimmicky at first, and rarely focused upon as a whole.

4. John Marley in Love Story- Marley has few scenes but he makes the most of everyone. It is a moving and warm performance that fulfills its purpose.

3. Chief Dan George in Little Big Man- Chief Dan George gives an appropriately wise, humorous, and dignified performance as the Chief who is all three of those things. He does not do much more than that though.

2. John Mills in Ryan's Daughter- John Mills creates a unique character that also has an emotional pull without seeming unnatural as he easily could have been.

1. Gene Hackman in I Never Sang For My Father- Good Prediction Dinasztie, and RatedRStar. Gene Hackman gives an incredible performance from beginning to end. He completely realizes the terrible struggle, and relationship his character has with his father. It is truly memorable and wonderful work from a great actor.

Deserving Performances:
Karl Malden in Patton
Alec Guinness in Scrooge
Trevor Howard in Ryan's Daughter

Best Supporting Actor 1970: John Mills in Ryan's Daughter

2012-02-10T22:58:00.000-05:00

John Mills won his Oscar from his only nomination for portraying Michael in Ryan's Daughter.

Ryan's Daughter is an underrated film about a small Isolated Irish village that details an affair between a British Soldier and one of the local women Rosy.

Ryan's Daughter contains more than one supporting performance of note from the town's domineering Priest played by Trevor Howard, to the titular Ryan the father of Rosy portrayed by Leo Mckern, and Rosy's faithful and kind husband portrayed by Robert Mitchum. The only man who ended up being nominated though should not have been too much of a surprise I suppose since John Mills has the most Oscary role playing a mentally handicapped man who is considered to be the "village idiot".

This type of role is popular with the Oscars although I can't say they are particular popular with me. Although there are few I do like, many times they can be examples of needless overacting, or frankly just bad acting. The simply truth about these performances in many ways though are you either like them or you don't, there is not really that much middle ground when it comes to these performances, because the actors go out on such a limb, and the actor's whole performance depends just on that limb.

Well I must admit I do like Mills performance here I can easily see why many wouldn't but I must say what he does in the role works for me. Although perhaps this can be partially attributed to the fact that I have not seen a great deal of Mills besides his Oscar winning role here therefore perhaps that helps him, for me anyways, slip completely into the character of Michael. I have to admit I really do not see him acting the role, like the way many of these performances are he simply is Michael.

I think his mannerisms do work from his almost constant grin, and his look of interest or inquiry. His limp and the way he walks never felt forced, but within Mills' creation of Michael that feels perfectly natural within his creation. Something that is usually stated although untrue is that Mills' performance is entirely mute, well in fact Michael does make some grunts actually from time to time. These grunts work well with the rest of the performance and again actually do realize Michael very well.

This performance is not only about character creation though as Michael has one very important aspect of his performance which is that he is clearly in love with Rosy even though she finds him revolting. Mills is again good in just giving an earnest performance in this regard showing that Michael loves in a very simple, but a very genuine fashion. He succeeds in making Michael a bit heartbreaking actually because he shows that Michael simply loves her unconditionally, and for her to be simply to be disgusted by him is a tragedy.

It is true that Mills' whole character could be seen as a bit of a contrivance in that even though looked upon as the "village idiot" he is far more descent than the rest of the villagers making the others the real idiots. I actually think Mills makes this work because he keeps his characterization throughout he never makes any concessions, he as well still brings an emotional impact with his performance as well just through his small little scenes showing Michael's love of Rosy. This performance might not be for everyone but for me it absolutely succeeds.

Best Supporting Actor 1970: Gene Hackman in I Never Sang for My Father

2012-02-10T11:13:00.000-05:00

Gene Hackman received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Gene Garrison in I Never Sang for My Father.

Gene Hackman received three of his Oscar nomination for portraying a lawman of some sort, his first for portraying an outlaw, but this is the only time he received it for portraying a relatively average man. A Man who must deal with the relationship of his Father (Melvyn Douglas) after the death of his mother. Although Douglas was nominated in the lead category, Hackman is just as much the lead of the film, even more so in many ways. In fact one could argue that if they reversed categories than than would have been in more appropriate categories than the actual way they were both nominated, but in reality they both really belonged in the lead category.

Gene Hackman shows a very different side here, but shows that he can excel as well with a relatively meeker character than his rather domineering characters found in most of his other nominations. This is a very quiet performance by Hackman for much of the film. A great deal of his performance actually relies on short reactionary moments, which Hackman uses to their fullest potential from beginning to end. Much of his performance depends on these reactions as they establish Gene's relationship with his mother and especially his father.

Hackman is simply excellent early on as Gene interacts with both his parents. Through every early moment they are on screen their is already a clear family dynamic and history developed. Hackman is great every moment though as Gene listens to his father's various orders, and deals with his overall controlling nature Hackman always perfectly portrays an underlying pain, and hatred frankly that Gene is constantly hiding toward his father. Hackman makes though so this is something Gene has long had to do, even if it clear troubles him every time his father makes a rather discouraging or controlling remark to him.

Hackman always has an emotional impact in his performance, and his early scenes with Gene's mother and father really bring us into his difficult situation with his mother and father. Hackman almost shows a tiring situation with Gene's situation with his father, as he reacts with a knowing but expected difficultly when dealing with his father. Both Douglas and Hackman do very well in establishing this difficult relationship where both do not seem exactly cold to each other, or even overly distant but the two actors create just the right emotional disconnection through the father's stubbornness and possessiveness.

Hackman is also equally strong in the few early scenes Gene has with his mother. Their relationship together is the basically the polar opposite of Gene's relationship with his father. There is a clear warmth and love in their scenes together they look at each other talk to one another with ease, unlike the way it is between the son and the father. Hackman here shows a clear and obvious love toward his mother, and an openness, there is not that restraint as he shows in his scenes with Douglas. What is terrific about Hackman's performance though is he does not show that Gene simply hates his father but loves his mother rather, but rather the difference is in his ability to be open to both of them.

Soon in the film his mother dies, and both the son and father must deal with the grief involved with it. Hackman realizes Gene own grief showing a clear loss, but even more importantly he shows a transition within Gene 's relationship with his father. There is still the lack of connection, but Hackman shows that Gene first changes from hiding to hatred to instead begins hiding a bit of a disbelief by the way his father shows his grief only really by talking about himself and his own troubles rather than talking about his wife.

After the death of the mother the end of the film focuses almost entirely on Gene and his father's relationship together, and Gene decision to leave his father completely by moving away, or staying with him. Hackman in these later scenes loses that hidden sort of distaste for his father, as Hackman shows that really he has lost it after the death of his mother. Hackman with ease instead shows it as Gene actually searching instead for some way to finally connect with Father, something that the death of his mother has forced him to confront the issue.

Hackman is terrific as he shows the multitude of emotions that Gene must go threw when thinking of his decision to stay with his father or not. Hackman is great here because he never lets just one facet of the relationship stay as what is pressing Gene the most. Hackman realistically conveys all of what is pressing him at once. There is not a single emotion that overrides the rest in Hackman's portrayal. He is able to show that he clearly loves his father, but that still he never forgets the troubles he has with his father as well. Hackman realizes Gene's troubles perfectly, creating the difficult conflict within himself brilliantly.

Hackman is great throughout but what makes his performance is his final scene with Melvyn Douglas which is simply incredible. The first half of the scene they finally really come together as father and son, and both actors show a genuine warmth to one another. It is a poignant moment where the two come together not only around their pleasant memories, but even their regrets as well. Hackman has a great reaction where he shows a regreat in Gene that suggest that he does also feel partially responsible for his strained relationship with his father. The two actors though simply create a beautiful scene together.

The scene though quickly, but effectively changes tone when the conflict between them comes about. This scenes is especially strong because of their warmth together suddenly changes so harshly. Hackman again is absolutely amazing because he comes back at Douglas' with the same intensity and Gene finally completely breaks out and stands up to his father. Hackman makes the scene heartbreaking though because with the frustration and the intense fighting Hackman manages to show the sadness in the fact that through all of this Gene only merely wanted to be able to love his father. The film leaves a haunted quality at the end of the film because of this last scene, which was brought upon by Hackman truly great performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1970: Richard S. Castellano in Lovers and Other Strangers

2012-02-09T16:32:00.000-05:00

Richard S. Castellano received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Frank Vecchio in Lovers and Other Strangers.

Lovers and Other Strangers is a rather forgotten relationship based comedy of sorts.

Richard S. Castellano received his only nomination for reprising his stage role, but to most people I would say that he is best known for portraying Clemenza in the Godfather which he was mostly quite good in. Here though he reprises his stage role in a film that is quite stagy. He portrays an older couple in the film who is Italian and Catholic. His wife is portrayed by Bea Arthur and their whole shtick in the film is that they are always pestering everyone else about the importance of marriage yet they constantly are bickering or describing problems within their and other people's marriages.

Their first scene together is set up in a fashion where he says something and than she says something both supporting their main theme but at the same time they are always contradicting each other at the same time. Their first scenes actually feel a bit off as they are trying to have a comedic dynamic but the direction, the writing, and even the performances do not find the right tone to really make these work. Instead they more of just feel like a scene wants to be performed in colorful comedic fashion, more than one that truly is comedic and colorful. They are not really bad, but the film clearly wanted for the two to do something really special that doesn't work.

Later on in the film they separate their conversions stopping the gimmick from contiguity which is most certainly a good thing for Castellano's performance which picks up a bit in the last part of the film when Frank talks to his son about why he should stay married. The dialogue itself really remains almost the same shtick, but now without the gimmick of the two talking together Castellano is able to bring out a greater degree of realism, even if his performance still is always at least partially comedic.

Castellano has basically one long talk to his son that is constantly broken up by the rest of the stories near the end of the film. Castellano carries on the same course he set previously in the film. All I can really say is he is fine really, just fine as he constantly repeats the same thing over and over again, in basically the same fashion over and over again, which makes sense since he is suppose to be a bit redundant there is only two brief moments that really let him shine in any sort of fashion although they are still only seen within the mix of the repetition.

In a few brief moments Castellano also suggests a sadder quality in his character that he went after the wrong woman in the end and shows some small signs of regret that are well handled by Castellano as he goes on his string of repetition. Aside from those brief moments though this is a repetitive character that Castellano really can only do so much with, but to his credit he does basically all he can with it. Although it really is not saying much of anything he and Arthur are the best part of the film. Really in the end this is a good performance, just not all that memorable of one though.

Best Supporting Actor 1970: Chief Dan George in Little Big Man

2012-02-09T09:08:00.000-05:00

Chief Dan George received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Chief Old Lodge Skins in Little Big Man.

Little Big Man portrays Jack Crabb (Dustin Hoffman) a white man raised by Natives who goes through many misadventures in the old west during the Indian Wars.

Native American Chief Dan George portrays Chief Old Lodge Skins another Native American Chief in Little Big Man who is humorous, dignified, and wise. An interesting thing about changing attitudes is it can cause one cliche to go away such as the brutal evil Native American chief, and they then can be simply be replaced by another which is the wise humorous chief. Well I cannot actually say how many not evil chiefs appeared before Dan George's portrayal, there were some before like Jeff Chandler in Broken Arrow, but later on the friendly wise funny chief is a very common character now.

The point is Chief Dan George portrays the part in a fashion I expected to be as the Chief character, and Dan George being a Chief himself it certainly fits. His early scenes he is simply just somewhat humorous charming to a degree, and of course dignified. He is rather quiet, but he conveys the wisdom of his character well, but never builds his character too much into something otherworldly having the occasional comical reaction that are not overplayed but effective in giving a lighter quality to the part.

Later in the film though another aspect required is to give dramatic speeches about the evils of the White man, which actually are the most heavy handed moments in the film that are the most obvious moments in the film really just in the way they are written. Now do not get me wrong in my statement by problem is in that the film was already get the point across visually quite well without having to hammer it in with speeches. To his credit though Chief Dan George is actually very strong in his delivery of his speeches bringing a passion to them that although does not rid them of their heavy handed nature are far more effective due to his performance.

Eventually in the film he seems to become philosophical soul searcher of sorts after he becomes blind. Dan George does not change that much with this part of his performance he more of simply becomes less lively in his performance, and a little more sad and wily instead. Chief Dan George doesn't make Old Lodge Skins dreary as he still shows a charming spirit in his performance, but he certainly shows a lesser degree of heart in Old Lodge Skins from what has happened to him.

I want to make this clear that I do believe this to be a good performance, but I can't see the great performance some seem to. In the end it is mostly just a standard kindly chief performance and much of the time there isn't anything particularly special about his performance. It is always good though, but I just not see any moment where he really sets his Native American Chief from other similar characters. He is one of the best of the type, but he still feels more like a type than a completely unique character.

Best Supporting Actor 1970: John Marley in Love Story

2012-02-08T22:05:00.000-05:00

John Marley received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Phil Cavalleri in Love Story.

John Marley portrays Phil who is the father of the female half of the titular love story Jennider Cavalleri (Ali MacGraw). He is the opposite of the Oliver Barrett (Ryan O'Neal)'s father (Ray Milland) who is cold, and and not supportive of their relationship whereas Phil is warm rather supportive, even if taken aback by some of their views and values. Marley actually has a very small role here with only four total scenes in the film. Marley is not even the focus of all four of them either and is simply part of the scenes.

I will say though that despite the rather limited and very small amount of screen time Marley does manage to make as much as he can out of his role, and does realize Phil better than one might expect given the limitations on his performance. He actually gives a charming honestly warmth filled performance. Marley makes Phil into an understanding father with a genuine quality to his performance that never feels forced in any aspect to his character from his love for his daughter to his sort of confusion over some of their choices, but the always shows that love is the actual overriding factor for Phil.

Marley gives a nice performance from his first scene where he does instantly establish Phil's character without trouble. To his short second scene that is a nice heartwarming and gentle reaction that again Marley handles well. Than his third and fourth scene where he is dealing with the terminal disease his Daughter has. Marley is actually terrific in his two short scenes where he is actually quite heartbreaking as he shows the sadness in Phil, that he can barely hide due to his promise to not cry to her father.

Marley actually never had a bad scene or moment in his performance. It most certainly is limited there is no question about that with his only four scenes, but he has four good scenes. I can't say it is the greatest performance ever, or even the greatest very few scenes performance ever. After all it is not as if he really makes an undeniable impact on the film, but his presence is a nice warm one that is effective for when he is on screen. A good performance where Marley serves his purpose as well as any actor really could have in the same role.

Best Supporting Actor 1970

2012-02-07T22:59:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Gene Hackman in I Never Sang For My Father

Chief Dan George in Little Big Man

John Mills in Ryan's Daughter

John Marley in Love Story

Richard S. Castellano in Lovers and Other Strangers

Best Supporting Actor 1995: Results

2012-02-07T09:54:00.000-05:00

5. Ed Harris in Apollo 13- Ed Harris gives a very standard performance that never turns into anything special.

4. Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys- Pitt's performance is somewhat interesting in his first few scenes even if over the top in his craziness, but as he continues to appear his performance just become repetitive.

3. Tim Roth in Rob Roy- Tim Roth gives an appropriately flashy villainous performance with a certain slimy charm, but in the end he just isn't that memorable.

2. James Cromwell in Babe- James Cromwell gives a wonderful performance that is genuinely moving and heart warming. It is a unique performance that finds just the right tone, and creates the right presence throughout the film.

1. Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects- Good prediction Dinasztie. Kevin Spacey gives a great performance that perfectly conveys the right sort of mystery with his character without ever giving away too much or too little through the course of the film.

Deserving Performances:
Patrick McGoohan in Braveheart
Kevin Spacey in Se7en

Best Supporting Actor 1995: James Cromwell in Babe

2012-02-06T23:24:00.000-05:00

James Cromwell received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Farmer Arthur Hoggett in Babe.

Babe is an enjoyable film about a Pig who tries his best to find his place on the farm that isn't on the food menu.

James Cromwell portrays the stoic Farmer Hoggett who is a man of few words but clearly is the man in charge of his farm. Cromwell whole performance really is the sort of presence he is able to convey with Hoggett since his performance really is nearly silent for the most part. The farmer Hoggett despite just being a simple farmer is harder to bring to life than one might think, as there could have been many pitfalls to his character but Cromwell never seems to make a single mistake with his performance that finds just the right tone throughout the film.

Farmer Hoggett frankly could have just been a dull character, after all commonly in stories of this nature the humans are the least interesting characters, but Cromwell never allows himself to be dull despite the fact that his role is so often one of few words. Cromwell has just the perfect sort of manner in his performance that suggests Famer Hoggett's long history of being a farmer, as well as being very much an old timey fellow in his own personal style. Cromwell absolutely nails this aspect of Hoggett and his performance almost feels like just an extension of the old farm itself in a way.

The most important aspect with Cromwell's performance though is actually his relationship with the Pig. In most of the early moments of the film Cromwell in very small but effective reactions suggests his slow movement to growing to become very found of the pig. Cromwell is really brilliant in just his tiniest of glances, and smiles at the mention or at the sight of the pig that are simply wonderful. He also slowly builds this change from almost indifference to fondness to really love which comes out fully in a scene where Hoggett completely loses his stoicism.

His scene where he completely breaks out into song is simply splendid. Cromwell reaches this point believably actually, and does not force this action of Hoggett instead it actually feels like a natural transition brought by Cromwell. It is a terrific moment where Cromwell brings such genuine joy to the song and dance that make the moment wonderful. The only moment I might like more in the performance than that though is his final "That'll do Pig". Cromwell gives such a warmth in his performance that is really something special.

James Cromwell simply gives a charming entertaining performance with Farmer Hoggett that does so much with what seems like a relatively simple role. Hoggett could have easily been boring, or overly sweet frankly. Cromwell's ability to make the character's change through the film, and relationship with his pig honestly heart warming without a single forced moment it actually quite an achievement. This is really a one of a kind performance by Cromwell, in a one of a kind film.

Best Supporting Actor 1995: Tim Roth in Rob Roy

2012-02-04T23:08:00.000-05:00

Tim Roth received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Archibald Cunningham in Rob Roy.

Rob Roy depicts the troubles and eventual revenge of Scotsman Robert Roy McGregor (Liam Neeson).

Tim Roth portrays Archibald Cunningham the man who causes most of the troubles for old Rob Roy. Roth makes no excuses about it from his opening scene that Archibald is the villain of the film. A cockney and overly prim villain with his gloating smile, and fancy boy manner. Roth aside from one very brief moment does not show Archibald to have any sympathy for his completely amoral actions. He is the bad guy plain and simple who does not mind for a second his murdering of Rob Roy's friend, stealing his money, burning his house, and even raping his wife.

Roth certainly has basically the same style throughout as he goes from scene to scene being evil, and acting like a pompous pretty boy well he does it. Roth is most certainly consistent and has the right sort of slimy charm in the role. He is fairly imposing as a villain, and he becomes most certainly worthy of hate so when he and Rob Roy clash swords you certainly want him to meet the business end of Roy's weapon. Roth is as he should be as Cunningham conniving and cruel, and is an effective enough villain.

The only problem I have with the performance though is he is just not that memorable of a villain in the end. He is a good enough villain as the film runs its course but soon after watching it I do not remember his performance that well. Villains commonly are the type of characters that can become unforgettable, but although I would not say Roth's Cunningham is forgettable he just is not one I would ever be quick to say he is an antagonist for the ages, rather just a suitable enough antagonistic.

Roth just stays consistently villainous throughout the only moment where he shows a different side of Cunningham is an extremely short one where he indicates he actually has some regret over one of his immoral acts. It is a small silent reaction but it is actually very well handled by Roth suggesting that maybe deep in Cunningham's pompous exterior there is not such a horrible man there somewhere. The scene is short but well done, but it really is not brought up past this short moment. In the end this is just a fine villain performance not ever amazing but never bad either.

Best Supporting Actor 1995: Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects

2012-02-02T22:08:00.000-05:00

Kevin Spacey won his first Oscar from his first Oscar nomination for portraying Roger 'Verbal' Kint in the Usual Suspects.

The Usual Suspects tells the story of a fallout from five criminals who got together for a series of heists, and their association with an elusive underworld bogeyman Keyser Soze.

In this review it is absolutely necessary to divulge the spoilers of the film since the twist of the film is pivotal to Spacey's performance, although I must say most people probably know the twist to this film already. Kevin Spacey Verbal Kint one of the criminals in the film who appears to be rather meek and simple fellow who seems to just stand behind and around the other criminals. He does not seem to make the major decision and always somehow seems like the least important among the group.

I must say Kevin Spacey is a strange actor for me as many of his performances always seem to lose their strength for me on each viewing after the initial viewing. After initial viewing of his performance in American viewing for example I thought he was simply a strong performance, but rewatching the performance his theatrical style he has comes more and more out, as he seems to mix both film style acting and stage acting in the same performance. That does not make his performances complete failures, after all I still liked him in American Beauty but they can detract from the overall effect.

As Kint he is very mannered he always seems to be putting on a bit of an act. He is always obviously talking too much for his own good and he seems to almost purposefully make himself seems extra pathetic with his disabilities, and manner of speaking. Kint is most certainly an oddity about Spacey he is as fidgety and as expressive in his overall meekness as possible. Spacey makes Kint into a rather weak willed man, who only seems to be among the criminals because they happened to ask him.

Kint It is a theatrical display by Spacey, but it is one that works for a multitude of reasons. For one thing he most certainly comes off as pathetic and as meek as Kint should be actually. He is both believable as the utterly pathetic Kint, but Spacey abilities in both the theatrical and the subtle actually creates a sort of mystery about Kint, and it is hard to put one's finger on the mystery of who this man is. His theatricality for example suggests one of two things that is merely what Kint does to get back in the criminal world, or that he is really hiding something by pretending to something he is not, Spacey allows us to see it either way.

The same goes for some of Spacey more subtle moments in the group scenes with the other criminals. Spacey portrays Kint just right is it that he is dumb and stupid just, and that is the sole reason he stays silent most of the time, or again is there something more going on in his head, which there may be in a few brief moments from time to time. Spacey keeps the mystery of Kint that could go either way that he really just is a nothing or, there is far more than one could possibly think about Kint.

Well the truth in the end is that there is far more to Kint in that he is in actuality the criminal mastermind known as Keyer Soze, or at least most certainly is not the meek individual he portrayed for the rest of the film. Spacey's slightly off but effective portrayal for the rest of the film absolutely works with the eventual twist making the twist believable in the end without giving away the twist early on either since he keeps Verbal just the right sort of mystery with his performance.

Spacey's performance was absolutely key to the film as a whole, after all what is most remembered about this film is Spacey's performance and the twist he brings to life. Spacey is the one who makes the twist work through his odd but effective characterization of Verbal Kint. I particularly love his single moment we he turns from the pathetic Verbal to a man of confidence and strength in a single moment. He managed to make a character that one could be suspect and doubt equally. Yes it has the combination of theatrics and some subtly as usual with Spacey in this film though in this instance it absolutely works.

Best Supporting Actor 1995: Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys

2012-02-01T17:40:00.001-05:00

Brad Pitt received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Jeffrey Goines in 12 Monkeys.

12 Monkeys depicts a time traveler James Cole (Bruce Willis) from the post apocalyptic future who tries to find out about the apocalypse virus in the past.

Brad Pitt portrays the deranged Jeffrey Goines who Cole first meets Goines in a mental institution where he even has a cartoon sound effect for when his head pops out of his shirt letting us now from the very first instance that this is not going to be a subtle performance from Brad Pitt. Although to be fair Pitt's performance only seems to fit the film sometimes rather insane style. Also Pitt is suppose to be portraying a totally insane character, so for him to go rather over the top is rather understandable.

The only problem is there is portraying crazy with the utmost realism, and than there is portraying crazy like you are just obviously "ACTING" with all the capital letters being needed. Pitt's performance work s sort of at first with me as he goes on his long rants at the mental hospital, about his insane idea and theories. Though Pitt never really feels like he is really a mental patient, and it does always feel like a performer performing. Pitt does manage to bring a manic energy to his part in these early scenes which is fairly effective to help set the mood.

Later on though Pitt's whole shtick just seems to get old pretty fast it works in those first scenes where he is a effective, later on though it just starts to become tiresome. Every time he shows up he does his same exact insane thing that really never develops to anything especially considering what happens with his character in the end. He never tries anything else with Goines just keeps with same insane act for the whole film, that almost feels to become even more actory as the film goes on.

Pitt performance ends up not being particularly special past his first scenes which are fine, but a little of him goes a long way. Frankly I would have just liked his performance if we never saw him again past the insane asylum, but the way he is used in the film his performance just becomes strangely sort of dull because we know exactly what to expect from his. He simply becomes less and less intense, and interesting as he continues to reappear.

Best Actor Ranking

2012-02-01T11:53:00.001-05:00

1962
1939
1964
2002
1978
1965
1970
1974
1976
1954
1966
1982
1960
1983
1967
1979
1955
2011
1986
1973
1972
1994
1940
1950
1963
1975
1952
1980
1953
1959
1987
1977
1968
2006
1938
1969
1992
1961
1971
1956
1951
1984
1943
1958
1948
1998
1999
1988
1944
1936
1946
1957
2007
2005
1942
1947
1993
1981
1989
1995
2004
1937
2009
1941
1997
1931
1996
1949
2003
2010
1990
1945
1985
2001
2008
1991
2000

F. Murray Abraham in Amadeus (1984)
Marlon Brando in On the Waterfront (1954)
Peter O'Toole in Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
James Stewart in It's a Wonderful Life (1946)
Richard Burton in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf (1966)
Dustin Hoffman in Midnight Cowboy (1969)
Richard Farnsworth in The Straight Story (1999)
Al Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
George C. Scott in Patton (1970)
Alec Guinness in The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)
Robert Duvall in Tender Mercies (1983)
Laurence Olivier in Hamlet (1948)
Montgomery Clift in From Here to Eternity (1953)
Jon Voight in Midnight Cowboy (1969)
Robert De Niro in Raging Bull (1980)
Jack Nicholson in Five Easy Pieces (1970)
Paul Newman in The Verdict (1982)
Giancarlo Giannini in Seven Beauties (1976)
Edward Norton in American History X (1998)
Peter O'Toole in The Lion in Winter (1968)
Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot (1989)
Peter Finch in Network (1976)
Laurence Olivier in Sleuth (1972)
William Hurt in Kiss of the Spider Woman (1985)
Robert De Niro in The Deer Hunter (1978)
Jack Nicholson in Ironweed (1987)
Montgomery Clift in A Place in the Sun (1951)
Laurence Olivier in The Entertainer (1960)
Richard Burton in The Spy Who Came in From The Cold (1965)
James Stewart in Anatomy of a Murder (1959)
Clark Gable Gone With the Wind (1939)
Ray Milland in The Lost Weekend (1945)
Gary Oldman in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)
Jean Dujardin in The Artist (2011)
Rod Steiger in The Pawnbroker (1965)
Kirk Douglas in Lust For Life (1956)
Laurence Olivier in Richard III (1956)
Robert Montgomery in Night Must Fall (1937)
Stuart Whitman in The Mark (1961)
Paul Newman in The Hustler (1961)
William Holden in Stalag 17 (1953)
Jeremy Irons in Reversal of Fortune (1990)
Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest (1975)
Ernest Borgnine in Marty (1955)
Jack Lemmon in Save the Tiger (1973)
Laurence Olivier in Rebecca (1940)
Michael Caine in Alfie (1966)
Jack Lemmon in Days Of Wine And Roses (1962)
Ronald Colman in A Double Life (1947)
Paul Scofield in A Man For All Seasons (1966)
Jack Nicholson in The Last Detail (1973)
Charles Laughton in The Private Life of Henry VIII (1933)
Philip Seymour Hoffman in Capote (2005)
Clark Gable in It Happened One Night (1934)
Robert De Niro in Taxi Driver (1976)
Alec Guinness in The Lavender Hill Mob (1952)
Jack Nicholson in About Schmidt (2002)
Marlon Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire (1951)
Laurence Harvey in Room at the Top (1959)
Spencer Tracy in A Bad Day At Black (1955)
Anthony Quinn in Zorba the Greek (1964)
Forest Whitaker in The Last King of Scotland (2006)
Peter O'Toole in Becket (1964)
Art Carney in Harry and Tonto (1974)
Jack Nicholson in Chinatown (1974)
Al Pacino in The Godfather Part 2 (1974)
Adrien Brody in The Pianist (2002)
Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler (2008)
Victor McLaglen in The Informer (1935)
James Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes Washington (1939)
Gregory Peck in To Kill A Mockingbird (1962)
Rod Steiger in The Heat of the Night (1967)
Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven (1992)
James Woods in Salvador (1986)
Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry (1960)
James Dean in East of Eden (1955)
Jon Voight in Coming Home (1978)
Laurence Olivier in Wuthering Heights (1939)
Tom Wilkinson in In The Bedroom (2001)
Bob Hoskins in Mona Lisa (1986)
Sean Penn in Dead Man Walking (1995)
Sidney Poitier in Lilies of the Field (1963)
Paul Newman in Hud (1963)
Richard Harris in This Sporting Life (1963)
Albert Finney in Tom Jones (1963)
Marcello Mastroianni in Divorce Italian Style (1962)
Richard Burton in Becket (1964)
Gene Hackman in The French Connection (1971)
Demian Bichir in A Better Life (2011)
Robert Donat in The Citadel (1938)
Charles Boyer in Gaslight (1944)
James Cagney in Angels With Dirty Faces (1938)
Dustin Hoffman in Tootsie (1982)
Paul Lukas in Watch on the Rhine (1943)
James Mason in A Star is Born (1954)
Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator (1940)
Robert Donat in Goodbye, Mr Chips (1939)
Leslie Howard in Pygmalion (1938)
Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Marlon Brando in The Godfather (1972)
Peter Sellers in Being There (1979)
Walter Huston The Devil and Daniel Webster (1941)
Michael Caine in Sleuth (1972)
Robert Duvall in The Apostle (1997)
Dustin Hoffman in Kramer vs. Kramer (1979)
Emil Jannings in The Last Command (1928)
Liam Neeson in Schindler's List (1993)
Walter Huston in Dodsworth (1936)
John Hurt in The Elephant Man (1980)
Jack Lemmon in The Apartment (1960)
Laurence Olivier in Henry V (1946)
Nicolas Cage in Adaptation (2002)
David Niven in Separate Tables (1958)
Jeremy Renner in The Hurt Locker (2009)
Kirk Douglas in Champion (1949)
Monty Woolley in The Pied Piper (1942)
Henry Fonda in The Grapes of Wrath (1940)
Fredric March in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932)
Viggo Mortensen in Eastern Promises (2007)
Peter Finch in Sunday Bloody Sunday (1971)
Leonardo DiCaprio in The Aviator (2004)
Morgan Freeman in The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood (2007)
Gene Hackman in Mississippi Burning (1988)
William Hurt in Children of Lesser God (1986)
Ronald Colman in Bulldog Drummond (1930)
Marlon Brando in Viva Zapata! (1952)
Bing Crosby in The Country Girl (1954)
Dudley Moore in Arthur (1981)
Don Cheadle in Hotel Rwanda (2004)
Nicolas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas (1995)
Henry Fonda in On Golden Pond (1981)
Barry Fitzgerald in Going My Way (1944)
Nigel Hawthorne in The Madness of King George (1994)
Charles Laughton in A Witness for the Prosecution(1957)
John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever (1977)
Tom Courtenay in The Dresser (1983)
Oskar Werner in Ship of Fools (1965)
Marcello Mastroianni in A Special Day (1977)
Dustin Hoffman in The Graduate (1967)
Tom Hulce in Amadeus (1984)
William Powell in The Thin Man (1934)
Marlon Brando in Julius Caesar (1953)
Maximilian Schell in The Man in a Glass Booth (1975)
Ben Kingsley in Gandhi (1982)
Alexander Knox in Wilson (1944)
Ian McKellen in Gods and Monsters (1998)
Tom Hanks in Cast Away (2000)
Jose Ferrer in Cyrano De Bergerac (1950)
Gary Busey in The Buddy Holly Story (1978)
Robert Duvall in The Great Santini (1980)
James Stewart in Harvey (1950)
Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain (2005)
William Holden in Sunset Blvd. (1950)
Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network (2010)
Daniel Day-Lewis in In the Name of the Father (1993)
Cary Grant in Penny Serenade (1941)
Leonardo DiCaprio Blood Diamond (2006)
John Travolta in Pulp Fiction (1994)
Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind (2001)
Morgan Freeman in Driving Miss Daisy (1989)
Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke (1967)
Peter Fonda in Ulee's Gold (1997)
Alan Bates in The Fixer (1968)
Anthony Quinn in Wild is the Wind (1957)
Albert Finney in The Dresser (1983)
Albert Finney in Under The Volcano (1984)
Tony Curtis in The Defiant Ones (1958)
Orson Welles in Citizen Kane (1941)
Sam Waterson in The Killing Fields (1984)
Sidney Poitier in The Defiant Ones (1958)
Michael Douglas in Wall Street (1987)
Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca (1943)
Brad Pitt in Moneyball (2011)
Russell Crowe in The Insider (1999)
Richard Harris in The Field (1990)
Lee Marvin in Cat Ballou (1965)
Topol in Fiddler on the Roof (1971)
Colin Firth in A Single Man (2009)
Melvyn Douglas in I Never Sang for My Father (1970)
Clark Gable in Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan (1998)
Marlon Brando Last Tango in Paris (1973)
Ryan Gosling in Half Nelson (2006)
Richard Jenkins in The Visitor (2008)
Ryan O'Neal in Love Story (1970)
Clint Eastwood in Million Dollar Baby (2004)
Robert Downey Jr. in Chaplin (1992)
Lionel Barrymore in A Free Soul (1931)
Gary Cooper in High Noon (1952)
Jack Lemmon in The China Syndrome (1979)
Spencer Tracy in Father of the Bride (1950)
Dan O'Herlihy in Robinson Crusoe (1954)
Peter O'Toole in The Ruling Class (1972)
Paul Newman in A Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958)
Roy Scheider in All that Jazz (1979)
Fredric March in A Star is Born (1937)
Tom Cruise in Jerry Maguire (1996)
Jackie Cooper in Skippy (1931)
Arthur Kennedy in Bright Victory (1951)
Ronald Colman in Random Harvest (1942)
Kirk Douglas in The Bad and The Beautiful (1952)
Gregory Peck in The Keys of the Kingdom (1945)
Peter O'Toole in My Favorite Year (1982)
James Cagney in Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942)
Montgomery Clift in The Search (1948)
Richard Burton in Equus (1977)
Mickey Rooney in The Human Comedy (1943)
William Holden in Network (1976)
Paul Muni in I Am a Fugitive From a Chain Gang (1933)
Ralph Fiennes in The English Patient (1997)
William Powell in My Man Godfrey (1936)
Cliff Robertson in Charly (1968)
Paul Newman in Nobody's Fool (1994)
Maximilian Schell in Judgment At Nuremberg (1961)
Laurence Olivier in The Boys from Brazil (1978)
Ronald Colman in Condemned (1930)
Peter O'Toole in The Stunt Man (1980)
Laurence Olivier in Othello (1965)
Peter O'Toole in Venus (2006)
Daniel Day-Lewis in Gangs of New York (2002)
Kenneth Branagh in Henry V (1989)
Warner Baxter in In Old Arizona (1929)
Dustin Hoffman in Lenny (1974)
Gary Cooper in Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936)
Fredric March in The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)
Warren Beatty in Bonnie and Clyde (1967)
Warren Beatty in Heaven Can Wait (1978)
Michael Caine in The Quiet American (2002)
James Earl Jones in The Great White Hope (1970)
Marcello Mastroianni in Dark Eyes (1987)
Fredric March in The Royal Family of Broadway (1931)
Michael Caine in Educating Rita (1983)
Al Pacino in ...And Justice for All (1979)
Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart (2009)
James Franco in 127 Hours (2010)
Anthony Hopkins in The Remains of the Day (1993)
Burt Lancaster in From Here to Eternity (1953)
James Dean in Giant (1956)
Burt Lancaster in Atlantic City (1981)
William Powell in Life With Father (1947)
Charles Laughton in Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
Jack Lemmon in Some Like it Hot (1959)
Maurice Chevalier in The Love Parade (1930)
Bill Murray in Lost in Translation (2003)
Jude Law in Cold Mountain (2003)
Charlton Heston in Ben-Hur (1959)
Rock Hudson in Giant (1956)
Charles Boyer in Algiers (1938)
Stephen Rea in The Crying Game (1992)
Tom Conti in Reuben, Reuben (1983)
Tommy Lee Jones in In the Valley of Elah (2007)
Jack Lemmon in Missing (1982)
John Garfield in Body and Soul (1947)
Ron Moody in Oliver! (1968)
Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady (1964)
Clifton Webb in Sitting Pretty (1948)
Denzel Washington in Malcolm X (1992)
Raymond Massey in Abe Lincoln in Illinois (1940)
Charles Boyer in Conquest (1937)
Lew Ayres in Johnny Belinda (1948)
Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman (1992)
Mac von Sydow in Pelle the Conqueror (1988)
William Hurt in Broadcast News (1987)
George C. Scott in The Hospital (1971)
Broderick Crawford in All the King's Men (1949)
Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind (1960)
Woody Allen in Annie Hall (1977)
Steve McQueen in The Sand Pebbles (1966)
Kevin Spacey in American Beauty (1999)
Robin Williams in Good Morning Vietnam (1987)
Paul Muni in The Life of Emile Zola (1937)
Al Pacino in Serpico (1973)
Trevor Howard in Sons and Lovers (1960)
James Cagney in Love Me or Leave Me (1955)
David Straithairn in Good Night and Good Luck (2005)
Harrison Ford in Witness (1985)
Edward James Olmos in Stand and Deliver (1988)
Sean Penn in Mystic River (2003)
Spencer Tracy in Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)
Geoffrey Rush in Shine (1996)
Alan Arkin in The Heart is a Lonely Hunter (1968)
Richard Dreyfuss in The Goodbye Girl (1977)
Paul Newman in The Color of Money (1986)
Tom Hanks in Big (1988)
Humphrey Bogart in The Caine Mutiny (1954)
Richard Burton in Anne of the Thousand Days (1969)
Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man (1988)
Michael Redgrave in Mourning Becomes Electra (1947)
Richard Barthelmess in the Patent Leather Kid (1928)
Nick Nolte in Affliction (1998)
Peter O'Toole in Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969)
Burt Lancaster in Birdman of Alcatraz (1964)
Mickey Rooney in Babes in Arms (1939)
Walter Pidgeon in Mrs. Miniver (1942)
Charlie Chaplin in The Circus (1928)
Robert Redford in The Sting (1973)
Walter Matthau in The Sunshine Boys (1975)
James Stewart in The Philadelphia Story (1940)
John Wayne in Sands of Iwo Jima (1949)
Jack Nicholson in As Good as it Gets (1997)
Paul Muni in The Valiant (1929)
Adolphe Menjou in The Front Page (1931)
Denzel Washington in The Hurricane (1999)
Dustin Hoffman in Wag the Dog (1997)
Paul Muni in The Story of Louis Pasteur (1936)
Alan Arkin in The Russians are Coming, The Russians Are Coming (1966)
Spencer Tracy in Judgment At Nuremberg (1961)
Louis Calhern in The Magnificent Yankee (1950)
Paul Muni in The Last Angry Man (1959)
Sean Penn in Sweet and Lowdown (1999)
Gregory Peck in Twelve O'clock High (1949)
Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump (1994)
Colin Firth in The King's Speech (2010)
Richard Dreyfuss in Mr. Holland's Opus (1995)
Johnny Depp in Sweeney Todd (2007)
Gary Cooper in For Whom the Bell Tolls (1943)
Walter Pidgeon in Madame Curie (1943)
Billy Bob Thorton in Sling Blade (1996)
Johnny Depp in Finding Neverland (2004)
Albert Finney in Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
Spencer Tracy in San Francisco (1936)
Johnny Depp in The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
Bing Crosby in Going My Way (1944)
Spencer Tracy in Boys Town (1938)
Franchot Tone in Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
Joaquin Phoenix in Walk the Line (2005)
John Wayne in True Grit (1969)
Paul Winfield in Sounder (1972)
Jose Ferrer in Moulin Rouge (1952)
George Arliss in Disraeli (1930)
Anthony Hopkins in Nixon (1995)
Gerard Depardieu in Cyrano De Bergerac (1990)
Wallace Beery in The Champ (1932)
Cary Grant in None but the Lonely Heart (1944)
Humphrey Bogart in The African Queen (1951)
Robert De Niro in Awakenings (1990)
Morgan Freeman in Invictus (2009)
Alfred Lunt in The Guardsman (1932)
Richard Todd in The Hasty Heart (1949)
Frank Sinatra in The Man With the Golden Arm (1955)
Charles Boyer in Fanny (1961)
Tom Hanks in Philadelphia (1993)
James Whitmore in Give 'Em Hell Harry! (1975)
George Arliss in The Green Goddess (1930)
Gregory Peck in The Yearling (1946)
Robin Williams in The Fisher King (1991)
Ed Harris in Pollock (2000)
Gregory Peck in Gentleman's Agreement (1947)
James Garner in Murphy's Romance (1985)
Maurice Chevalier in The Big Pond (1930)
Robert Montgomery in Here Comes Mr. Jordan (1941)
Sylvester Stallone in Rocky (1976)
George Clooney in Michael Clayton (2007)
Fredric March in Death of a Salesman (1951)
Gary Cooper in The Pride of the Yankees (1942)
Geoffrey Rush in Quills (2000)
Walter Matthau in Kotch (1971)
Wallace Beery in The Big House (1930)
Paul Newman in Absence of Malice (1981)
Frank Morgan in The Affairs of Cellini (1934)
Jeff Bridges in True Grit (2010)
Javier Bardem in Before Night Falls (2000)
Warren Beatty in Reds (1981)
Massimo Troisi in The Postman (1995)
Dan Dailey in When My Baby Smiles At Me (1948)
Gene Kelly in Anchors Aweigh (1945)
Ben Kingsley in The House of Sand and Fog (2003)
Robert De Niro in Cape Fear (1991)
Jon Voight in Runaway Train (1985)
Nick Nolte in The Prince of Tides (1991)
Will Smith in The Pursuit of Happyness (2006)
Marlon Brando in Sayonara (1957)
Denzel Washington in Training Day (2001)
Laurence Fishburne in What's Love Got To Do With It (1993)
Richard Burton in The Robe (1953)
Leslie Howard in Berkeley Square (1933)
Bing Crosby in Bells of St. Mary's (1945)
Rex Harrison in Cleopatra (1963)
Spencer Tracy in The Old Man and The Sea (1958)
Chester Morris in Alibi (1929)
Russell Crowe in Gladiator (2000)
Frank Langella Frost/Nixon (2008)
Dexter Gordon in 'Round Midnight (1986)
Jack Nicholson in Prizzi's Honor (1985)
Jack Lemmon in Tribute (1980)
Javier Bardem in Biutiful (2010)
Sean Penn in Milk (2008)
Woody Harrelson in The People vs Larry Flynt (1996)
Larry Parks in The Jolson Story (1946)
Warren Beatty in Bugsy (1991)
Terrence Howard in Hustle and Flow (2005)
Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting (1997)
Robin William in Dead Poet's Society (1989)
Tom Cruise in Born on the Fourth of July (1989)
George Clooney in Up in The Air (2009)
Yul Brynner in The King and I (1956)
George Clooney in The Descendants (2011)
Cornel Wilde in A Song to Remember (1945)
Jeff Bridges in Star Man (1984)
Spencer Tracy in Captain Courageous (1937)
Gary Cooper in Sergeant York (1941)
Will Smith in Ali (2001)
Roberto Benigni in Life is Beautiful (1998)
Sean Penn in I Am Sam (2001)
Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves (1990)
Jamie Foxx in Ray (2004)
Brad Pitt in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)
Anthony Franciosa in A Hatful of Rain (1957)
Richard Dix in Cimarron (1931)

Missing:
Richard Barthelmess in The Noose
George Bancroft in Thunderbolt
Lewis Stone in The Patriot
Lawrence Tibbett The Rouge Song
Emil Jannings in The Way of All Flesh

Updated Video of All My Winners:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SI_mCwPB1A&feature=youtu.be

Best Actor 2011: Results

2012-01-29T00:01:00.000-05:00

5. George Clooney in The Descendants- Clooney as usual for him fails to find conviction in his performance. He has a strange lack of consistency and has some very bad moments that are suppose to be his money scenes.

4. Brad Pitt in Moneyball- Brad Pitt gives a fine leading performance here that is effectively charming and entertaining.

3. Demian Bichir in A Better Life- Demain Bichir gives a heartfelt and incredibly moving performance that only ever relies on bringing out genuine emotions in every moment of his film.

2. Jean Dujardin in The Artist- Jean Dujardin gives simply a wonderful performance that is a unique achievement to behold. He never fails to entertain as well as create a powerful portrait despair as well it is truly great work.

1. Gary Oldman in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy- Gary Oldman has the greatest of challenges with his almost emotionalism part, yet he makes a compelling and very convincing characterization. His performance improves for me each time I have watched it. A very difficult decision to be sure and I certainly thought between these top two for quite a while. Both give superb performances, and again I have no real reason for picking Oldman over Dujardin, I think they are equally good in their challenging roles, but I am forced to pick one.

Deserving Performances
Michael Fassbender in Shame
Ryan Gosling in Drive
Brendan Gleeson in The Guard

Best Actor 2011: Demian Bichir in A Better Life

2012-01-28T11:36:00.001-05:00

Demian Bichir received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Carlos Galindo in A Better Life.

A Better Life is a descent although far from perfect film about an illegal immigrant from Mexico who attempts to make a better life for his son.

Demian Bichir portrays an illegal immigrant from Mexico who lives in American earning a living through working on trees. Bichir early on shows Carlos just to be really an average but hard working man who honestly just wants to work hard for more. Bichir realistically shows just the right degree of exhaustion on his face to indicate that Carlos has been doing this for a long while. Although not tired in the sense that suggest he does not want to do before, just in the sense that he has been working hard.

Bichir has always a certain ease in the role that always supports the idea of Carlos' history as a worker and as a father. In the first scene with his son there is just a thoroughly natural quality to their scenes together.Their first together is special really because of just how ordinary they are with one another. They establish in their first scene as a father and son that is not the warmest but neither is the coldest. Bichir really characterizes it as less than it should be merely by the fact that Carlos is basically working most of the time and is simply too tired from that to devote the effort to deal with his son.

Bichir effectively brings us into his world with him, and through his simple but moving approach he makes Carlos an easy man to empathize with. He always shows that Carlos' hopes and dreams are genuine, and truly meaningful to him. Because of this honest approach when Carlos finally has the money to buy the equipment to run the tree service himself we are able to feel the joy of the success with him. The scene where he goes to show his son what he has finally achieved is one of the most genuinely heart warming moments I have seen in a recent film. His happiness and pride in what he has gained is truly brought to life by Bichir.

Soon afterwards in the film Carlos' fortune quickly changes though when his truck is stolen suddenly. Bichir again sense he created such an honest portrait from the beginning of the film, this scene is made heartbreaking as we can really feel the loss right along with him. Bichir is terrific in these scenes because he really downplays it all to great effect. Bichir shows Carlos to really be a modest man and it would be incorrect for him to respond in some great outburst of anger, instead he very simply shows a sadness in him, but Bichir always shows that Carlos never loses his determination though.

The later scenes of the film focuses on Carlos looking for what was stolen from him with his son, as well at the same time attempting to bond with his son. In these scenes the whole time I wished the actor playing Carlos' son was better, since Bichir is excellent and these scenes could have been great if Bichir had been equaled by his co-star. Bichir is extremely moving in these scenes as he shows Carlos' quiet attempts to try to reconnect with his son. Bichir never tries to force the emotional impact of these scene but rather brings them naturally with his genuine performance.

These scenes could have frankly fallen into overt sentimentality but Bichir never forces a moment. He shows that Carlos have a completely honest love for his son, and only wishes to try to connect with his son. Bichir presents this with a clear history with his son that is exceedingly moving. We feel with Bichir his whole struggle to reach his son, as well as his loss when he forced away from him. It is a very emotionally powerful portrait that always manages to bring the strength of everyone moment to it fullest.

Best Actor 2011: Jean Dujardin in The Artist

2012-01-27T18:22:00.000-05:00

Jean Dujardin received his first Oscar nomination for portraying George Valentine in The Artist.

The Artist depicts the fall of a silent star and the rise of a talkie star.

Jean Dujardin is the first actor since Lewis Stone in the Patriot to be nominated for a silent film, and if he were to win he would be the first winner of that sort since Emil Jannings' two wins. Jean Dujardin has apparently reminded many people of silent stars like Douglas Fairbanks for example. I actually must disagree and say he actually reminded most of relatively early sound star Fredric March, and George Valentine after all shares many similarities with Fredric March's character in A Star is Born, they are both originally popular romantic leading men and are eclipsed by a woman they helped get her start, and they both fall into an alcoholic despair over their loss of stardom although the eventual fates are considerably different although they come close to being the same.

For some reason I always felt Dujardin felt to me more like an early sound star than a truly silent star only because I suppose many silent stars tended to overact a lot, they weren't all Emil Jannings after all, and to me he gives a performance Fredric March sort of gives if you turn off the sound in their films, after all I just find that both Dujardin's and March's face of distress is exactly the same. Anyway though it is really better than Dujardin portrays the part in this manner rather than replicating some of the more dated aspects of the silent period, instead he finds a way to make the essence of the best qualities of old Hollywood.

In the first section of the film when George Valentine is still the great star Dujardin is just a ball of energy. He is about as charming as one could possibly be with the simple joy he shows in every moment as he performs. His smile is about as wide as a smile can be and he just is a bright spot on screen perfectly capturing the sort of charisma of a star of that period without ever making it feel like he is trying to merely imitate one of those stars either. He simply becomes the star which is an outstanding achievement to behold, and it is an essential element for the film itself.

After his fall from stardom which happens rather quickly George Valentine falls in despair. Dujardin excels in this part of his performance just as well as he did when George Valentine was on top, and actually Dujardin perfectly brings out the sadness in Valentine with performance by showing just what a difference there is between his happiness and sadness. It is true that Dujardin change is rather abrupt but it is entirely fitting since George Valentine's fall from stardom happens almost overnight.

Dujardin is extremely effective in his portrayal of the fallen Valentine who never falls in delusions like say Norma Desmond in Sunset Blvd, instead he falls into deep despair over his loss. Dujardin is terrific in showing the slowly intensifying despair in his performance, and although silently he perfectly conveys everything that is going through George over every that he lost. There is a great intensity to Dujardin in these moments that brings to life just how troubled George Valentine has become, and he Dujardin effectively works toward the final climax of George's despair exceedingly well.

Dujardin throughout this film gives a compelling and entertaining performance that is easy to follow throughout George Valentine's tribulations. I must say interestingly enough the part of his performance that I was at all disappointed by was, and this is a spoiler, when he finally does say his single line. The only reason is his single line is with his native french accent and I was perhaps a bit disappointed by this. Not that Dujardin says incorrectly or anything I just don't think the french accent fit the star he was the rest of the time, he just does not look like the successful sound french actors in type like Maurice Chevalier or Charles Boyer, he looks like Fredric March. This is really beyond even a nitpick though.

The artist is a film that really could have been either made or broken by its lead performance. Frankly it would have easy for the actor in this role to have just seemed like some sort of cheap imitation of an actor of the period the film depicts. Dujardin's magnificent performance though completely meets and overcomes all the obstacles of the part. He simply is a star in this film he never lets you question it from a moment, and the idea that this is an entirely silent performance never matters for a moment. Dujardin brings just as much in fact far emotional power and even charm in his performance than many performances that never stop talking. Dujardin's work here is a truly a unique achievement.

Best Actor 2011: Gary Oldman in Tinker Tailor Solider Spy

2012-01-26T22:24:00.000-05:00

Gary Oldman received his first Oscar nomination for portraying George Smiley in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

Tinker Tailor Soldier is an effective thriller about the search for a Soviet double agent at the very top of the British intelligence agency.

Until just a few days ago Gary Oldman was often regarded as one of the most notable actors never nominated for an Oscar. The interesting part is Oldman who became notable early in his career for rather broad performances in films received a nomination finally for the most restrained performance of his career. I suppose the academy wanted him to calm down or something. It is also interesting that the many times broad Oldman not only gives his most restrained and understated performance, but also I would say the most understated performance ever nominated in the category. Yes even more understated than Robert Duvall in Tender Mercies, or Richard Farnsworth in the Straight Story.

It must be a great achievement of sorts for Oldman to have been recognized for such a restrained performances, since the academy often prefers louder performances with at least one scene. It is also notable that Oldman I believe is only the second actor to be nominated for portraying a spy role, the first being Richard Burton in The Spy Who Came in From the Cold, also based on a John Le Carre novel, which also features George Smiley but in a supporting role. Burton portrayed a spy who was basically far past the end of his rope, Oldman on the other hand portrays Smiley who some how has been a spy so long that he is content enough with spy life that it does not seem to effect him really in any way.

Oldman has quite a challenge actually than to find a way to make Smiley a compelling character, but still as the character should be. Smiley is a key player one of the most intelligent men yet he almost seems to come off as a non entity. He is suppose to be a man you don't notice in a room, yet he still has an undeniable presence. Smiley is suppose to be a man who actively tries not to be emotional and in order to not show any possible weaknesses to his enemies. Oldman does succeed in producing the professional side of Smiley perfectly. In every scene with a group Oldman is noticeable, but never in a way that only the audience would notice him. In every scene with he is listening Oldman never shows Smiley to simply be listening rather his eyes are always piercing into them showing his constant analysis, and examination to find the truth.

It is always a very difficult trick to make an character interesting whose whole point is that they are not suppose to in anyway emotional, but it is one that Oldman succeeds with. Oldman allows us to see that George is putting on a bit of an act at all times, an act he has been practicing for a long time, and is exceedingly good at but still an act in the end. Oldman is a master of the act with his distant body language as Smiley. As I said his eyes are always piercing and manipulating, but just the way he walks, and sits even suggests a man of great intelligence and ability. Oldman as Smiley is always seeming to say yes I know more than you, as well yes I am going to get exactly what I want from you. Oldman never portrays this as just a pompousness but a genuine skill in Smiley.

Oldman's key scenes though are his short moments where Smiley's emotions do seep through on occasion as well as a few moments where he lets his guard down. Most of these are only for a single moment that last only a second or two but each are brilliantly used by Oldman to more thoroughly reflect his character. My personal favorite of these brief moments is when he visits the now deceased control's (John Hurt), the former head of British Intelligence, apartment where he finds who control believed could be the double agent. When Smiley sees himself as one of the potentials Oldman reaction is a small but just about perfect indication that Smiley's heart is almost broken to learn that Control did not fully trust him.

Every time there is a break in the defenses of Smiley Oldman's portrays these absolutely perfectly to subtly show there is a great deal of emotional sadness in Smiley surrounding his wife in particular, but it is something he only ever lets onto in short outbursts, if they can even be described as that. Oldman is pitch perfect in these portrayal because they are always fast and quick but still clear indicators of Smiley's true feelings on the matter. Oldman shows them not to be Smiley purposefully letting down his defenses but rather a clear sharp emotional response that not even his experience in the matter of hiding emotions can completely hide.

His best scene though comes in a single scene where he actually lets down his defenses completely, which is when he tells about his meeting with the Soviet mastermind Karla to his confidant Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch). Oldman is terrific in this scene as Smiley changes his body language to no longer being firm and structured for interrogation and analysis and instead becomes just like any man for this moment. There is not flashback in this scene yet Oldman brings us into Smiley's early past, and shows us a glimpse of not only a once more emotional man but also Oldman presents to us what made Smiley change the way he did. He shows a more emotional man, and easier one to relate in this scene, but one less able to be successful in his line of work.

The role of Smiley is a challenging one in that playing a non entity is quite a difficult one, since he is not a simple man, but he portrays himself as a completely non emotional one. Oldman finds just the right dynamic with Smiley though. He always shows Smiley to be the expert spy, and his long history, but inserts moments of more direct emotions without fault to have far greater impact actually than if Smiley was constantly emotional. Gary Oldman finds the right path for Smiley throughout the avoid what could have been the potential limits of the part. Although I will admit this very understated and restrained performance might not be for everyone, I absolutely loved it.

Best Actor 2011: Brad Pitt in Moneyball

2012-01-25T17:50:00.000-05:00

Brad Pitt received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Billy Beane in Moneyball.

Moneyball is a descent enough film which depicts Billy Beane general manager of the Oakland A's attempt to use only statistics to create a winning baseball team.

Brad Pitt portrays Billy Beane the general manager who use to be a baseball player himself who never reached what many seemed to be his potential. Pitt portrays his the part in a fairly standard approach. He does not seek to make Billy Beane any sort of genius, or incredible man, just pretty much a normal guy trying to make his under financed team compete with the rich teams. Pitt's performance really for the most part is a standard leading man performance, he never really tries for anything more than that, which is technically fine since Billy Beane is not suppose to be anyone overly special.

Pitt though does have a sort of commanding presence in the film as Beane who wants to bring his team up using completely unorthodox methods. Pitt does have just the right dynamic between domination and relaxation actually, since after all Beane is doing these business maneuvers in baseball not something bigger. Pitt always displays a certain seriousness in Beane, in that he does take his business seriously enough, but he never goes that far with showing that Beane also is indeed aware of what kind of business he is in which makes him naturally a more relaxed fellow.

Pitt finds the right sort of determination, and passion within the part to be convincing as Billy Beane. He does not present his new ideas as something that is because he is some sort courageous visionary, but in many ways as just a man desperate for a new way or answer. Pitt creates just the right amount of desperation within Beane's whole sage. It not a self pitying desperation though Pitt portrays rather as something that is actually a motivating factor for Beane rather than a restrictive aspect of him.

Pitt is quite good and charismatic in the role. I do wish though that there was perhaps a little more time granted to Pitt actually reflection on Beane past. There are a few moments and Pitt is fine in showing some degree of regret, but these scenes a very very short, and never long enough or fully written enough for Pitt to turn them into anything especially amazing. Which is a shame since I do think Pitt shows promise in his short moments, but there is just not enough there.

I won't say this is a perfect performance by Pitt simply because there are a couple of scenes where his line readings have a little bit of a rehearsed quality to them, nor will I say this is the most complex performance Pitt has ever given, but I will say this is a good performance. It is a solid leading man turn from Pitt that realizes most of the potential of a part, giving a charming and entertaining performance, which allows the audience easily to follow Beane through his exploits.

Best Actor 2011: George Clooney in The Descendants

2012-01-24T09:56:00.079-05:00

George Clooney received his fourth Oscar nomination for portraying Matt King in The Descendants.

The Descendants deals with Matt King who owns a great deal of real estate in Hawaii due to inheritance. He deals with his wife being in a coma she will not awaken from, a big money land deal, his rebellious daughters, and learning that his wife was having an affair.

The last three films by Alexander Payne have been about older men dealing with some serious problems in their life, and facing a crisis. I should say right away that George Clooney does not at all change his track record with me, and proves that he most certainly is no Paul Giamatti or Jack Nicholson. Clooney as usual never really makes a mark in his part that will ever make me remember Matt King as a notable character, and actually portrays Matt King in a somewhat different way for Clooney but still the same as his other performances in terms of its success.

Clooney firstly does not give his Up in the Air "Hi I'm George Clooney" type of performances that so many believe to be charming, I don't. In fact in the role of Matt King he never really tries to be charming in any way and does indeed attempt to show Matt as more of just a man trying to go through his series of crises. Having said that though his performance is more in line with that of his performance in Michael Clayton, but like his performance in Michael Clayton there is not the required conviction in his performance or characterization to make his performance compelling.

In fact his performance is rather incompetent in many ways as he attempts to be the exasperated husband and father. I simply never bought him in the role as the man who is emotionally bent out of shape, something Jack Nicholson and Paul Giamatti succeeded with very well in their similar roles. Clooney just never seems tired enough, or truly a man who has experienced troubles of Matt King's sort in life, it just not there ever in Clooney's performance as much as he wants it to be. I will give credit that Clooney tries many things in this performance, but this actually just leads to an inconsistency in his performance.

Clooney attempts quite ineffectively to combine drama and comedy in his performance in a rather poorly conceived fashion. For example when he first learns of his wife's affair he goes running for some reason like he is one of films for the Coen brothers. Than he confronts someone about it with the utmost seriousness. There is not any sort of logic for Clooney to do this in this scene, he does anyway, which causes him never to turn Matt King into a compelling character in any fashion. He truly fails to bring us into Matt's mindset and problems at any point in the film.

I must say much of the time Clooney is just going through the role with the same uncertainty throughout in his performance, there is not a single scene where he really finds a way to make his performance compelling. He fails to ever really brings Matt's problems to life even in the what should be some compelling scenes that one would think would automatically bring it out. That is the scene with his wife's lover, Clooney is bizarrely dull throughout the whole affair, there is not even signs of repression anger or anything like that.

He plays almost all of his scenes with his typical lacking in conviction Clooney fashion. The only scene he really does more is his final scene with his wife where he finally breaks down, and says goodbye. It wants to be the heartbreaking "Oscar" scene, but Clooney is frankly at his worst in this scene. He frankly wants to rush through the scene, and is not convincing for a moment. He is just clearly "acting" during the whole scene and he fails to bring a single genuine emotion into the scene. This is a poor performance by Clooney, and I will be very annoyed if I have to add "won his second Oscar" to this review.

Best Actor 2011

2012-01-24T09:09:00.003-05:00

And the Nominees Are:

Brad Pitt in Moneyball

Jean Dujardin in The Artist

George Clooney in The Descendants

Gary Oldman in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Demian Bichir in A Better Life

I break my scheduled reviews of supporting 95 to return once again to Best Actor. I actually did not except to do this yet, and would have held off since I thought Michael Fassbender was going to be nominated, and I have not seen Shame, but now I have seen all of these performances.

Supporting will wait because I have yet to seem Extremely Loud, or My Week with Marilyn, but I do think I will probably write a deserving performance for Albert Brooks.

Best Supporting Actor 1995: Ed Harris in Apollo 13

2012-01-24T01:08:00.000-05:00

Ed Harris received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Gene Kranz in Apollo 13.

Apollo 13 details the troubles of the apollo 13 spacecrafts during its unsuccessful attempt to reach the moon.

Ed Harris portrays the NASA flight director who must deal with the situation of the men in space. As I said in my review of Tommy Lee Jones in the Fugitive, Ed Harris here is merely the man in charge no more no less. He comes in intent on getting the men home by being resilient, and keeping a firm grasp on the situation. Ed Harris is not a dominating force in the film by any margin though, and he really is just there to basically react to each crisis by telling another team to get to it.

There really is not anything particularly special about Harris' portrayal of Kranz it is about as it should be. When he problem happens he acts as he is frustrated, if they need to fix the problem he reacts with determination. The only time there really is anything more required of him is at the very end of the film when they are waiting to see if the man on the space ship survived. He shows the nervousness, sadness, and eventually the happiness of his moment well enough, but nothing that is in any way amazing.

There really are not any scenes where Harris act in any fashion other than merely what one would expect from the role no more no less. It is a standard performance that really any actor who is the same type as Harris could have played just as well. There is not a single scene where he stands out, or rises above the rest of the cast in a fashion that would make one believe he had to be recognized for this performance. It is not a bad performance, but it just isn't a special one either.

Best Supporting Actor 1995

2012-01-21T11:14:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Ed Harris in Apollo 13

James Cromwell in Babe

Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects

Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys

Tim Roth in Rob Roy

Best Supporting Actor 1982: Results

2012-01-21T00:07:00.003-05:00

5. Charles Durning in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas- Durning although may be the best part of the film, still does not make a particularly substantial impact with his small amount of screentime, that is mostly made up of a very unspectacular musical number.

4. Robert Preston in Victor Victoria- Preston gives a standard Preston performance which most certainly is charming but also not particularly special. It is not even the best case of Preston doing Preston.

3. Lou Gossett, Jr. in An Officer and A Gentleman- Gossett is convincing and capable as an intense drill Sergeant, he also is very good in inserting subtle indications of the more humane characterizations of the man.

2. John Lithgow in The World According to Garp- John Lithgow never overacts in his role as a transsexual and instead gives a nicely heartfelt performance.

1.James Mason in The Verdict- This win easily goes to James Mason who thoroughly proves his strength as an actor in the role of the ace attorney in this film. He gives an excellent quietly dominating performance that creating the perfect sort of adversary in the film.

Deserving Performances:
Rutger Hauer in Blade Runner
Charles Durning in Tootsie

Best Supporting Actor 1982: John Lithgow in The World According to Garp

2012-01-20T23:51:00.001-05:00

John Lithgow received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Roberta Muldoon in The World According to Garp.

The World According to Garp is a very unique film about the life of a writer T.S. Garp (Robin Williams), and his feminist mother (Glenn Close).

John Lithgow portrays a transsexual former football player Roberta Muldoon. In playing a transsexual Lithgow actually tries not to bring that much more attention to it with his actual performance. All of his mannerisms for the part are rather low key and really very handled because of that reason. Lithgow's voice and mannerisms are all fairly simple but realistically portrayed that naturally realize his character. Lithgow's performance never becomes actory which is very important to his character presence in the film.

Roberta's role in the film is that of a completely supporting character, in the sense that Roberta literally provides emotional support to the other character in the film. Yes there are moments where Roberta doesn't just discuss someone else's problems but these scenes are always short and usually just a sentence or two at the beginning or the end of a scene. Lithgow although given very little time in these moments does succeed in showing Roberta to be a fairly average person actually who is seeking happiness. Lithgow though always shows Roberta to be one of the less troubled characters in the film.

Lithgow's although shows that although Roberta does not have perfect happiness, that does not stop Roberta from having a very bright outlook on life that is rather endearing, and provides a nice contrast from some of the more troubled characters in the film. Roberta is always there is offer a kind helping hand throughout the film, and although this is somewhat limited, Lithgow does manage to make the most of it. Everything time Roberta is on screen things do seem to either brighten or ease up a little bit due to Lithgow's charming presence.

I will say after watching the film the first I was a bit surprised to find out Roberta's exact role in the film, as in it was far more limited than I thought it would be. Still Lithgow takes a role that easily could have been very much overacted or very well could been a rather exploitative type of performance, and instead turns Roberta in a very human character. Lithgow as well succeeds in making Roberta add a great deal of heart to the film that was certainly needed.

Best Supporting Actor 1982: Lou Gossett Jr. in An Officer and a Gentleman

2012-01-19T23:02:00.000-05:00

Lou Gossett Jr. won his Oscar from his only nomination so far for portraying Gunnery Sergeant Emil Foley in An Officer and a Gentleman.

An Officer and a Gentleman depicts Zack Mayo(Richard Gere)'s attempt to get through a naval training program.

One of Zack's seemingly largest obstacles, although in actuality is trying to get him through the course, is his drill Sergeant played by Gossett. In all truth there really is not too many ways to play a drill Sergeant, particularly in their opening scenes where they ridicule everyone. I really must say I was not surprised to learn that Gossett was coached by R. Lee Ermy a real drill Sergeant, who also later portrayed one in Full Metal Jacket. Gossett portrayal Sergeant Foley is not nearly as intense or brutal as Ermy's was in that film, but his performance clearly shows he took a few pointers from Ermy.

As the Sergeant Gossett is appropriately intense, and dominates most scenes he is in with his presence. He quick witted loud, swift, and properly rough in proper drill Sergeant method. The question is, is this amazing acting the drill sergeant role is technically a standard role where there is not much play to it except on just how intense they and Gossett is not the most intense, that would be Ermy, but he does manage to make a far greater impact than most other drill sergeant performances I have seen.

What specifically separates Gossett as a drill Sergeant is that he always hints at the fact that really Sergeant Foley wants to bring what is best out of the recruits, and does in fact feel proud when they achieve. Gossett handles these moments in very very small reactions in a few scenes, and actually they are just about brilliantly handled by Gossett. This is because Gossett handles them with such subtly that the audience can notice it but also only enough that it never compromises what his character is suppose to be.

Although I cannot really say this quite an amazing performance by Gossett it is easy for me to say it is a good one. He is completely up to being the overwhelming presence of the Sergeant as well as does add some well laced hidden human characteristics as well. It is a very well handled performance that could have been a wholly standard performance that made absolutely no impact whatsoever, or it could have failed to find the right balance between the rough and the humane, but Gossett manages to find both this balance and leave a mark on the film.

Best Supporting Actor 1982: Robert Preston in Victor Victoria

2012-01-18T22:35:00.000-05:00

Robert Preston received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Carole "Toddy" Todd in Victor Victoria.

Victor Victoria tells of the "comedic" problems that arise after a struggling female soprano Victoria Grant (Julie Andrews) pretends to be a man who performs drag.

When it comes to portraying a gay character many actors use certain mannerisms sometimes very effectively William Hurt, sometimes not so much Ed Harris, one who is only aware of Preston's performance here might think Preston puts on mannerisms, but from what I have seen from Preston acts just as he always does here, and really does not technically play his character as visibly gay. He instead plays him as Preston seems to play just about all his roles as a fairly flamboyant witty energetic shyster of some sort.

I really do not see any sort of play in his performance as the gay friend of Andrews' character who helps her with his charade as a man pretending being woman. He is fairly flamboyant in his Robert Preston sort of fashion with his distinct voice, and way of speaking. He is Preston all the way which is fitting of his character, and also is charming as it just about always is but I can't really say this is any sort of great performance either. It really is just standard Robert Preston, and not even standard Preston at his best.

Robert Preston also never made me really convinced of his character at all times particularly in his scenes where he is in bed with men, to be honest it never looks like Preston had much of an association with them in any way. He honestly did not seem honestly gay to me, since to me he really just was doing Preston. Preston does indeed says all his lines about his character's sexuality with the utmost conviction, yet I was never convinced, because Preston was just being Preston the entire time.

Although Robert Preston is indeed the male lead of the film he undergoes no changes throughout the film just acting as someone to make insert a clever line from time to time in usual Robert Preston fashion. Preston's performance is enjoyable to a degree since Preston is an enjoyable to watch, but I don't think this is best I frankly thought he was more entertaining and effective in the Last Starfighter actually. Still this is most certainly not a bad performance, but one that frankly left me underwhelmed.

Best Supporting Actor 1982: James Mason in The Verdict

2012-01-17T22:10:00.002-05:00

James Mason received his third and final Oscar nomination for portraying Ed Concannon in The Verdict.

In the supporting actor category Mason was not the first actor to be nominated for portraying an the adversary attorney in a court room drama as George C. Scott was also nominated for a similar role in 1959 for Anatomy of a Murder a performance that earned my win for that particular year. What I like is to see these two talented actors taken such different approaches to what are very similar character in that they are both there just to win their case, there really is not a personal life mentioned or anything else, yet they still managed to be Oscar nominated.

Well it is most certainly true that one can be nominated for an entirely unimpressive and unsubstantial performance, Mason though as with Scott managed to show how a great actor can make the most out of just about any sort of role if they actually bother to try. It is just interesting to look at the differences and similarities between Scott and Mason in the ways they both managed to succeed in their roles, and make a substantial impact in their film despite the technical limitations of their part.

Where Scott was more demanding, and intense as his prosecutor, Mason portrays his slick attorney as a relatively quite man but one who like Scott's character is absolutely always in control of his situation. Mason though always presents Ed Concannon as an always prepared man who examines every situation so he doesn't need to get loud or angry, he is in charge because he has determined that he is in charge. Mason always shows with cold efficiency that there is a calculated procedure Concannon takes to everything involved with a case.

Mason has such a great ease in his performance that it makes him a more than just a rival to Paul Newman's Frank Galvin, but in fact makes him seem like his legal superior. Mason for most of the film has complete control in his scenes, and so calmly lays down plan and actions in every scene with just the right degree of smug superiority. Mason never shows Concannon to be an idiot when it comes to his superior manner and tone, but rather something he has earned his right to use from his long standing history as a lawyer.

Mason is particularly excellent in his scenes of cross examination, since he really does not have a harsh intense attitude, but rather is always polite, even though Mason shows almost a fiendish quality in this calm approach that through his slowly but eloquently put questions he is always carefully tearing into them. I particularly like when Concannon basically harasses a witness, and accuses her of lying, yet he does it with such calm reserve he actually seems even more piercing because of this.

Mason is terrific in every moment he needs to show just how smart, and effective Ed Concannon is creating an almost overwhelming obstacle for Galvin to fight, but my favorite moment in his performance is when he is at a loss for words in a single scene. Mason's reaction is absolutely perfect when Concannon finally is truly surprised by something he hadn't planned for, and Mason shows a vulnerability in this single scene where it Concannon can barely understand that there something has occurred that he has not planned for, simply a terrific moment that perfectly shows a sign of weakness in Concannon.

This is a great performance by Mason who takes what he has an makes the absolute most of it. It would have been very easy to actually have had Concannon be an nonentity in the film, but instead just like George C. Scott in Anatomy of Murder he turns Concannon into a formidable court room villain. His performance here puts to shame other performances that just settle in their roles and never attempt bring more life to the part. This is a brilliant realization of what an actor can do with a character even when the character is limited.

Best Supporting Actor 1982: Charles Durning in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas

2012-01-17T12:58:00.000-05:00

Charles Durning received his first Oscar nomination for portraying the Governor in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.

The Best Little Whorehouse is a rather hard to sit through musical about a long standing Whorehouse's problems with people who are against it.

Charles Durning portrays the governor of Texas who aside from a few very short and quite unremarkable reaction shots really does not do anything in the film until way past half way through the film he finally does something because the governor of Texas is the person left with the decision to close the Whorehouse down or not, even though he really does not want to be the person left with the decision. Durning despite how little he is in the film is often described as the best part of this film, although that may be true it really says more about the quality of the film than the quality of his performance.

He really does not do anything till he is asked to make a decision on the Whorehouse something he does not really want to do since it gives him any sort of responsibility. So he says all of that in a musical number about side stepping the issue, in which he joyfully sings about his love of doing so, with short moments of saying absolutely nothing through just saying some random good politician type statements. I can't say the number is particularly well written or well directed but Durning does have some energy into the number but never enough that it makes the number at all memorable.

Other than the number he just is a southern inconsistent politician. Durning attempts to be comedic in his character's indecisiveness, but his material is frankly never good enough for Durning to do anything even slightly amusing with it. Durning does try though, and I will give him credit for that but even at his best his performance is nothing special. It never overcomes his material, and his performance is never anything that needed to be awarded. How he was nominated is a bit perplexing especially since they could have nominated him for Tootsie and it would have been far more deserving.

Best Supporting Actor 1982

2012-01-16T00:00:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

James Mason in The Verdict

Robert Preston in Victor Victoria

Lou Gossett Jr. in An Officer and A Gentleman

Charles Durning in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas

John Lithgow in The World According to Garp

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Results

2012-01-15T07:33:00.001-05:00

5. Jamie Foxx in Collateral- Foxx gives a functional performance some of the time, but he also fails to capitalize any scene that requires more from him.

4. Morgan Freeman in Million Dollar Baby- Freeman gives a painfully standard performance, that although it is not bad it always feels uninspired.

3. Alan Alda in The Aviator- Alda has very little to do but still his performance is effective as he shows both the charm and the cruelty of a career politician.

2. Clive Owen in Closer- Owen although has strong elements particularly in portraying the harsh bluntness of his character, but also lacks in terms of his onscreen relationships with his female co-stars.

1. Thomas Haden Church in Sideways- A very easy win for Church who easily gives the best performance of the five through his great achievement of finding a way to make what technically should be just a despicable character, a endearing one instead.

Deserving Performances:
David Carradine in Kill Bill Vol 2
Michael Madsen in Kill Bill Vol 2

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Clive Owen in Closer

2012-01-14T23:17:00.000-05:00

Clive Owen recieved his first Oscar nomination for portraying Larry Gray in Closer.

Closer details the intertwined relationships of four miserable people.

Clive Owen portrays one of these four miserable people a dermatologist who is rather cheeky to say the least. He is not supporting of the other three and really all four actors are lead in this film. This is a performance that a lot of people love, but I can't really join that love for this performance, although I will agree that Clive Owen does give the best performance in the film by far. The problems in the performance though come from the overall chemistry with the rest of the cast really.

I do think one aspect of the character Owen does nail is the bluntness of the character. Out of any other character one can argue he is technically the most honest, even if that makes him seem sort of crueler. Owen does have just the right clear and concise fashion in which he speaks and acts. Owen shows that with Larry he just says things the way he sees them, does exactly what he wants, and will always admit his motivations to be exactly what they are.

Owen has the right directness in his performance that shows the exactly zero inhibitions Larry has when it comes to his life. My problems with performance comes with his chemistry with the rest of the cast not so much with Jude Law as his perpetual rival their mutual dislike for one another is appropriately shown with always a certain underlying intensity between the two in their scenes together. It is really his chemistry with Julia Roberts, and Natalie Portman that I have an issue with.

With Julia Roberts I really did not feel there was much of anything between the two, since I never really saw either actor convey enough of a passion with one another for me to honestly believe their relationship. They are suppose to instantly hit off so much that they are soon married, but aside from Owen being slightly charming their is not a strong enough purpose for it. There is not enough of love or lust shown between the two, making the relationship seem quite underwhelming between the two.

This is also true for his scenes with Natalie Portman particularly in their later scenes with he is suppose to be lusting after here. Owen most certainly tries his best, but there never is a great enough drive in their scenes together to make sense of his intense lust, and even Owen's lust was never quite intense as it really should have been. This is hardly a bad performance though and it certainly has strong aspect, but on a whole it is really less than it should have been.

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Thomas Haden Church in Sideways

2012-01-13T22:23:00.000-05:00

Thomas Haden Church received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Jack Lopate in Sideways.

Sideways details the trip of two men through wine country just before one is going to be married.

Thomas Haden Church portrays Jack who is in many ways the exact opposite of his friend Miles (Paul Giamatti). Jack is almost always happy, even when he gets mad or sad it is only for a brief period, opposed to Miles who is almost always is at least a little bit moody. Jack is just about completely amoral, and seems to have absolutely no sense of decency, where perhaps Miles has a little bit of it. Jack does not seem to be overly smart, where Miles at least could be described as a pseudo intellectual.

Their dynamic is a rather strange one, but both actors do manage to make their "friendship" believable they are able to stand each other, but they are definitely of two different sorts. Thomas Haden Church has actually quite a difficult part in that Jack's actions are quite unlikable through the course of the film caused by his amorality, also there is the fact that it does not seem he even learns anything after what happens to him. Jack could have very easily come off as just a despicable character that you don't want to even see, but Church manages to make the unlikable Jack likable.

Church does this in a rather interesting way, in that he almost portrays Jack as a child, which is the perfect way to portray. Everything Church really does as Jack seems slightly childlike. Church is careful to infuse this childlike quality to Jack to just the right degree, without making Jack seem unrealistic. It is interesting though just the way Church manages to bring a childlike quality to everything he does. His want for his last week of "freedom", and just the way he listens to Miles talk about has just the same enthusiasm and impatience of a child.

The negative qualities of Jack though are the real challenge, and Church meets the challenge. Church does this firstly by being charming in his rather simple, in more than one way, fashion that always feels quite effortless. Again though when he does wrong, and he really does a lot of wrong it is the childishness of Church's characterization that keeps him from somehow seeming completely despicable. Everything he does bad is almost just like a spoiled child that really does not know any better, even though he should.

Even when he suffers the consequences Church shows Jack to act in a childish fashion finding someone else to blame, or when he finds no other option pleading like a crying baby for help. Because Church manages to be so honestly pathetic he actually comes off as oddly endearing. I also really like his scenes where he attempts to cheer up Giamatti's because Church shows such a senseless happiness in the role. Jack really is a rather challenging role but Thomas Haden Church brings the perfect sort of life to the role through his simple but very well handled characterization. Jack is a role that could been just a jerk, but Church succeeded in turning Jack into a lovable jerk.

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Morgan Freeman in Million Dollar Baby

2012-01-13T14:39:00.000-05:00

Morgan Freeman won his Oscar from his fourth nomination for portraying Eddie 'Scrap Iron' Dupris in Million Dollar Baby.

Morgan Freeman although would have been a deserving winner for all of his previous nomination, especially for Street Smart, he did not win until here in the best picture winner Million Dollar Baby, which is film that just gets worse and worse every time I watch the dreary film. Morgan Freeman here did received a career Oscar here, that really seemed to be a role that was far too much devised Freeman. This sometimes can mean they'll give a performance, and it will be a role they were born to play, but it can also cause one to give a very by the books and standard performance like Freeman's here.

Morgan Freeman offers the narration in the film, and it is not nearly as well handled as in The Shawshank Redemption. In Shawshank it was frankly better performed, but also better used in that it felt like more of the reflections of his character more than just narration, here it feels just like narration nothing more. Freeman being the narrator is only one facet that feels like a far too standard of a role for Freeman. His role is just of a has been old timer who offers advice to the main characters not much more than that.

Most of the time in the film Freeman just gives the same slightly dispassionate expression. It sort of makes sense due to what happened to his character but it does nothing to brighten up the dreary nature of the film, and it would have been nice if there was a performance that did that. Freeman's performance really is just rather repetitiveness giving that same expression that reflects his past, but trying to offer some warmth or advice to the other characters in a minimalist fashion, that again technically fits the character, but feels always like a far too by the books performance from Freeman.

Freeman gave some good performances in the past he was amazing in Street Smart for example, but in Street Smart he really went as far as possible with his performance, and created a truly memorable character. Here though Freeman never turns Scrap Iron into just a serviceable character because of his only serviceable performance. I will admit it is not a bad performance because Freeman is a good enough actor that he really has to try to give a bad performance, but his performance is very uninspired.

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Jamie Foxx in Collateral

2012-01-13T12:08:00.000-05:00

Jamie Foxx received one of his two nominations for portraying Max Durocher in Collateral.

Collateral tells of a hitman Vincent (Tom Cruise) who takes a cab driver hostage to bring him to his five marks on one night.

Jamie Foxx actually is not at all supporting in this film as the cab driver Vincent uses for the ride is the lead, since he even has more screen time than Cruise. Although it is obvious it was positioned this way to allow Foxx two nominations one that allowed him to undeservedly win for Ray, and this one. I will say first off that Foxx is indeed better here than he was in Ray, but that is saying very little in my opinion. This is more of a standard performance from Foxx than does not rely on mannerisms for his performance, but instead he just tries to convey the emotions of the moment.

It is an attempt at a fairly standard lead performance by Foxx since Max is just suppose to be a very standard Cab driver who happens to be in an not so ordinary situation. Foxx shows Max to be a reasonably happy man who has a dream, and does not really have a problem with his job. He than shows a very scared and frustrated man when his life becomes in danger because of the hitman. I will say Foxx is technically fine, when is scared he is scared, when he frustrated he looks frustrated, he is technically does what he needs to for the part.

Foxx though could have done far more in the part than he does, as it is a lead performance, and really he could have made Max simply into a more interesting character with the possibilities given to him. For example Cruise absolutely dominates all of their scenes together. He always controls the scene, and always has the more overpowering presence than Foxx. Yes it is true Vincent should dominate for most of the film anyways, Cruise did not need to technically dominate as much as he does though, since Foxx never seizes any opportunity to stay with Cruise.

Foxx just stays really too standard, and functional in the part. He never reaches for more than just very simple emotions, which although are conveyed correctly, aren't all that interesting. Also later in the film there are two scenes where Max is suppose to do more and Foxx is not up for it. Firstly he must impersonate Vincent in one scene, and Foxx is not at all convincing that he could make the gangster afraid of him in the least. Secondly through the night Max is suppose to become more and more frustrated to the point he finally takes matters in his own hand, but again Foxx is not up to it.

Foxx basically keeps Max at the same level emotionally throughout, he should have slowly become more and more drained, but he just does not. Also his scene where he finally takes matters in his own should have been a powerful moment where Max's strength finally comes out, but in Foxx's failed to build toward this point effectively, and the moment itself feels quite underwhelming. Although technically adequate some of the time Foxx fails to capitalize on the possibilities of his character, and this performance ends up being a misses opportunity.

Best Supporting Actor 2004: Alan Alda in The Aviator

2012-01-12T21:35:00.000-05:00

Alan Alda received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Senator Owen Brewster in The Aviator.

Senator Owen Brewster acts a basically a tool against Howard Hughes (Leonardo DiCaprio) to be used by his International airwaves rival Juan Trippe (Alex Baldwin). This is a little bit of a head scratcher of a nomination simply because Brewster does very little, and only has a few scenes in total. He first tries to prod Hughes to see things his way through a blackmail of sorts, but than after Hughes refuses he attacks Hughes by publicly calling him a war profiteer and holding a Senate hearing to investigate and attack Hughes.

Although his part is very limited Alda actually is pretty much exactly as he should be. He really is a hatchet man used by Trippe for Hughes, but he does it all in a traditional sort of politician smile. Alda has that smile and has the right dynamic between being that friend of everyone politician face along with a more sinsiter quality in his eyes for when he needs to do what he must. Alda is fine in showing that Brewster is putting on always a bit of act that allows him to be a senator.

Past just the whole idea of who Brewster is Alda does not do all that much in the part, since we don't really know much about Brewster other than that he is against Hughes and for Trippe. There is never a moment that he is anymore than a typical poor sort of politician. Alda is never bad in the role, and is exactly as he should. Is it anything that needed to be awarded, no, is it very memorable, no, but it is technically a descent performance nonetheless.

Best Supporting Actor 2004

2012-01-12T11:20:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Alan Alda in The Aviator

Thomas Haden Church in Sideways

Morgan Freeman in Million Dollar Baby

Clive Owen in Closer

Jamie Foxx in Collateral

Best Supporting Actor 1964: Results

2012-01-11T17:52:00.001-05:00

5. Edmond O'Brien in Seven Days in May- O'Brien has limited opportunities due to the nature of the film, but he still manages to realize his alcoholic senator quite well.

4. Lee Tracy in The Best Man- Tracy is good in showing the differences between his warm great facade, and his cynical side he shows behind close doors.

3. Stanley Holloway in My Fair Lady- Stanley Holloway gives a very enjoyable performance that is very entertaining, he also handles his songs incredibly well making them some of the best moments of the film.

2. John Gielgud in Becket- Gielgud although is in the film for less than ten minutes makes a sustainable impression instantly bringing Louis to life as a charismatic, humorous, and strong willed King.

1. Peter Ustinov in Topkapi- Good Prediction Dinasztie. This is a very good year actually with all of the nominees giving good performances. The best though is easily Peter Ustinov even though to be fair he had an advantage since he is the lead of his film. Ustinov nonetheless gives an absolutely hilarious performance, that makes Arthur Simpson a wonderful endearing character that is joy to follow through the film's story.

Deserving Performances:
George C. Scott in Dr. Strangelove
Frank Overton in Fail-Safe
Fredric March in Seven Days in May

Best Supporting Actor 1964: Edmond O'Brien in Seven Days in May

2012-01-11T16:13:00.000-05:00

Edmond O'Brien received his second and final Oscar nomination for portraying Senator Raymond Clark in Seven Days in May.

Seven Days in May is a political thriller about an attempt to overthrow the U.S. government.

Edmond O'Brien portrays one of the loyal men to the president Jordan Lyman (Fredric March who gives the best performance in the film, but probably suffered from category confusion). O'Brien role is rather simple in that he acts as an operative for the president in trying to find out the truth behind a secret army base. Edmond O'Brien although has a descent amount of screen time he spends most of the time listening to others as he attempts to either help the president or decipher the mystery of the possible coup. O'Brien is required to develop his whole character as he moves through the plot.

O'Brien actually handles this quite well and does develop Raymond Clark into an actual person despite limitations caused by the type of film it is. In all of his scenes he makes an enjoyable characterization of a real old timey southern Senator, who drinks to much, but does believe in the president and plans do to his best to help him. O'Brien has some very good mannerisms here, that although he ensures they are very distinct he also never overplays them to the point that they become caricature.

He realizes Clark with these mannerisms very well showing exactly where he comes from and as well as his clear history in politics. O'Brien creates the history of the man simply in his face. O'Brien is good as he proceeds to show Clark as a flawed man being an aged alcoholic, but still a man with pride, as O'Brien shows in his scenes of supporting the president. O'Brien has the passion of Clark just right as it certainly is reduced by age and drink, but it still is clearly apparent. This is not an amazing performance by O'Brien, but most certainly an interesting one and from what he did do with Clark, I actually wish he had been given more to do in the script than he was allowed.

Best Supporting Actor 1964: John Gielgud in Becket

2012-01-11T10:21:00.000-05:00

John Gielgud received his first Oscar nomination for portraying King Louis VII of France in Becket.

John Gielgud portrays King Louis of France who actually is only in two scenes during the film. This is not a forgettable two scene performance though, and does give the most memorable supporting performance in the film. In his first scene he stands as an ally of sorts for Thomas Becket (Richard Burton) who is at odds with King Henry II (Peter O'Toole). He really makes himself an ally because anyone who makes a problem for Henry helps him since France and England stand at constant odds with one another.

Gielgud is always absolutely at ease with these sort of authority roles, which is quite necessary for the part since the film requires that Louis establishes himself as a King all in a single scene. Gielgud must have the Kingly presence right from the first moment because he is gone in the next. Gielgud though is a master of these sorts of character and has all of the qualities realized from his first scene. From the moment you see him you not only know he is the king, but also a strong willed King, just from the the way Gielgud looks and stands.

When he talks Gielgud only furthers his characterization of a jovial, quick witted King, who also always seems to be in charge of his affairs. Gielgud has the right command of his single scene, and does take over the scene as needed. In his one scene he is charming, he is funny, and he shows the experience of Louis when it comes to manners involving Henry, through his fairly casual manner he helps Becket undermine Henry as well as he is able to.

It is a great single scene performance that is perfectly placed within the film. His other scene really does not have much to it he just quickly brings Becket to meet Henry, although again Gielgud shows the strength and the intelligence of Louis. Gielgud certainly is not on screen for long, but he still leaves a nice impression after he has left the screen. Louis could easily have been a forgettable character, with a forgettable performance behind him, but Gielgud does his best to make the most of his relatively minor character.

Best Supporting Actor 1964: Peter Ustinov in Topkapi

2012-01-10T15:09:00.000-05:00

Peter Ustinov won his second Oscar from his third and final acting nomination for portraying Arthur Simpson in Topkapi.

Topkapi is an entertaining heist film about a group of thieves who attempt to steal a jewel encrusted dagger from a museum in Turkey.

Peter Ustinov joins two ranks of the winners in the supporting actor category. The first being he is another almost entirely comedic performance, that once again shows that this category never was afraid to award performers for being funny. The other rank he joins are winners that are not at all supporting in the film. Although one can argue the Maximilian Schell is a lead as well as the mastermind of the heist, but it is clear Ustinov as Simpson is the true lead as the film follows him through almost the whole film.

Topkapi is a heist film that works certainly because of the heist, and locale, but more importantly do to the characters of the robbers from the sultry Elizabeth Lipp (Melina Mercouri) who comes up with the original idea, to the mastermind of the plan Harper (Maximilian Schell), to the mechanical master Cedric Page (Robert Morley), as well as a strong man, and mute human fly. All of the original robbers have a certain quality that works for the film, but who makes the film is Ustinov who actually is only a "schmoe" at first to the robbers, but eventually becomes needed.

Ustinov is simply hilarious as Arthur Simpson who is a small time hustler in Greece who attempts to make money by selling fake antiques, and offer tours of the nightlife. Ustinov has the perfect sort of an attempt at a charm. Ustinov makes it clear that Simpson is always trying to be a suave con man, but he cannot help it that he is not one. It actually would have been very easy to make Simpson too pathetic, that would not have been funny, but Ustinov has always such a pride within Simpson that his incompetence actually comes off as quite endearing.

Peter Ustinov becomes the viewers guide actually into the heist plot as he forced to become an agent for the Turkish police under the threat of being charged with terrorism. Ustinov is again hilarious in every one of his scenes as maneuvers through the plot. I particularly love his scene where he is being interrogated by the Turkish police, as he constantly attempts to defend himself, and naturally manages even to share some of his own personal history in his defense. It is a great act Ustinov to pull off all of Simpsons various defenses, his attempts at pride, as well as his fear, and even his past while still making it funny, and Ustinov absolutely pulls it off.

Ustinov really is the perfect guide to follow through, as he manages to make Simpson a very likable schmoe, and a very funny one as he spies on the robbers while having absolutely no idea what their up to. Ustinov's various reactions to overhearing them talk about their plot are perfectly times gold. I absolutely love his reactions to when he Elizabeth Lipp complementing his looks particularly his eye lashes that is absolutely hilarious, the only thing funnier is when he reports it to the Turkish security officer, Ustinov just could not be any better.

Eventually do to unforeseen circumstances Arthur Simpson joins in the heist itself, and again Ustinov is terrific in the heist scenes. Simpson suffers from a fear of heights, and again Ustinov is just great realizing Simpson's fear genuinely but still manages to make it quite amusing as well. Ustinov just makes the whole heist fun becomes he brings to life the fears of getting caught, as well as the troubles in the requirements of it marvelously well still with a good deal of humor.

I just simply love this performance, and I think Ustinov's hilarious performance as Simpson was essential to the film. The gang of thieves could have seemed perhaps too distant or pompous to relate to, but Ustinov manages to wipe away any issues of that sort by making Simpson into such an honestly human sap that we can strangely enough relate to. It is simple wonderful work that shows exactly how to make an endearing and very entertaining character.

Best Supporting Actor 1964: Lee Tracy in The Best Man

2012-01-09T13:49:00.002-05:00

Lee Tracy received his only Oscar nomination for portraying former president Art Hockstader in The Best Man.

The Best Man details a rivalry between the two leading candidates in a presidential primary the never afraid of a dirty tactic Joe Cantwell (Cliff Robertson), and the more idealistic although still troubled William Russell (Henry Fonda).

Lee Tracy portrays the former president of the United States from the same party as the two front runners, and seems to be almost the unofficial head of the party. Both men seek his endorsement but Hockstader does not really like either man. Tracy has actually a rather difficult part to portray, since Art Hockstader was suppose to be some sort of great president who seems to be almost legendary whom almost everyone looks up to. Hockstader's presence has to to be undeniable.

Tracy is very good though actually is very good in showing the many sides of Hockstader but not all of his sides are that of a great man, but when he needs to be Tracy shows that side with great ability. In every scene where he meets someone or in his scene where he makes his speech before the primary begins, Tracy has the right politician sort of passion, and pride in this scene that is perfectly fitting. In his smaller greetings scene he again has a warmth of a respected elder statement that fits Hockstader's reputation.

Tracy perfectly positions these scenes in a broad contrast to the way Tracy portrays Hockstader in his behind closed door scenes. Tracy no longer shows a warm, prideful politician, but a cynical man of experience as he rips into both candidates for their faults. Tracy brings out all of Hockstader's the negative qualities out showing that the great man with his speeches is really just a facade. Tracy though shows an efficient inside politician, he shows a clear experience in these manners, and always has a firm control of his situation.

Tracy realizes the questionable politician very well as he sometimes viciously pressures the two men to test them, but in his old country style. Tracy mixes all of his down home, and dirty qualities into one man, who pretends to be a perfect idealist outwardly. It could have been easy to make Hockstader seem like an unrelated character, but Tracy does pull off the strange dynamic of a politician. It is a fascinating portrait of a cynical career politician, but not quite a perfect one only really for one reason.

The one reason is that even the characters who know him personally still think he is this tremendously great man for some reason despite his rather obvious flaws, but that really has far more to do with the script than with Tracy's performance. Although I will say it would have been an amazing performance if Tracy could have still seemed like a great man after showing the worst side of the man. Aside from that though this is a strong performance that works in harmony with the film.

Best Supporting Actor 1964: Stanley Holloway in My Fair Lady

2012-01-07T21:25:00.001-05:00

Stanley Holloway received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Alfie Doolittle in My Fair Lady.

Stanley Holloway portrays Alfie the father of Eliza Doolittle (Audrey Hepburn) the cockney flower seller who through Professor Henry Higgins (Rex Harrison) attempts to gain proper diction, and upper class manners. Alfie really is a completely superfluousness character to the film, since all his scenes are entirely there just to add some more color or comedy to the film, and none of his scenes move along the main story in anyway, but this is a long musical and such character certainly are not unusual by any means.

Alfie is purely there to be there, and really because of that Holloway did have a challenge of sorts to really ensure that his scenes did not feel like a waste of time. Holloway though manages this by giving quite an enjoyable performance as Alfie. Stanely Holloway has a the perfect type of grungy sort of charm. Holloway proves Alfie is not any sort of gentlemen, in any sort of way, but he is quite an enjoyable fellow to watch since Holloway has such a jovial presence in all of his moments.

This really is a relatively simple part though, he just needs to be entertaining and humorous. Holloway is just that in his few scenes that he has whether Alfie is asking everyone he comes across for some money, or in his scene where he goes to get money from Higgins for Eliza. Holloway makes Alfie perfectly endearing through just how much pride there is in Alfie despite his morality, or lack thereof. Holloway's little smiles, and dirty mannerisms, and his whole delivery do just add a nice bit of comedy to the film.

Alfie undergoes no changes, except for the fact that he gets money, yet that does not change him as a man in the least he still acts just the same. So after just being funny in his talking scenes his biggest requirement are his two songs. Holloway again succeeds with these as well being comedic, and sings the songs just like Alfie should sing them, and he helps in making his two songs two of the more memorable songs in the film.

This is not completely outstanding work by Holloway as it is not even the funniest or most entertaining I have ever seen him, that would be in the Lavender Hill Mob, but really this film could not have asked for a better person to play Alfie. Alfie could have been just a poorly thought out distraction, but he gives a colorful joyful supporting performance that succeeds in a way that all supporting performance should succeed in, which is making the film better simply by being there, even if his role is not the largest or the most complex.

Best Supporting Actor 1964

2012-01-06T11:20:00.001-05:00

And The Nominees Were:

John Gielgud in Becket

Lee Tracy in The Best Man

Peter Ustinov in Topkapi

Stanley Holloway in My Fair Lady

Edmond O'Brien in Seven Days in May

Best Supporting Actor 1959: Results

2012-01-05T18:44:00.000-05:00

5. Ed Wynn in The Diary of Anne Frank- Ed Wynn although not the most memorable of the cast still gives a performance showing another honest portrait of a man living in a terrible situation, and he does add a little humor nicely enough when he can.

4. Robert Vaughn in The Young Philadelphians- Although Vaughn most gives functional work for the most of the film he makes up for it in two pivotal scenes where he nails the pain and trauma that his character is going through.

3. Arthur O'Connell in Anatomy of a Murder- O'Connell has a nice supporting turn offering a charming and warm presence in the film, and as well succeeds with the slightly more dramatic material also needed of him.

2. Hugh Griffith in Ben-Hur- Griffith is the comic relief purely and simply and he suceeds completely at being so. In his few scenes he successfully lightens the mood, and offers some much needed laughs for his film.

1. George C. Scott in Anatomy of a Murder- George C. Scott easily takes the win though in what one could almost argue is the simplest character of the nominees yet Scott makes it so he has the greatest impact out of all the nominees. His performance as Dancer is an intense piece of acting that absolute holds your attention on screen. Every second he has Scott makes the most of, and is the perfect rival for James Stewart in that film.

Deserving Performances:
Joseph Schildkraut in The Diary of Anne Frank
Stephen Boyd in Ben-Hur
Laurence Olivier in The Devil's Disciple
James Mason in North by Northwest

Best Supporting Actor 1959: Hugh Griffith in Ben-Hur

2012-01-05T18:32:00.000-05:00

Hugh Griffith won his Oscar from his first nomination for portraying Sheik Ilderim in Ben-Hur.

This is a bit of surprise winner if you watched Ben-Hur before finding who won best supporting actor for it simply because one would think Stephen Boyd as the villainous Messala would have been the winner from that film, at least would have been the actor nominated with the film, at least would have been nomination along with Griffith, but no Boyd was not even nominated despite the fact he even won the Golden Globe for his performance. I suppose maybe what sunk Boyd was the fact he played Messala too well in that he was a truly detestable villain that was impossible to like, whereas the winner Griffith portrayed Sheik Ilderim who is the joyful comic relief of the film.

Hugh Griffith after all does come in the perfect time in the film during when Ben-Hur is basically overwhelmed with thoughts of vengeance. Griffith as a jovial, warm and comedic presence is most certainly a nice welcome to the film and they really could not have chosen a better character and actor to lighten things up a bit. Griffith from the first second he is on screen does just that as he is attempting to train a chariot rider for his horses he holds so dear. Griffith has a great deal of comedic energy as he hollers about his rider's inability, that certainly succeeds in making everything at little less weighty.

His best comedic moments come though from his quieter conversations with his pitch perfect humorous reactions such as his inability to recall how many wives he has, and that it is uncivilized to have only one wife. His best scene though, and my favorite dialogue based scene in the film comes when he sets up the odds for betting on the chariot race with Messala. Hugh Griffith is hilarious in this scene as the Sheik basically gets exactly what he wants without getting angry once over the Romans pointless insult. I particularly love his delivery and reaction when he says "bravely spoken" in regards to their boasting and belief in their own superiority.

Griffith is great in those scenes, and I'm sure his odds scene is what got him both the nomination and the win in the category. Other than those being a nice warm and comedic presence for these few scenes Griffith does not do anything more with the Sheik, nor did have to though. His performance is exactly as it should rather short, but funny and it is the type of comic relief performance one would want. Firstly Griffith is actually funny, and secondly his comedic character still fits with the rest of film. Although I can't say he should have been nominated instead of Boyd I will say Griffith still managed to give Ben-Hur as a film exactly what needed and when it needed it, and that is most certainly worth something.

Best Supporting Actor 1959: George C. Scott in Anatomy of a Murder

2012-01-05T14:07:00.000-05:00

George C. Scott received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Assistant State Attorney General Claude Dancer in Anatomy of a Murder.

When I reviewed Arthur O'Connell in this same film I said he was the sort of supporting performance that's whole purpose was to literally support the lead, and never really attempt to steal a scene for himself as the loyal confidant of James Stewart's defense attorney Paul Biegler. George C. Scott on the other hand plays the Assistant State Attorney General who comes to help the local D.A. prosecute the murder case. The whole point of Scott's performance is to basically attempt to up show James Stewart's performance in the court room scenes as the lawyers basically play a game a showmanship, with some keen observation and attacks against each other's cases for and against the defendant.

The character of Dancer is very simple in that he is in the film purely for the reason stated in the film There are no scenes to indicate his life outside of the courtroom, but just because a performance a relatively simple task, does not mean the performance of that character cannot be great, and a fully realized characterization. Scott shows that a character does not need to the most complex to create a wonderful performance nevertheless. Scott from his first scene knows what his part should be, and knows exactly how to make a huge impact in the film as the prosecutor Dancer.

In everyone one of his scenes Scott makes his presence known in the film, even when he is just sitting down at the prosecutors table and saying nothing at all. Scott in every silent moments always shows an intelligence in Dancer, and you can just tell that he is dissecting everything that is being said. It abundantly clear that Dancer is just waiting for his time to attack. Scott also with absolute ease shows the control and superiority Dancer has over the D.A. through the way he always speaks with absolute control but never visible seems to be trying he just simply is.

Scott's best scenes come out when Dancer finally attacks and he and Stewart face off interestingly enough as not only their character but really as actors as well. Stewart gives one of his best performances, but Scott manages to match him just about every turn, creating the best scenes in the film. Scott is completely on in everyone of his cross examination scenes. Scott is striking in every one of these moments as he intensely interrogates every witness. Scott is able to portray Dancer quick thinking and pressure tactics perfectly, and he makes it absolutely believable that the witnesses would be overwhelmed by him.

Scott is incredible for every moment he is on screen and never lets Stewart really win, making Dancer the perfect adversary for Stewart's Biegler. Scott has such a great impact on the film, that really it is unthinkable to see anyone else in the role. Scott simply is fantastic as Dancer who was essential to the success of the film which would not have worked if Stewart seemed in charge the entire time. Instead Scott though matches Stewart, and shows that a great actor can make an undeniable impression even if their character as written might seem simple.

Best Supporting Actor 1959: Arthur O'Connell in Anatomy of a Murder

2012-01-04T19:33:00.001-05:00

Arthur O'Connell received his second and final Oscar nomination for portraying Parnell Emmett McCarthy in Anatomy of a Murder.

Arthur O'Connell portrays somewhat washed up lawyer Parnell McCarthy who acts as a sort of supportive friend, and research to defense attorney Paul Biegler (James Stewart). He is an alcoholic fellow, but an apt legal mind although not a confidant one. O'Connell really gives a supporting performance that is the very definition of a supporting performance. Parnell just mainly supports Stewart's character throughout the film offering support, someone to talk to, advice, and his skills as a researcher, not much more than that.

O'Connell is absolutely appropriate for the role though without his not quite fatherly, but sort of elderly knowledge and warmth in equal quantities. O'Connell stay low key throughout the film never trying to stealing a scene from Stewart, but nor should he since he is suppose to be supporting Stewart first and foremost. O'Connell never attempts to take the spotlight in the film but does manage to show you can most certainly serve the film even if one is always more content to be around it.

O'Connell has a good chemistry with Stewart in all of their scenes together. They are natural and their is a certain warmness between them that work quite well, without ever bringing unneeded attention to their friendship which is only a very small aspect in the overall story. O'Connell always though acts as a brighter warmer side of this film without naturally without disrupting the tone of the rest of the film just through his natural charm.

Besides his chemistry with Stewart and his overall charm the only other pivotal part of his performance is his alcoholism and feelings of inadequacy. His struggle with these are especially short moments, and handled mostly only by small reactions, since as I said earlier O'Connell's Parnell is never really in the spotlight. O'Connell though despite the shortness of these moments, does convey both the fear, and eventual strength that lies in Parnell in a few short moments. This really is not a great performance, but it does act as a good supporting part to Stewart's great leading performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1959: Robert Vaughn in The Young Philadelphians

2012-01-04T11:06:00.001-05:00

Robert Vaughn received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Chester A. 'Chet' Gwynn in The Young Philadelphians.

The Young Philadelphians tells of Tony Judson (Paul Newman) who social climbs his way up the Philadelphia social latter, and does some poor things along the way to get ahead.

Robert Vaughn portrays Newman's roommate at first who has some big connections through the family although he is an alcoholic himself. Vaughn in these early moments is barely in the film, but he does have the right manner for his high society character, but with just the right degree of sloppiness to suggest his problems with alcohol. His only really notable scene though is when he describes that he became alcoholic after his family basically forced him out of a marriage with a poorer woman. It is a very short scene but Vaughn is convincing enough to show that what happened to him indeed to wound him deeply.

Vaughn though goes missing for great lengths of the film. He though appears again for a single scene of Chet's has lost his arm in the Korean war. Vaughn again is given very little time, but he able bring pain of his character realistically to life. Then it is another long delay until we see him in two pivotal scenes where Chet alcoholism has gotten the better him, his family has disowned him basically, and on top of all of that he is charged with murder. Vaughn in these two scenes therefore must show a completely disheveled and changed Chet believably, and without forgetting his earlier characterization of Chet.

Luckily Vaughn makes these two scenes his Oscar scenes. These sort of scenes are an incredible challenge actually as they are the sort scenes where an actor will resort to the worst sort of overacting, but Vaughn actually completely succeeds in both of the scenes. Vaughn realistically shows a completely at his ropes end Chet, and gives a very moving performance. Vaughn honestly conveys Chet's complete fall in his single scenes with a frantic intensity that absolutely brings out terrible troubles his character has been through. It is a powerful pair of scenes the best in the film because of Vaughn. I wish his character had been given a conclusion scene, or a few scenes to allow Vaughn to show more of Chet's downfall. Nevertheless Vaughn still makes the most of what he has, and manages to gives a strong performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1959: Ed Wynn in The Diary of Anne Frank

2012-01-03T21:15:00.002-05:00

Ed Wynn received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Albert Dussel in The Diary of Anne Frank.

The Diary of Anne Frank is an ensemble filmed caused by the fact that it is a group of character in their cramped hiding place trying to deal with each other. Only two were nominated from the ensemble though Shelley Winters in her Oscar winning role as Petronella Van Daan, and Ed Wynn as the dentist Albert Dussel who arrives later to join in their hiding place. Wynn's nomination probably was helped by the fact that Joseph Schildkraut, who gives the best performance in the film in my opinion, most likely suffered category confusion, and Wynn was likely helped by the fact that he plays against type.

Ed Wynn was best known for his comedic work, and it is almost rather hard to believe that one would ever expect for Wynn to play anything but comedy. This is because the fact that Wynn not only just naturally looks funny, but his voice has to be one of the funniest natural voices ever heard on film. Wynn though proves himself capable of giving a dramatic performance here, although it should be noted it is a dramatic performance with comedic undertones. Dussel is suppose to be just a normal man, but has just some rather fussy habits that the film attempts to derive humor from.

Ed Wynn actually is effective in his role though, even though it is most certainly limited by the very nature of the ensemble film. A funny thing about this performance actually is that Wynn seemed to have to tone down his voice and his face, since he stays mostly quiet in the film almost to prevent his comically sounding voice from coming out, as well his facial expressions are always withdrawn as well almost again to hide the fact that he just is rather funny looking when wide eyed. This is only really noticeable though if you have seen many of Ed Wynn's other performances, as I have, and Wynn actually does a good job of keeping realism in his performance as Dussel.

Ed Wynn best scenes though are his quietest ones especially his very first scene where he sadly tells of a list of many Jewish people who have been taken away by the Nazis. Wynn performance here is not overly emotional yet rather there is a haunting quality because he only sadly tells of the facts that cannot be ignored. Wynn never is nearly as effective as his initial scene as he becomes more of just part of the ensemble. Yet Wynn does not becomes forgotten in the rest, and still has a certain presence in their scenes even if it is less than say Winters or Schildkraut.

Wynn comes in and out of focus scenes with most small reactions that for the most part are appropriate. Really his leas effective moments come in when he freaks out near the end of the film, only really because his voice comes out more, but still Wynn presents Dussel as a man honestly troubled by his terrible situation. Wynn casting though likely did come from the fact there is some humor involved with the part involved in just his fussiness. Wynn is able to add some humor, while still keeping it within the tone of the actually film. Wynn actually does add a nice presence to the film overall with his humor, and genuine emotions he does bring to the part. It is not the most memorable, or best performance in the film but it is a good one.

Best Supporting Actor 1959

2012-01-03T10:12:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Arthur O'Connell in Anatomy of a Murder

George C. Scott in Anatomy of a Murder

Hugh Griffith in Ben-Hur

Ed Wynn in The Diary of Anne Frank

Robert Vaughn in The Young Philadelphians

Best Supporting Actor 1946: Results

2012-01-02T19:25:00.000-05:00

5. William Demarest in The Jolson Story- Demarest has a simple role as a supportive mentor, he is properly supportive but little is asked of him.

4. Clifton Webb in The Razor's Edge- Webb has a simple role as a pompous snob, which is portrays with proper snobbishness but again like Demarest little is asked of him.

3. Charles Coburn in The Green Years- Coburn's gives an entertaining and warm performance. He realizes his particular character quite well that only succeeds in adding to his film.

2. Harold Russell in The Best Years of Our Lives- Harold Russell gives a terrific heartbreaking performance that never fails to be moving.

1. Claude Rains in Notorious- Good prediction RatedRStar. The top two of this year are both absolutely terrific heartbreaking performances. What I find amazing about Rains though is that his character never had to be heartbreaking to begin with since he portrays a villain. Rains is astounding in his ability to give both a chilling villainous performance as well as give a sympathetic portrait and turns his character into almost a tragic man.

Deserving Performances:
Henry Travers in It's a Wonderful Life
Lionel Barrymore in It's a Wonderful Life

Best Supporting Actor 1946: Harold Russell in The Best Years of Our Lives

2012-01-02T12:06:00.000-05:00

Harold Russell won his only Oscar from his only nomination for portraying Homer Parish in The Best Years of Our Lives.

Harold Russell stands as one of two actors who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor despite not being an actor before being in his Oscar winning film the other actor being Haing S. Ngor in The Killing Fields. As with Ngor the character that they portray is closely intertwined with their own personal experiences. Ngor as with his character experienced the Cambodian Killing Fields, and Russell just as his character lost both of his hands while serving his country during World War II.

As with Haing S. Ngor's terrific performance Russell's own personal connection does seem to give emotional truth to his performance. The part of Homer Parish is most certainly a sad one having lost his hands, and having to deal with people, and particularly his family's own difficulty with coping with what has happened to him. Russell realistically underplays his role, and at first basically tries to avoid the idea that he really has any real problems with his prosthetic hands, and Russell even shows Homer attempts to ignore it almost through some small bits of humor.

In his early moments before going home Russell is terrific in just his small subtle indications of his dread, and pain he is trying to hide over his his hands. What is great about Russell though is the fact that he never does let a single emotion override the rest. It actually would have been easy to just have Homer constantly sulking over what happened to him in the war, bur Russell feels far more genuine showing a gambit of emotions that come to him from returning home.

It is the combination of feelings that Russell brings to life so well, which is so exceedingly moving. In his scene where he returns home, Russell does not convey just one emotion of sadness or fear over his family's reaction, but rather he has a more honest showing of happiness, to earnestness, to uneasiness, and even some pride actually since an undercurrent in Russell's performance seems to be is that he is proud to have served his country, but it is all of the emotions together that feels the way Homer's homecoming should be.

Russell after the opening scenes comes in and out of the story where it shows his coping with his families own coping with his problem. Russell underplays these scenes to great effect. Russell is terrific in these moments because he actually shows most of Homer's troubles do actually come from within. Russell authentically portrays feelings of doubt over that anyone his family, or his girlfriend Wilma could get over the hooks, and truly accept him as he use to be.

Russell pivotal scene is his final moment where Homer almost tries to convince Wilma that he is not worth the trouble as he shows her his arms without the hooks on. It is an absolute heartbreaking scene which Russell only infuses with a completely genuine sadness in Homer, and shows just brings out the vulnerability of Homer in this scene absolutely to life.

His final scenes though where Homer has finally overcome his fear is just as well realized by Russell, since he does not show the fear to be absolutely forgotten or Homer to be a changed man, but Russell presents Homer finding the strength that was in him all along. This is a terrific performance that is almost perfect if I were to have any complaints is that in a few moments you can perhaps see a slight inexperience in his performance, but never in a fashion that it becomes distracting and certainly never in which it takes away any of the impact of his great performance.

Second Anniversary of Best Actor and a New Year

2012-01-01T16:01:00.010-05:00

Well it has been the second year now of my reviews, and I must say I am interested to return to the Best Actor category, and look forward to the nominees annoucement.

Here seems the likely nominees but they might also be if Sag is a predictor:

And perhaps the Academy will finally decide that is a mistake that Gary Oldman has not been nominated before:

Or maybe one of these two could surprise:

It could any of these way or a Hodge Podge of the alternates in the last two spots, since Fassbender is not even a lock. This year is most certainly hard to predict but I wish it was even more unpredictable though as three of the nominees seem to be sewn up, this is not commenting on their quality (I have so far only seen Pitt) I just enjoy unpredictable nominations.

The unpredictability of this year's races seems to go even more so for my other category Best Supporting Actor.

This outcome to me seems the most likely with it being a very veteran actor centered year with all of them being previously nominees except for Hill.

Or it could stay with veteran actors but add an even older one to the mix:

Or Sag could be a predictor:

Or Just maybe the Golden Globe will be the predictor:

This year is even harder to predict than actor. The reason for this is because Plummer feels like he is to be the only absolute lock.

Best Supporting Actor 1946: Charles Coburn in The Green Years

2011-12-31T22:36:00.000-05:00

Charles Coburn received his third and final Oscar nomination for portraying Alexander Gow in The Green Years.

The Green Years portrays the growth of a young Irish orphan Robert Shannon who goes to live with his sometimes distant relatives in Scotland.

Charles Coburn portrays one of Robert's relatives his Great Grandfather specifically. Alexander Gow is the ends up being the warmest of his relatives who is a bit of a rouge among the family. Coburn despite a rather odd hairstyle, and a fake nose as well still once again proves himself to be one of the best character actors of the period. Although interestingly enough this is his only nominations that is a completely supporting role, unlike his previous two nominations that can both be easily argued as leading roles.

Charles Coburn gives a performance that is an interesting contrast to his bitter millionaire in The Devil and Miss Jones, and the fun loving millionaire in The More the Merrier. This time he portrays a not too rich Scotsman who although has a handsome life insurance policy he is not that wealthy of a man. Coburn handles his Scottish accent in a restrained but effective fashion, and also has certain mannerisms that only add to the character. From the way he walks, to the way he sits all really adds to showing the age and history of his character.

Alexander Gow does not have a great deal of time to himself, but Coburn always makes the most of every time he is on screen. Alexander Gow is an interesting character because he tells some tales about his past that may or may not be complete tall tales or something that might have actually happened to him. Coburn handles these story scenes perfectly telling the story as if it is something that happened to him, but in in a certain fantastical fashion that suggests maybe it did not.

The most important moments in Coburn's performance come from his scenes with his Great Grandson Robert. Coburn is genuinely warm in these scenes. He never overplays the part, and he has the right chemistry with both actors who play Robert. What makes his scenes work well is that Coburn never shows Alexander be overbearing with love, but there is always an honest joy in all of his reactions as he sees his great grandson achieve.

Coburn gives an appropriately fun loving performance here, that is perfect for the almost too fun loving nature of Alexander. There is not a moment where Coburn does not find a way to bring something more to the film through his performance. It is a consistently enjoyable performance of the aged Alexander Gow it is easy to make a role like this frankly too colorful and one can overact. Coburn never does this always finding the right tone, and giving a wonderful supporting performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1946: Claude Rains in Notorious

2011-12-29T16:21:00.001-05:00

Claude Rains received his fourth and final Oscar nomination for portraying Alexander Sebastian in Notorious.

Notorious is a thriller about the daughter of a Nazi spy Alicia Huberman (Ingrid Bergman) who in an attempt to prove her loyalty to America agrees to infiltration her father's organization, even though she is torn through her duty and her love for her spy liaison Devlin (Cary Grant).

Claude Rains lost every time he was nominated but I have the feeling that he probably received the second most votes every time except for perhaps 1944. Although he lost each other time to another well liked character actor this time he lost to the non actor Harold Russell, who most certainly had other factors in his favor to win. Rains though lost once again in a role that shares similarities with his other two performances I have nominated so far which is that he portrays sort of a villain, but a not at all standard villain who has a lot more to them than one would really expect.

Here he portrays Alexander Sebastian who is an important part of a secret Nazi group, that Bergman's character infiltrates through Sebastian's infatuation with her. What is fascinating about this performance by Rains is the fact that he never for a moment portrays Sebastian as any sort of standard villain who is just simply evil. He instead always presents Sebastian as a man first and a villain second. His business with the Nazis never seems to be the most pressing factor Rains suggests in the way he performs each of his scenes.

One of the best parts of his performance is his chemistry with Bergman in the film. With the part of Sebastian's romance with Alicia it would have been easy for Sebastian to come off as only a fool, or just a man who simply lusts after her. What makes Rains take on this so special though is the idea that he conveys a genuine love in these scenes. Rains never makes it out to be anything less. Rains makes it almost a tragic portrait of a man who is seeking for something that is not there.

What I love about his scenes with Bergman, is that Rains almost shows that Alexander is almost ready to be let down at any moment. In every scene where he sees Alicia with Devlin, Rains is terrific because he does not show any sort of angry or jealous outburst. Rains though subtly shows a fairly sensitive man who honestly does not want to be wounded, and even suggests that he may have been before in the way he quietly pressures her to admit she does not love him, almost as to say that Alexander could never truly believe someone like her could possibly love someone like him.

It is almost surprising how sympathetic Rains manages to make Alexander without ever going to far and making him not longer a villain. Rains honestly makes you sorry for Alexander when he finally does find out about the truth of why Alicia married him. Rains is actually quite moving in that he shows Alexander feels genuinely betrayed on a deeply emotional level. Rains never shows him as simply angry over her betrayal but as actually hurt by her betrayal and false affection when all his affections where truthful.

I suppose I should note as well how Rains acts as a villain, even though I feel I almost do not need to as he makes Alexander such a layered man to begin something that usually does not go hand in hand with a villain. As a villain though Rains again is brilliant in his refusal to ever portray Alexander as any sort of simple evil doer. There are several shades to his characterization from how he appears outwardly as well to the way he appears in more confined quarters.

Outwardly even Rains never takes one approach and still only shows complexity within his characterization. Alexander never lets on to the evil he really is able to do, but rather Rains makes him quietly imposing. There is never visible malice in face, but rather a more businessman sort approach to the proceedings. He is especially chilling in a single scene where he and his Nazi cohorts decide a man must die for a slight mistake. Rains and the others show such a casual approach to their decision that it is absolutely chilling.

Also Rains portrays Alexander quite intelligently throughout. Although he is indeed being tricked the for most of the film, Rains still makes Alexander an astute adversary. I particularly love his single scene where he figures out the betrayal of his wife. The scene is just about silent but Rains is brilliant in his reactions as Alexander breaks down the plot against him clearly in his mind.

In his more enclosed scenes with his mother Rains though shows a very different side to Alexander as a villain. There again is always a man there first, and his actions to deal with his wife's betrayal are made not out to be a vile decision but an unavoidable act of self defense. It seems almost impossible to make a scene where you might have sympathy for a man who is intent on killing his wife, but Rains makes Alexander's fear for his own life such a reality that he almost makes Alexander's actions seem understandable.

This is just an outstanding turn the whole way through for Rains, and for me turned Alexander oddly enough in the character I became most interested in. This is all despite the fact that Alexander could have been one dimensional and a simple evil figure. Rains though creates a compelling portrait of a man, that I must say I was surprised how much I felt sorry for him, particularly in his final scene where Alexander can do nothing but accept his fate. This is a perfect supporting performance, that just may be Rains' best work.

Best Supporting Actor 1946: Clifton Webb in The Razor's Edge

2011-12-28T18:59:00.000-05:00

Clifton Webb received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Elliott Templeton in The Razor's Edge.

The Razor's Edge is a very bad film that tells the story of a troubled War vet ran who takes a personal journey to find the meaning of life.

Clifton Webb was apparently the go to snobbish society type before John Gielgud took over that perpetual role. The character of Elliott Templeton is strictly within Webb's type, a snobbish fellow who looks down upon basically everyone else in someway. As one would except Webb is of course a pro at being the snobbish Templeton, and always has the right demeanor as well as superior attitude in each of his scenes.

Elliot Templeton as a role in the film is quite limited though to mostly making snide remarks about others going through the plot. Webb though always does indeed make the most of each of his moments. Webb is just the perfect snob, which is exactly what Templeton is suppose to be. Templeton though is not the greatest role still and does not do more than act as a snob until his death/ Oscar scene.

The placement of the scene actually is quite bizarre considering how he was just treated as a snob most of the time, yet the film suddenly wants you to have sympathy for him, either way though Webb does have a chance to show a weaker side to Templeton. Webb's final scene is a mix though. He overacts in one moment of it as he cries out that no one is coming to see him, but his last moments are well handled as Templeton regains his dignity.

As with so many performances nominated in this category there is not anything special in Webb's performance, and aside from a moment during his final scenes there is nothing wrong with his performance either. It is really standard work from Webb that suits the role, and is an entirely functional performance, but not one that ever stands out as something all that substantial.

Best Supporting Actor 1946: William Demarest in The Jolson Story

2011-12-26T20:21:00.000-05:00

William Demarest received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Steve Martin in The Jolson Story.

William Demarest portrays Steve Martin a vaudevillian cellist who discovers Al Jolson. They eventually work together for awhile until Jolson becomes far more successful leading Jolson to go on his own, but he eventually brings Martin back as his manager. The part of Martin is thin, just as the whole film is that is far more interested in reenacting various Jolson musical numbers more than really developing any of its characters to a fuller extent.

William Demarest has a nice warm presence on screen as Steve Martin who acts a mentor to Jolson. There really is not much to his part though other than either giving Jolson supportive talks, or trying to convince that he should probably try to take it easier. Demarest does all of this well enough. He is supportive as he should be, and as mentory as he should be, but none of what he does is amazing.

Demarest really though does gives my favorite performance in the film although that is not saying much. He does his best with his character with the limited amount he is given which only lessens as the film continues on. It is not a great performance just one that is as it should be. There are no special moments, but Demarest is consistently competent throughout.

Best Supporting Actor 1946

2011-12-22T10:21:00.001-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Claude Rains in Notorious

Charles Coburn in The Green Years

Harold Russell in The Best Years of Our Lives

Clifton Webb in The Razor's Edge

William Demarest in The Jolson Story

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Results

2011-12-21T12:28:00.000-05:00

5. Leonard Frey in Fiddler on the Roof- Leonard Frey gives an enunciation and energetic performance that might be a bit much, but is fitting for the part.

4. Richard Jaeckel in Sometimes a Great Notion- Jaeckel is barely noticeable most of the film, although he is always fine when he is on screen, but his final scene is quite effective.

3. Roy Scheider in The French Connection- Scheider although never has a scene really to himself or his character he gives a realistic performance that more than fulfills the requirements of his role.

2. Jeff Bridges in The Last Picture Show- Bridges gives a performance that I can never say wows me, but it is always a good consistently realistic turn that brings to life the confusion of his character.

1. Ben Johnson in The Last Picture Show- Johnson easily earns my win this year as Sam the Lion. Johnson creates a haunting and humane portrait of a man who stands for a certain noble dying nature.

Deserving Performances:
Andrew Robinson in Dirty Harry
Fernando Rey in The French Connection
Jack Albertson in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Roy Scheider in The French Connection

2011-12-21T11:27:00.000-05:00

Roy Scheider received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Detective Buddy 'Cloudy' Russo in The French Connection.

Roy Scheider portrays Detective Cloudy Russo who is the Narcotics partner to 'Popeye' Doyle (Gene Hackman), and they together try to foil a heroine trade between French and American criminals. Scheider has a descent amount of screentime actually but his role is limited in terms that there is not really any scenes that focus on him as a character, and really there are not even too many moments within scenes that focus on Scheider. Really all of the characterization is basically up to Scheider as he moves through the plot.

Despite this rather big limitation Scheider still makes Russo into a character, whom does seem like there is probably more to him but we only ever see him on the job. Scheider makes Russo into a very much normal man who does his job. Scheider always is quite natural whenever he is doing anything, and there is never a moment where Scheider acts as if Russo is doing something far out of the ordinary. With this Scheider establishes Russo's history has been long.

Scheider also is good in his distinct chemistry with Hackman as they play off each other in their scenes together. They have a particular dynamic the way they interrogate, and work together that shows their long history on working on cases. They work together perfectly as Hackman as Doyle is the more intuitive one, as well as hot headed one, against Scheider as Russo who acts as the more level headed and cool headed one who tries to keep Popeye sensible.

Although Russo is most certainly a limited part but Scheider makes more than the most it. He is realistic throughout and easily adds to the realistic tone of the film. Even though the character as written could have far too simple, but Scheider though still manages to make Russo into a realistic character. It is not the most complex part, but Russo does his very best in the part to bring Cloudy Russo to life.

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Jeff Bridges in The Last Picture Show

2011-12-20T23:56:00.002-05:00

Jeff Bridges received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Duane Jackson in The Last Picture Show.

. Jeff Bridges portrays Duane Jackson one of the more popular teenagers in the town who goes out with the most popular girl Jacy (Cybil Shepherd). Jeff Bridges actually most certainly has a challenge here to make Duane a compelling or likable character. Duane after all is not at all sure of himself is in a point of his life where he understands very little about himself, or anything else and sees many things in a rather shallow manner.

It is than hard for Bridges to really a distinct characterization since Duane is constantly changing his attitudes, and ideas. Bridges actually though does have his usual charm he has in his roles but too a far far lesser degree than say in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot. It is still apparent but it can only do so far really, and I can't say even Bridges manages to make Duane likable, even though he does try.

Duane goes through a lot of phases in the film but mostly he just acts as a fairly shallow young man in his shallow relationship. Bridges in turn is properly shallow as Duane, and is most certainly realistic in showing his confusion as well as his shallow wants in his relationship. Bridges is entirely accurate but I'm hard pressed to honestly say I found his performance especially compelling.

I don't want to say he is ever bad though that is most certainly sure. He stays realistic throughout the ever changing Duane, from when he is impudent or later in his scenes where he ends up being cruel after being dumped by Jacy. To even his last scene where he shows Duane having any sort of understanding.

They are all part of Duane almost random journey that is fitting of inexperience youth, which Bridges does realize, I just must admit I never felt myself Duane become all that interesting or affecting in the film despite Bridges' efforts. I know there are many who love this performance, but I personally cannot see it more than just simply a good realistic performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Ben Johnson in The Last Picture Show

2011-12-20T14:07:00.000-05:00

Ben Johnson won his Oscar from his only nomination for portraying Sam the Lion in The Last Picture Show.

The Last Picture Show tells of various relationships within a small Texas town.

Ben Johnson plays Sam the Lion who owns the local billiards, diner, and picture show. Same the Lion is a very particular character in the town because he is one of the few people who believes in doing the right thing in his own regard as well as in regard to helping others. Sam also although certainly does not have a perfect life he clearly does not suffer from the psychological troubles which trouble most of the rest of the residents of the town.

Sam the Lion actually has a limited amount of screen time but Johnson makes the most of every moment he has on screen. In short scenes Johnson effortlessly conveys the noble nature of Sam the Lion. There is always a certain quietness in his performance, and within every solemn gaze Johnson always manages to bring to life the wisdom, and intelligence of Sam. It is difficult to establish this sort of almost casual wisdom without seeming unrealistic, but Johnson manages it flawlessly.

Johnson with his little he has manages to create a whole history in the character of Sam. In his somewhat tired world worn face their is an honest experience conveyed by Johnson. He is of course especially stand out in his scene where reminisces about old times. Johnson is brilliant in his ability to convey the truly fond memories Sam has of his particular past. Johnson is especially strong is that it is not that he shows really a regret, Sam really is above a feeling like that, but instead he shows a genuine nostalgic feeling for that time in his life.

Johnson succeeds in every way with Sam the Lion creating a unique presence in every one of his scenes that almost a mysterious quality to him in the way he has his certain warmness and nobility that almost no one else has in the town. It most certainly is a short role in the end, but Johnson's performance has a lasting impact on the film. When he exits the film you feel a genuine loss of warmth, hope and nobility that Johnson so effortlessly conveyed in the role.

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Leonard Frey in Fiddler on the Roof

2011-12-20T00:14:00.001-05:00

Leonard Frey received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Motel Kamzoil in Fiddler on the Roof.

Leonard Frey portrays Motel Kamzoil the poor tailor who is love with the eldest daughter Tzeitel of the milkman Tevye (Topol). Motel is only a small aspect of the story, and is a rather modest character as well. Motel though is quite passionate in his love for Tzeitel, and does insist on being her husband even though she has been matched with a different man.

Frey gives an energetic and enthusiastic performance, perhaps a little too enthusiastic frankly with how much he puts into each of his expressions and reactions. It is a musical though and he is in line with many of the performances found in the film with his particular enthusiasm, and it certainly makes sense for his character who is very passionate for his love.

Frey though most of the time is barely even noticeable in the film which technically is fitting for his character but does not make his performance especially compelling either. Frey mostly is as he should be since Motel should be quite the modest individual who never is suppose to really stand out much, except when it comes to Tzeitel or his sewing machine which will make his sewing far easier.

He also has a song number to himself and he does through a lot of energy into his single song that is again quite appropriate to Motel who is quite passionate when he needs to be. In the end still it is hard for me to say this is all that much of a performance. It isn't really bad at all, even if he might be a bit much at times, but not matter what he never makes motel overly special either.

Best Supporting Actor 1971: Richard Jaeckel in Sometimes A Great Notion

2011-12-19T16:55:00.000-05:00

Richard Jaeckel received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Joe Ben Stamper in Sometimes A Great Notion.

Sometimes a Great Notion depicts the lives of an independent logging family the stampers who are at odds with Union loggers who are on strike.

This is the sort of nomination that just boggles the mind because one must ask why exactly did anyone in the academy say wow now that there is a performance that needs to be recognized. Especially since Sometimes a Great notion only received two nominations total, so this was not one of those bonus nominations like say Joe Mantell in Marty, I guess they wanted to nominate long time character actor Jaeckel I suppose but certainly seems quite strange in the end.

Joe Ben really is not at all prominent in the story of the Stampers he in the end is just one of the Stampers crew and in terms of the story is mostly just makes the occasional comment or reaction that is in no way substantial. He neither makes the decisions in the family or the arguments in the family. He really is part of the family he merely acts as just part of the family with his occasional small little reaction here or there that does not make the biggest of differences.

Joe Ben really is a non entity for most of the film until finally in one scene where he is held in place by a tree. Jaeckel is quite realistic in this scene and effectively brings out the emotions in the single scene. Other than this important scene Jaeckel just is around scenes never becoming the focus or making himself the focus. He most certainly never bad for a moment in the film, but there is just so little ever asked from Jaeckel in the part of Joe Ben Stamper that he could never really be more than just adequate.

Best Supporting Actor 1971

2011-12-18T23:17:00.000-05:00

And the Nominees Were:

Leonard Frey in Fiddler on the Roof

Jeff Bridges in The Last Picture Show

Ben Johnson in The Last Picture Show

Richard Jaeckel in Sometimes a Great Notion

Roy Scheider in The French Connection

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Results

2011-12-18T10:30:00.002-05:00

5. Ben Kingsley in Bugsy-Kingsley gives a rather dull performance that never really even becomes comfortable with his gangster mannerisms he attempts to employ.

4. Harvey Keitel in Bugsy- Keitel certainly is as good as one could be as the gangster here being exactly as he should be unfortunately he does almost nothing over the course of the film.

3. Jack Palance in City Slickers- Palance like Keitel basically is exactly as he should be in his role, unfortunately just like Keitel he has far too little to do.

2. Michael Lerner in Barton Fink- Lerner is only in three scenes but he dominates the three scene with his rather enjoyable performance as the quick talking movie executive.

1. Tommy Lee Jones in JFK- Good Prediction RatedRStar. Tommy Lee Jones easily wins this year with his fascinating performance that carefully but very effectively creates the enigma of a man his character should be.

Deserving Performances:
John Goodman in Barton Fink
Ted Levine in The Silence of the Lambs
Gary Oldman in JFK

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Jack Palance in City Slickers

2011-12-17T23:58:00.002-05:00

Jack Palance won his Oscar from his third and final nomination for portraying Curly Washburn in City Slickers.

City Slickers is a comedy about a literal group of city slickers who go on a cattle drive.

Jack Palance portrays the trial boss Curly who heads the cattle drive. He is rough tough, and with a glint of a philosophical side as well, an all around old fashioned cowboy. Jack Palance plays him rough and tough well enough most certainly with the strong screen presence he usually was able to bring in his better performances. Also he does have an occasional enjoyable reaction or two as well when he sees the city slickers act stupidly.

Palance as well handles the philosophical side of Curly with an ease and grace that is entirely appropriate for his old dying race demeanor and fits the rest of his character. My problem with this Oscar winning performance though comes from his screentime, and the amount asked of Palance from his performance. This just is not too much of a challenge really in the end especially compared to say his performance in Sudden Fear, or even his performance in Shane.

Firstly he is only required to do exactly what he does no more, which in the end is surprisingly little. Secondly though I was surprised with just how little that was total, I had seen the film before but not in a long while, and I forgot just how little Palance was actually in the film. This still is not a bad performance by any means, but it just never amounts to anywhere near one would expect from what was named the best supporting performance of the year.

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Tommy Lee Jones in JFK

2011-12-17T09:08:00.000-05:00

Tommy Lee Jones received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Clay Shaw in JFK.

JFK is Oliver Stone's inaccuracy and conspiracy filled depiction of District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) investigation into the JFK's assassination.

Tommy Lee Jones portrays the very elusive and mysterious businessman Clay Shaw who in the film seems to have some involvement with the assassination of JFK although it never says precisely what his association is. Tommy Lee Jones portrays Shaw in an equally mysterious fashion, and although Stone is not a subtle director by any means there is most certainly subtly laced within Jones' work in this film.

Jones role is in the end quite small really. Much of his appearances in scenes are only very very short moments that merely indicate his presence more than anything else. Nevertheless Jones still creates compelling character within these short scenes. Jones never for a moment exactly says who Shaw is in but rather creates him into a fascinating enigma that is basically impossible to fully understand.

An enigma is actually quite a difficult role to find the right balance as it is easy to give away too much of the character or too little that it just seems like thin characterization. Jones though manages to find the perfect balance of the known and unknown in his performance. There is an underlying sinister quality to Jones' portrayal that is always clear and chilling in an understated way but mysterious by the way Jones never exactly say what makes Shaw so sinister.

Jones gives a careful but concise performance that always seems to suggest the Shaw is hiding something, but Jones is good enough that he is able to convey in small indications that he is hiding something, but at the same he is able to show that Shaw is exceedingly good at hiding his secrets. This again something that is very difficult to convey but Jones is masterful in portraying that here.

Jones' role is quite short but you do actually feel his presence almost throughout the film from the his short time. I really do not like to use that overused phrase with performances, but it is true of Jones' work here that absolutely creates fascinating character who acts as the incarnation basically of the conspiracy in the film.

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Michael Lerner in Barton Fink

2011-12-16T19:56:00.000-05:00

Michael Lerner received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Jack Lipnick in Barton Fink.

Barton Fink depicts the strange story of a playwright hired for the movies to write a wrestling picture but suffers from writer's block well living in a bizarre hotel.

This is a strange nomination since after the watching the film I would think that anyone would most likely say the standout supporting performance in the film was by John Goodman as the strange neighbor of Barton's, but I guess maybe Goodman's character was a little too strange for them maybe his whole plot line so perhaps they decided to go with the character they could more fully understand the imposing studio boss played by Michael Lerner Jack Lipnick who hires Fink to write a wrestling picture that is to star Wallace Beery.

Lerner appears in only three scenes total as Lipnick although he is the domineering presence in all three of them. Jack Lipnick is forceful fast talking studio head who knows his business and talks fast, and is unpredictable in his way he praises Fink and ridicules his assistant. Lerner actually is quite good in these scenes and does bring all of these qualities to life. He dominates his scenes just as Jack Lipnick should dominate everything around him.

Lerner appropriately has humorous overtones to his performance which he includes in his performance without any sort of visible performance. It is a performance that more than simply fufills his roles because how effective he is in his scenes. Lerner role though is limited, and he does not make for the most memorable part of a film. Lerner's performance though is of course quite good though yet I can say he is that good really. Lerner is enjoyable presence in the film, but there isn't anything he does in the film that is absolutely amazing in the film though. He is a good few scenes wonder, but not one of the truly great ones.

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Ben Kingsley in Bugsy

2011-12-15T08:54:00.000-05:00

Ben Kingsley received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Meyer Lansky in Bugsy.

Kingsley portrays Meyer Lansky Bugsy Segal(Warren Beatty)'s old friend from childhood as well as fellow gangster. He is the more sensible one who sees the big picture, and understands crime in more terms of money refusing to take things too emotionally or personally. Kingsley really is not in the film very often but he has a few scenes that are important for his character.

Kingsley unlike his fellow nominee Harvey Keitel is not nearly as comfortable as a gangster. He tries the same trick as Keitel from the voice to his physical demeanor. Kingsley never seems to be completely natural with his gangster voice or his gangster style and it frankly seems a little too much like a performance rather than really being an embodiment of Meyer Lansky.

Unlike Mickey Cohen played by Keitel though the materials did seem to be there to make Meyer Lansky into a memorable or compelling character. The problems is though Kingsley is never able to convey any sort of inner killer, or power one would think would be in a character like this, something that Lee Starsberg was able to very well in the Godfather Part II as Hyman Roth who was based on Meyer Lansky.

Kingsley never gives more than a rather paper thin characterization of Meyer Lansky focusing far too much on the mannerisms of the character, which he does not even do well, without ever achieving any sort of deeper complexity to the character. It is is all around a rather unimpressive performance by Kingsley that never seizes any of the opportunities the role does indeed offer.

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Harvey Keitel in Bugsy

2011-12-15T00:10:00.000-05:00

Harvey Keitel received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Mickey Cohen in Bugsy.

Harvey Keitel portrays gangster Mickey Cohen who is a bit of renegade gangster at first but eventually he comes to work for Bugsy Segal (Warren Beatty). This is another odd career nomination for Keitel that is his only nomination he has received so far but for very unsubstantial work. He does have an intensity in the role though in his first scene where he yells at Bugsy for awhile, but than he quiets down in his very next scene where he makes a deal with Bugsy and really quiets down for the rest of the film.

After his first scene he barely is on screen and when he is on screen he really is just in the background making the occasional comment that is in no way remarkable. Cohen as a character in this film just simply has little to no impact on the film. Aside from his first scene there is never a scene that even focuses on him for more than a few minor moments. This really is a character as written that it would have been impossible for any actor to make anything special out of it.

Keitel though does really portray the part of Mickey Cohen as well as anyone could. He talks tough he has the right demeanor for the typical gangster. He really is just as he should be but the problem of course is the fact that Cohen is such an undemanding role that there post certianly is nothing about Keitel performance that comes across as memorable or even particularly interesting.

Best Supporting Actor 1991

2011-12-14T15:39:00.001-05:00

And the Nominees Were

Ben Kingsley in Bugsy

Harvey Keitel in Bugsy

Jack Palance in City Slickers

Michael Lerner in Barton Fink

Tommy Lee Jones in JFK

Best Supporting Actor 1987: Results

2011-12-14T10:39:00.001-05:00

5. Sean Connery in The Untouchables- Connery has little to do in his role besides act tough and give inspirational talks both which he does adequately enough but never to any sort of amazing degree.

4. Denzel Washington in Cry Freedom- Washington gives a fine quietly passionate performance that avoids the problems some of his other performances suffer from.

3. Vincent Gardenia in Moonstruck- Gardenia gives an effectively colorful performance that only succeeds in adding to his film.

2. Morgan Freeman in Street Smart- Freeman gives a great performance excelling in both showing the odd charm and charisma equally well with the terrifying brutality of the same man.

1. Albert Brooks in Broadcast News- This for me was a rather close choice between the top two, although I really should not have had to make because Brooks gives really more of a lead than a supporting performance. Brooks either way gives a great performance that balances the different aspects of his character making a winning performance. He gives a charming humorous performance that finds the right emotional tone throughout the film.

Deserving Performances:
Vincent D'Onofrio in Full Metal Jacket
R. Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket
Mandy Patinkin in The Princess Bride

Best Supporting Actor 1987: Albert Brooks in Broadcast News

2011-12-13T20:37:00.004-05:00

Albert Brooks received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Aaron Altman in Broadcast News.

Broadcast News is a film for that improved all around on this viewing so much so really that I must say I was rather unfair to William Hurt in my review of his leading performance and I should probably update my review since he achieves far more than I gave him credit for. What also struck me though was Albert Brooks in the role of the intelligent News reporter who believes in and is effective at reporting the real news. Even though he is not that much of a showman. Brooks really is not supporting but rather co male lead along with William Hurt.

Brooks actually has a great challenge in this role, a challenge that is often failed at which is to portray a character who is written to be annoying in some way but succeeding in making the character likable still. Brooks is quite capable in this regard as Aaron who is purposefully written to be a bit of a know it all as well as someone who does not mind espouses his views fairly loudly and with as much condescension as possible. Brooks though is able to balance this aspect of Aaron with his more charming traits just about perfectly though.

Brooks in Aaron more potentially annoying qualities does well because he effectively enables his slight sense of superiority to be both appropriately humorous as well as sincerity in his performance. Brooks is able to show that Aaron honestly does believe in what he does and what he attempts to do, and it it is almost that he can't help but be at least a little snarky to those who are willing to compromise their values rather than do what it right.

Brooks with this though also does manage to make Aaron charming in his own particular way. Brooks is interesting actually in that he shows that what Aaron tries to do really is always attempt to be charming as much as possible really, because it does not come to him naturally. Brooks is able to show naturally actually able to realize Aaron's repeated attempts to try to charismatic and naturally he does succeed somewhat, but Brooks shows always there is that effort that stops Aaron from being able to be his rival Tom Grunick (William Hurt).

What really is effective about his performance though is in Brooks of portrayal of Aaron relationship with the television producer Jane (Holly Hunter). Brooks is terrific in these scenes as he shows Aaron's obvious love for Jane even though Jane refuses to see Aaron anymore than just a friend. Brooks is great in showing just how much he honestly does love her particularly in his body language that is always tuned toward's Hunter's in a way that he is always waiting for just to reciprocate.

Brooks is very moving really in his scenes with Hunter later on after Jane has fallen for Tom. Brooks realizes so well the various emotions Aaron goes through from his obvious love for Jane that he finally absolutely comes out with, but also with his own anger toward her since she can't return it and is instead falling for a man who represent everything he sees that is wrong with the news. Brooks gives a moving performance that really realizes the painful dilemma of Aaron's life.

Brooks is also great in his very important moments with William Hurt as neither of them treat each other in really a hostile a fashion but rather have a dynamic of rather hidden mutual jealousy, disrespect but with a bit of admiration at the same time. What both actors do work exceedingly well for their scenes together which realizes both their professional and personal struggles in an interesting effective fashion. I was very much surprised by just how much I liked him this time around, but Brooks really gives a great performance that succeeds completely with his character.

Best Supporting Actor 1987: Sean Connery in The Untouchables

2011-12-13T11:17:00.001-05:00

Sean Connery won his Oscar from his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Jimmy Malone in The Untouchables.

The Untouchables depicts the efforts of Elliot Ness (Kevin Costner) to take down crime boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro).

Sean Connery's nomination and win is a rather strange one because despite his long career that included many performances far better than this one he was nominated only for this performance as he street smart beat cop who shows Eliot Ness how to do things the Chicago way. The most notable thing really about this whole performance is the fact that for some reason this beat cop needed to be Irish therefore Connery had to do an Irish accent.

I really do not like to make a big deal about accents unless they really aid in a characterization like for example Al Pacino in a Dog Day Afternoon or if they are distracting because of how bad they are unfortunately Connery's accent falls into this latter category. Connery as he grew older his Scottish accent grew thicker and thicker, perhaps Connery could have done an accent back say in his Darby O'Gill days but this time in his career his accent was far too thick and distinct for him to attempt anything else.

All I can really think is why did they not just change the character's last name, and make him a Scottish cop that was all that was required. Instead Connery attempts an Irish accent over his Scottish that just comes off as awkward when it is apparent, but it is also exceedingly inconsistent. He loses constantly and quite randomly, and this whole problem only ever serves to take away from whatever else he might be doing with his performance.

The rest of his performance is not remarkable either all he does is look and act tough and gives various talks just to toughen up Ness. No one should never sell short acting tough it is a harder really than it looks, and Connery certainly is good at it, but this not his best display of it. Also there are so many other times where he not only acts tough but has a fuller characterization otherwise than just tough honest cop. Otherwise than the accent Connery really is not bad, but there is nothing special about his work here, which is a shame since you might have noticed I have found Connery has given more than one deserving performance in many other years.

Best Supporting Actor 1987: Vincent Gardenia in Moonstruck

2011-12-11T00:41:00.000-05:00

Vincent Gardenia received his second and final Oscar nomination for portraying Cosmo Castorini in Moonstruck.

Moonstruck is about a soon to be married Italian woman Loretta Castorini(Cher) finds some difficulties when she has an affair with her fiancee's brother.

Vincent Gardenia portrays the father of Cher's character who is facing a late life crisis. Cosmo is one of the many colorful family members in the film. Gardenia though although certainly is colorful in his own way in his portrayal of Cosmo never goes over the top to make these sorts of qualities apparent. Gardenia simply adds to the color of the film with his presence with a great deal of ease in his performance that realizes the character of Cosmo quite well.

Gardenia has terrific chemistry with everyone else that he interacts with and with this chemistry he effectively conveys everything he needs to about Cosmo. In his scenes with Cher there is not an a lot of fatherly love found, not that he is cold at all as he does want what is best for her. The two actors though naturally convey a long family history between the two that leaves him less than enthusiastic to hear about her new martial plans with a man he has no respect for.

There is always a certain frustration in his performance that is just perfect for Cosmo, and Gardenia manages to make it appropriately humorous while still keeping Cosmo fairly realistic. Gardenia is very good because he doesn't show Cosmo frustration around his family and his wife as just him being tired, but Gardenia subtly suggests that there is always more on his mind and that he is most certainly hiding something.

What he is hiding is that he is having an affair outside of his marriage with his wife Rose (Olympia Dukakis). Gardenia is great when he is outside the family in one particular scene where he is acting as a plumber where he has a great deal of cockiness and a certain that is totally unapparent in the family scenes that shows just how Cosmo is without his frustrations about that he has at home.

The most interesting factor about Gardenia's performance though is his chemistry with Dukakis. Again they show a family history together that can just be seen in the way they react with one another in such a quiet but knowing fashion. The best single scene I think is a short but just about perfect moment where she tells him she wants him to stop seeing his mistress. Gardenia reaction is almost silent but really quite perfect as he shows Cosmo's history and connection is strong that he instantly understands and accepts. Gardenia throughout is always exactly as he should be adding color, humor and depth whenever needed with his nicely handled performance.

Best Supporting Actor 1987: Denzel Washington in Cry Freedom

2011-12-09T12:57:00.000-05:00

Denzel Washington received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Steve Biko in Cry Freedom.

Cry Freedom tells of the murder of anti-Apartheid activist Steve Biko, and the escape of his friend a white newspaper editor (Kevin Kline) who must escape South Africa to tell the truth about what happened to Biko.

Washington plays the murdered Biko who is killed relatively early on but before he is killed Washington is basically the lead in the film. Washington I will admit is not one of my favorite actors as he can act in a too self aware fashion in many of his performances, or fail to really make a characterization with conviction. His performance as Steve Biko though is one of his better performances because he avoids these problems.

He manages to play Steve Biko fairly simply but fairly effectively. He does not try to really make Biko a larger than life sort of figure, but rather just a man who wishes to find some justice in his country. Washington never overplays the role of Biko rather handles everything relatively quietly in his performance. From his speeches to the way he convinces Kline's character of his cause Washington just shows a nice dignity and passion in the part that is effective.

The part is not the greatest of challenges really though past showing the passion of Biko, but nonetheless it is a well handled performance. Biko though is not as well developed of a character as one might think though as he is murdered very early on, and he only occasionally is remembered past this point, and even when he is remembered it is not in any sort of different fashion than when we saw him alive earlier in the film.

What there is though Washington is as he should be in his performance. He realizes the exact Steve Biko the film wanted you to remember as a martyr for his cause throughout the rest of the film. I do wish that the film had maybe expanded even more on his character and given a bit less emphasis on Kline's characters escape, but still Washington's performance is a good one that avoids the problematic tendencies of his later work.