Barry Fitzgerald in The Quiet Man
Stanley Holloway in The Lavender Hill Mob
Showing posts with label 1952 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1952 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Thursday, 17 March 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Results
Barry Fitzgerald in The Quiet Man
Stanley Holloway in The Lavender Hill Mob
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Jack Palance in Sudden Fear
Jack Palance received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Lester Blaine in Sudden Fear.
I should say this is a spoiler review since it is needed to really properly describe the performance of Palance. Sudden Fear is an effective thriller about a playwright Myra Hudson (Joan Crawford) who begins to suspect her new husband Lester might have some ill intents for her. It is a good thriller although there is a plot hole in that she never calls the police, but hey in a modern thriller she likely would and it would lead to either the scene with the cops are useless and believe she's just crazy, or the cop would walk in and quickly be killed, but this is a low body count thriller like all older thrillers, and much more effective because of that reason.
Lester Blaine first crosses paths with Myra when she refuses to cast him in her play because he lacks stage presence. Anyways he meets her later, and charms her off her feet basically. This is quite a challenge that Palance must fulfill to make this romance believable. Palance though is actually charming enough in these early scenes to make this aspect of the film believable. He is not charming in say a Clark Gable sense, or more appropriately a Robert Montgomery in Night Must Fall sense, but really an average Joe charm that works well.
Palance is also quite commanding in the beginning of the film. His control he takes over Crawford is made quite believable by both actors. This command is necessary to make the actions of Crawford's character believable suggesting as giving him a great place in her will. I will say Palance does make his control over her properly realistic. I almost felt he was the male lead because of the first half of the film. In the second half of the film though his role does become limiting quite considerably, when the film does almost completely focus on Joan Crawford's character.
Palance though suggests that underneath his charm there is a selfish motive underneath all what he is doing. It turns out that he actually only romanced and married Myra to get her fortune. He intends to, along with his ex-girlfriend Irene Neves. I think Palance did a fairly good job at the beginning of the film hiding Lester's true attentions, but nonetheless subtlety suggesting them at the same time. His revelation is well handled, his whole facade is very believable, and I think he did not make his evil intentions completely obvious at the beginning of the film making it more effective when he did.
Palance at the end of the film is properly chilling when he finally undergoes his plan of action. I liked it that he did not turn Lester into a complete psychopath precisely, but clearly a man who is a bit nervous himself. I liked at the end that he really goes over the edge, and becomes incredibly nervous and frantic at the end in his attempt to fulfill his plan and not get caught. Overall a strong effective performance from Jack Palance.
Lester Blaine first crosses paths with Myra when she refuses to cast him in her play because he lacks stage presence. Anyways he meets her later, and charms her off her feet basically. This is quite a challenge that Palance must fulfill to make this romance believable. Palance though is actually charming enough in these early scenes to make this aspect of the film believable. He is not charming in say a Clark Gable sense, or more appropriately a Robert Montgomery in Night Must Fall sense, but really an average Joe charm that works well.
Palance is also quite commanding in the beginning of the film. His control he takes over Crawford is made quite believable by both actors. This command is necessary to make the actions of Crawford's character believable suggesting as giving him a great place in her will. I will say Palance does make his control over her properly realistic. I almost felt he was the male lead because of the first half of the film. In the second half of the film though his role does become limiting quite considerably, when the film does almost completely focus on Joan Crawford's character.
Palance though suggests that underneath his charm there is a selfish motive underneath all what he is doing. It turns out that he actually only romanced and married Myra to get her fortune. He intends to, along with his ex-girlfriend Irene Neves. I think Palance did a fairly good job at the beginning of the film hiding Lester's true attentions, but nonetheless subtlety suggesting them at the same time. His revelation is well handled, his whole facade is very believable, and I think he did not make his evil intentions completely obvious at the beginning of the film making it more effective when he did.
Palance at the end of the film is properly chilling when he finally undergoes his plan of action. I liked it that he did not turn Lester into a complete psychopath precisely, but clearly a man who is a bit nervous himself. I liked at the end that he really goes over the edge, and becomes incredibly nervous and frantic at the end in his attempt to fulfill his plan and not get caught. Overall a strong effective performance from Jack Palance.
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Victor McLaglen in The Quiet Man
Victor McLaglen received his second and final Oscar nomination for portraying 'Red' Will Danaher in The Quiet Man.
Well this perfect timing to review this performance on St. Patrick's day, a film all about Ireland. Anyways this is one of my favorite films ever, about an Irish born, but American ex-boxer Sean Thorton (John Wayne) who runs from his past in America to go back and settle in Ireland in the cottage he was born in.
Victor McLaglen portrays a character certianly in his type that have a large brutish fellow, unlike in his Oscar winning performance in the Informer, where he was a brutish fellow but a modest one as well, this one he is a very loud obnoxious man. Danaher is basically a friend of no one and particularly dislikes the Yank Sean Thorton from the first time he sees him. This comes to quite a problem when Thorton wants to marry his sister Mary Kate (Maureen O'hara), which he objects to quite quickly and quite stubbornly which due to tradition means they cannot even date.
McLaglen is loud most certianly in this role. He always is taking up the screen in more ways than one, which I must say is the perfect style for the role of Danaher. I really think Danaher could have been played all wrong, in that he could have seemed too threatening, and without a comedic edge to the performance, but McLaglen finds precisely the right tone for his performance I think. He certainly is loud, and obnoxious and is properly over asserting, but McLaglen makes his boorish behavior actually fairly effective, and at the same time entertaining. He manages to create a good amount of humor due to some his reactions when he loses about something, or gets insulted in some way.
An interesting part about Danaher is that usually palooka characters like these are generally written incredibly simply. Danaher is a little different in that they actually write in that he himself wishes for love with a local rich widow. Now he makes rather amusing indications of this when he attempts his non too subtle come ons to her. He is in fact tricked because of this desire by locals to allow Sean Thorton and his sister date and marry by making him think that if he does the widow will marry him. On the wedding night of Mary Kate and Sean Thorton though he realizes the trick when the widow rejects him. I think McLaglen was actually quite good because he managed to make me actually a little sorry for Danaher as he pleads, and questions the others what went wrong before he figures out the trick.
Well anyways he denies the married couple the dowry causing marriage trouble between the Thorton's which leads to him and Danaher duking it out in one of the best fights in film. It is not because it is a dramatic fight, but rather because it is a hilarious rousing fight. I think actually even here McLaglen actually does still excel, because he could just fight, but some of his reactions in the fight I find are just gold. The best part of the fight is the end where he and Sean share a cold drink become friends. This would seem like an utterly impossible notion, but McLaglen makes it utterly believable showing his boisterous nature was a bit of a facade all along. Overall a performance a like very much, that could very well have been nothing, and just adds to a film, I already adore.
Victor McLaglen portrays a character certianly in his type that have a large brutish fellow, unlike in his Oscar winning performance in the Informer, where he was a brutish fellow but a modest one as well, this one he is a very loud obnoxious man. Danaher is basically a friend of no one and particularly dislikes the Yank Sean Thorton from the first time he sees him. This comes to quite a problem when Thorton wants to marry his sister Mary Kate (Maureen O'hara), which he objects to quite quickly and quite stubbornly which due to tradition means they cannot even date.
McLaglen is loud most certianly in this role. He always is taking up the screen in more ways than one, which I must say is the perfect style for the role of Danaher. I really think Danaher could have been played all wrong, in that he could have seemed too threatening, and without a comedic edge to the performance, but McLaglen finds precisely the right tone for his performance I think. He certainly is loud, and obnoxious and is properly over asserting, but McLaglen makes his boorish behavior actually fairly effective, and at the same time entertaining. He manages to create a good amount of humor due to some his reactions when he loses about something, or gets insulted in some way.
An interesting part about Danaher is that usually palooka characters like these are generally written incredibly simply. Danaher is a little different in that they actually write in that he himself wishes for love with a local rich widow. Now he makes rather amusing indications of this when he attempts his non too subtle come ons to her. He is in fact tricked because of this desire by locals to allow Sean Thorton and his sister date and marry by making him think that if he does the widow will marry him. On the wedding night of Mary Kate and Sean Thorton though he realizes the trick when the widow rejects him. I think McLaglen was actually quite good because he managed to make me actually a little sorry for Danaher as he pleads, and questions the others what went wrong before he figures out the trick.
Well anyways he denies the married couple the dowry causing marriage trouble between the Thorton's which leads to him and Danaher duking it out in one of the best fights in film. It is not because it is a dramatic fight, but rather because it is a hilarious rousing fight. I think actually even here McLaglen actually does still excel, because he could just fight, but some of his reactions in the fight I find are just gold. The best part of the fight is the end where he and Sean share a cold drink become friends. This would seem like an utterly impossible notion, but McLaglen makes it utterly believable showing his boisterous nature was a bit of a facade all along. Overall a performance a like very much, that could very well have been nothing, and just adds to a film, I already adore.
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Richard Burton in My Cousin Rachel
Richard Burton received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Philip Ashley in My Cousin Rachel.
My Cousin Rachel is an effective film, although somewhat lacking about a young man who falls in love with Rachel the widow of his favorite cousin. He also though is unsure if she did or did not have something to do with his death.
Richard Burton is no question the lead in this film not supporting. He is in a greater percentage of the scenes in this film than he is in some of his lead nominations. He is also the focus of every scene, it is about his character and his perceptions of Rachel (Olivia de Havilland). This was either the first leading performance by Richard Burton or at least his first prominent one. It is quite interesting to see the young Richard Burton with the exuberance of youth, something quite absence from say his final Oscar nomination for Equus.
Philip Ashley is a rather interesting character actually because it is a character where the age of the character matters. The very key part of his character is his age, and his urgency as a youthful young man who really does not want to ever be considered unable to completely understand something or be able to take something because of his youth. Burton's youth and somewhat inexperienced performance actually works quite well for the character of Ashley. Burton does not have a fully comfort on screen yet quite clearly, he never commands as he was able to easily later on in his future performances.
Now this might sound strange praising something technically lacking from the actor, but it work well for Philip who is inexperienced in his understanding of life. Burton lack of command completely compliments the lack of Philip's command in the film. It is strange to say this but a more experienced Burton perhaps would have given a lesser performance. He really shows the mixed passion, and lack of complete understanding well in his performance. You never know what Philip is quite feeling except for brief moments, since Philip himself does not know, and Burton stays properly mixed up in his performance which works incredibly well.
I thought Burton fulfilled his role incredibly well, and made his love of Rachel, and his paranoia around her all work, because of the lack of precision of his performance. Now part of me wants to give a higher rating, but another part wants lower because technically what I like about the performance may be technically Burton's lack of inexperience as a film actor. Well I don't know maybe that is just Burton wanted me to believe. I must say I am not quite sure so I will have to settle for a good, but safe rating for Burton's performance.
My Cousin Rachel is an effective film, although somewhat lacking about a young man who falls in love with Rachel the widow of his favorite cousin. He also though is unsure if she did or did not have something to do with his death.
Richard Burton is no question the lead in this film not supporting. He is in a greater percentage of the scenes in this film than he is in some of his lead nominations. He is also the focus of every scene, it is about his character and his perceptions of Rachel (Olivia de Havilland). This was either the first leading performance by Richard Burton or at least his first prominent one. It is quite interesting to see the young Richard Burton with the exuberance of youth, something quite absence from say his final Oscar nomination for Equus.
Philip Ashley is a rather interesting character actually because it is a character where the age of the character matters. The very key part of his character is his age, and his urgency as a youthful young man who really does not want to ever be considered unable to completely understand something or be able to take something because of his youth. Burton's youth and somewhat inexperienced performance actually works quite well for the character of Ashley. Burton does not have a fully comfort on screen yet quite clearly, he never commands as he was able to easily later on in his future performances.
Now this might sound strange praising something technically lacking from the actor, but it work well for Philip who is inexperienced in his understanding of life. Burton lack of command completely compliments the lack of Philip's command in the film. It is strange to say this but a more experienced Burton perhaps would have given a lesser performance. He really shows the mixed passion, and lack of complete understanding well in his performance. You never know what Philip is quite feeling except for brief moments, since Philip himself does not know, and Burton stays properly mixed up in his performance which works incredibly well.
I thought Burton fulfilled his role incredibly well, and made his love of Rachel, and his paranoia around her all work, because of the lack of precision of his performance. Now part of me wants to give a higher rating, but another part wants lower because technically what I like about the performance may be technically Burton's lack of inexperience as a film actor. Well I don't know maybe that is just Burton wanted me to believe. I must say I am not quite sure so I will have to settle for a good, but safe rating for Burton's performance.
Wednesday, 16 March 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Arthur Hunnicutt in The Big Sky
Arthur Hunnicutt received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Zeb Calloway in The Big Sky.
The Big Sky is an okay but very standard western about a group of men going a dangerous expedition to trade with Natives.
I must say I expected little of this nomination beforehand. I have watched many performances of character actors, who received an Oscar nomination seemingly for nothing more than their consistent career. I was very happily to see that Arthur Hunnicutt actually gives a pretty good performance. He portrays Zeb Calloway an old fashioned trapper sort of guy. Zeb is actually a pretty smart guy though, more than I expected him to be, who leads and sort of teaches two youthful men on the expedition.
Calloway acts as a guide for the two younger men, and the audience. Hunnicutt makes the knowledge of old Calloway a natural, old timer intelligence, rather effective in the film actually. I really enjoyed his performance, and the rather relaxed fashion he teaches these men the ropes, as well as help them grow as men as well. He really shows the history of the character's knowledge of his field, through just his natural performance. Hunnicutt never really pushes this aspect of the character but it really comes natural through his intelligent, but at the same time simple performance.
This sort of character is sort of common in westerns but really they tend to be dumber than Hunnicutt's character, or at least his portrayal of Calloway. They are usually used as comic relief, and can be rather hokey characters to say the least. I will say the film does use him in the comic respect, but Hunnicutt manages to avoid a lot of the hokiness that usually comes with a character. Yeah he has some comedic aspects but Hunnicutt manages them well enough to be an actual part of the character rather than an artificiality that can be involved with over acting of similar characters like say Chill Wills in the Alamo. Overall Hunnicutt gives a good honest, and warm performance, that I was, pleasantly and thoroughly surprised by.
I must say I expected little of this nomination beforehand. I have watched many performances of character actors, who received an Oscar nomination seemingly for nothing more than their consistent career. I was very happily to see that Arthur Hunnicutt actually gives a pretty good performance. He portrays Zeb Calloway an old fashioned trapper sort of guy. Zeb is actually a pretty smart guy though, more than I expected him to be, who leads and sort of teaches two youthful men on the expedition.
Calloway acts as a guide for the two younger men, and the audience. Hunnicutt makes the knowledge of old Calloway a natural, old timer intelligence, rather effective in the film actually. I really enjoyed his performance, and the rather relaxed fashion he teaches these men the ropes, as well as help them grow as men as well. He really shows the history of the character's knowledge of his field, through just his natural performance. Hunnicutt never really pushes this aspect of the character but it really comes natural through his intelligent, but at the same time simple performance.
This sort of character is sort of common in westerns but really they tend to be dumber than Hunnicutt's character, or at least his portrayal of Calloway. They are usually used as comic relief, and can be rather hokey characters to say the least. I will say the film does use him in the comic respect, but Hunnicutt manages to avoid a lot of the hokiness that usually comes with a character. Yeah he has some comedic aspects but Hunnicutt manages them well enough to be an actual part of the character rather than an artificiality that can be involved with over acting of similar characters like say Chill Wills in the Alamo. Overall Hunnicutt gives a good honest, and warm performance, that I was, pleasantly and thoroughly surprised by.
Best Supporting Actor 1952: Anthony Quinn in Viva Zapata!
Anthony Quinn won his first Oscar from his first nomination for portraying Eufemo Zapata in Viva Zapata!.
Eufemo Zapata is the brother of Emiliano Zapata who acts as one of his loyal soldiers, and later one of his generals. Quinn here is perfectly cast as Eufemo, and not just because he is Mexican. Eufemo is a macho, drinking sort of guy and Quinn portrays these facets of Eufemo without effort. Eufemo though most of the time is just in the background, but Quinn does always react to everything in the film with realism and authenticity. Quinn manages not to ever be completely forgotten due to his notable screen presence, although still he only really can be noted some of the time.
I like Quinn's performance and his blunt attitude during the fighting sequences which certainly simply adds to the film, he also gives a nicely joyful performance in the celebration scenes. Eufemo though at the end of the film betrays everyone, since he steals land and wives from his people. I will did not think the film gave Quinn anymore time to lead to this betrayal, besides a very short moment earlier where he suggested Emiliano to take the land bribe offered to him. So although he really did not have a transformation period given to him, Quinn is still good in this final scene. His shows well an exhaustion, and anger of the battles he fought, and his lack of rewards. His explanation to Emiliano is effective and very well done by Quinn, even though I did not feel the film completely earned this change in Eufemo Quinn still acted it quite well. Overall a good performance, although not really given enough to do to be great.
I like Quinn's performance and his blunt attitude during the fighting sequences which certainly simply adds to the film, he also gives a nicely joyful performance in the celebration scenes. Eufemo though at the end of the film betrays everyone, since he steals land and wives from his people. I will did not think the film gave Quinn anymore time to lead to this betrayal, besides a very short moment earlier where he suggested Emiliano to take the land bribe offered to him. So although he really did not have a transformation period given to him, Quinn is still good in this final scene. His shows well an exhaustion, and anger of the battles he fought, and his lack of rewards. His explanation to Emiliano is effective and very well done by Quinn, even though I did not feel the film completely earned this change in Eufemo Quinn still acted it quite well. Overall a good performance, although not really given enough to do to be great.
Best Supporting Actor 1952
Victor McLaglen in The Quiet Man
Jack Palance in Sudden Fear
Anthony Quinn in Viva Zapata!
Arthur Hunnicutt in The Big Sky
Richard Burton in My Cousin Rachel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)