Showing posts with label 1991 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1991 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts

Sunday, 18 December 2011

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Results

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. Tommy Lee Jones in JFK- Tommy Lee Jones creates the right fascinating performance that carefully but very effectively creates the enigma of a man his character should be.
1. 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.
Deserving Performances:
John Goodman in Barton Fink
Ted Levine in The Silence of the Lambs
Gary Oldman in JFK

Saturday, 17 December 2011

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Jack Palance in City Slickers

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 trail 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

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's (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's 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's 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's work here that absolutely creates fascinating character who acts as the incarnation basically of the conspiracy in the film.

Friday, 16 December 2011

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Michael Lerner in Barton Fink

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 while living in a bizarre hotel.

This is a little bit of 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 the man who hires Fink to write a wrestling picture that is to star Wallace Beery. Also Lerner evidently launched an active personal campaign for the nomination whereas Goodman did not, although two from Barton Fink would have been much more preferable than two from the forgettable Bugsy.

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 is great 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 finds this magnificent combination within his three scenes of creating the very strange yet rather hilarious nature of the forceful Jack Lipnick particularly to how he contrasts against the unsure Fink. Lerner finds this perfect tone to maneuver within his performance, as any proper supporting player in a Coen brothers should, in that he not only brings impeccable comedic timing but also goes further in terms of the creation of what Lipnick represents. Lipnick is the studio system in full force and his use of Fink is the brilliant representation of this sort of grotesque leviathan. There is this confidence, overwhelming confidence, Lerner brings and a passion, however both of those seem forceful for the sake of it, of a man demanding to own his "art" even when he's really in it just for the money. His interactions with Barton are sheer perfection in the first two scenes Lerner plays this brilliant line between excessive affability but with these strict sinister undertones. One of my favorite moments is in their first scene together where he states his lack of actually having seen Barton's work, despite being so enthusiastic towards Barton's work, and as a parting note Lerner infuses this certain cynicism as he casually dismisses Barton's intentions when speaking about work he has done rather than theoretical work he will do for capitol pictures. Lerner's second scene is equally entertaining as Lerner brings such earnestness towards Lipnick's fawning over Barton, even translating it towards his violent reaction towards his assistant Lou when he demands actual work from Barton. Lerner again is this great face of the studio delivering this great smile towards Barton yet again channels this vicious darkness even within that. Lerner then naturally makes it all come to his final scene where he is openly hostile towards Barton for having written a "fruity picture about a man wrestling with his soul". Lerner is great as he still is very funny even in this breakdown of Barton's passion but indeed is also all the more cruel because of it as Lerner still doesn't lose that certain spring in his delivery while cutting out Barton's heart and feeding it to him. Although yes Goodman should have been nominated, I will say Lerner is extremely entertaining and effective in his own right by creating both the colorful facade of the studio system and its more genuine dog eat dog attitude.

Thursday, 15 December 2011

Best Supporting Actor 1991: Ben Kingsley in Bugsy

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 problem 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

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 just is nothing about Keitel's performance that comes across as memorable or even particularly interesting.

Wednesday, 14 December 2011

Best Supporting Actor 1991

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