Hugh O'Conor did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Christy Brown in My Left Foot.
Hugh O'Conor plays Christy Brown as a boy suffering from cerebral palsy in the earliest years of his life when everyone seems to believe that he's mentally disabled due to his physical impairment which leaves him with essentially only the use of his left leg and foot. O'Conor's physical performance is incredible. His portrayal of the effects of palsy never for a moment feels like a put on or acting in the least. O'Conor depicts so well the difficultly of Christy's condition in the randomness of the muscle movements of his face as well as the sheer weight of being unable to control the majority of his body. It's impeccable work from O'Conor as it just feels wholly real and that you are watching a poor boy with this severe disability. there is never a second even in this which feels false. What I love about the film, and this carries over to O'Conor's performance as well though is that this is not a film just about the depiction of a disability. It's always first and foremost about the man, well at first the boy, who manages to find a way in which to deal with the constrictions of it.
O'Conor of course has a set restriction, technically even more severe than his successor in the part since at this point Christy cannot even speak, due to he fact that he must maintain Christy's impairment so he also must portray the mind in the body. O'Conor does so much with his eyes in the role as he makes it rather clear that Christy is not the simpleton so many seem to take him for. A prevailing emotion that O'Conor so well expresses in his performance is the frustrations in Christy due to his forced position in life. O'Conor is interesting though in that he does not portray this in a downtrodden way as a sort of sadness. Instead O'Conor portrays an actual anger in Christy as he must basically fight against himself in order to be recognized, and rather than wanting people to feel sorry for him, he wants them not to be. O'Conor even manages to bring a little humor in part as he conveys Christy's intelligence in his expressions of a certain exasperation Christy feels when he is treated as a simpleton, particularly when a neighbor is slowly telling him letters that's he's definitely well aware of.
O'Conor realizes the spark that will motivate Christy's artistic endeavors later in life, in these early scenes as he's simply just trying to tell people he can think for himself. Although he is unable to say whole words O'Conor's delivery of the grunts of sorts that Christy is able to get out past his physical restrictions is no that of a some random noise. O'Conor brings the intensity of someone fighting to speak, he's trying to vocalize but is just unable able to do it. The moment where Christy finally proves his intelligence to his family by taking chalk with his left foot to write out mother on the floor is simply an amazing scene, and O'Conor's performance contributes greatly to this. O'Conor portrays so well the considerable physical effort it takes for Christy to do this, but also expresses the relief and satisfaction in Christy when he finishes. O'Conor whole work here is a wonderful depiction of Christy initial struggle for recognition. It does stand out on his own completely, but it does more than that. In some biography films there is a bit of disconnect between the child actor we begin with before we get to the adult actor, as though they are almost just wasting time before we really get to know the character. That is not the case here. Even though its an extreme jump in years when Daniel Day-Lewis takes over for O'Conor, there is nothing lost between the performances. O'Conor's performance matches Daniel Day-Lewis's performance, and Day-Lewis's matches O'Conor's. There is a clear progression between the two which is a marvel to behold.
Ray McAnally did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning BAFTA, for portraying Patrick "Paddy" Brown in My Left Foot.
Brenda Fricker, rightly, won the Oscar for portraying Christy's mother. Even with that eventual and sadly posthumous BAFTA win Ray McAnally was ignored as Christy's father. This may have partially been due to the nature of the role of Mr. Brown which feels a bit thankless at times. The first reason being Mr. Brown is not an immediately likable sort. In a far cry from his performance as the refined Bishop in The Mission, for which he also won the BAFTA, Mr. Brown is a working class father that if he were American might be described as a blue collar slob. One of the earliest scenes we see him in is finding out about Christy's birth and the complications in regards to Christy's condition. Mr. Brown instead of dealing with it in any refined fashion goes about by going straight to the pub. Even in this earliest scene of Paddy drinking away his sorrows McAnally does not leave him as simple as he might of been. McAnally certainly is good in creating that rough personality fitting for the rough drinker, but even within this McAnally subtly alludes to Brown sadness, as well as violence to a man with too many comments, not coming from Brown being saddled with such a son rather because people will treat his son as less of a man.
When Christy is a boy his father, much like everyone other than sort of his mother, is under the belief that Christy's mind is disabled as well. McAnally carefully does not portray any contempt in Paddy towards his son at this time, in fact there is even a certain protective quality McAnally suggests whenever he feels that Christy is being mistreated or in a position where he could be potentially mocked. Nevertheless though due to expecting nothing from him he does not exactly pay his son any extra attention. This is until that "mother" scene I referred to in O'Conor's review. Again it is amazing scene which is contributed greatly by O'Conor's, Fricker's, and McAnally's performances. What I love is how McAnally differs Fricker's work. Fricker is very moving in her depiction of Christy's mother's being vindicated for her faith, but McAnally is just moving in his depiction of Paddy's reaction. Although he certainly doubted his son before McAnally is outstanding as he conveys the pride in Paddy in seeing his son's intellect. McAnally is particularly great in the way he shows Paddy being moved to tears, and almost has to move to an over joyous celebration in order to stop himself from breaking down completely.
The thankless nature comes a bit as the film continues just because McAnally gets less time than Fricker, but he certainly still keeps a strong presence throughout the proceedings. McAnally also does have to deal with less endearing side. What's special about this performance is that McAnally brings depth to the rather uncouth side of Paddy. McAnally does not hold back in that he is certainly quite imposing when his rage does reveal itself, but is never something simple. One terrific moment for McAnally is when the large family must eat porridge due to Mr. Brown having been fired, and Christy makes a few comments. McAnally does not show a baseless rage but presents where it comes from. McAnally brings a vulnerability in the action that he suggests seems to stem from Mr. Brown knowing that he's not properly providing for his family. McAnally never treats Mr. Brown as a simple man even at his worst when he viciously berates his pregnant daughter. In the moment just before McAnally is just as good at showing the loving side as he plays with another one of his sons, and even in the switch McAnally never makes Mr. Brown's reaction as something from an uncaring father quite the opposite actually. McAnally makes an honest man of this sort. One of his best scenes is when Mr. Brown shows his love to Christy by building him a room, though never says it, there is such a warmth that McAnally gives in his action that he gives sense to Mr. Brown. This is a brilliant performance by Ray McAnally which works as an excellent counterpoint to Brenda Fricker's work. Where she presents a wholly positive influence for Christy, McAnally vividly creates both the positive and negative influences Christy Brown's father also had on the man.
250 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 250 of 250McCarthy: Each to his own. I didn't say Stoll was bad, he's good in my opinion. I merely said he doesn't hold a candle to Miles Anderson, who is my #2 supporting performance in a miniseries, ever, just behind Ian Richardson in Tinker Tailor.
*We're
200 comments everyone.
What The Fuck.
MacFarlane: Law was pretty awful, and I thought Craig wasn't much better either. Hanks was miscast definitely but I thought he was fine, a problem I had with the film overall though was how they handled Newman's excellent performance, his actions seemed to veer all over the place and I wasn't sure whether to hate or love him, thankfully that final scene is heartbreaking although nullified by that overly stylized direction.
Luke: I could except Louis to give 5 to DiCaprio, Hardy, Fassbender (Macbeth), McKellen, Foster and Courtenay.
I actually disagree on Craig. He was the only actor I found totally convincing as a gangster. I honestly wish he'd play more slimy characters like that.
Luke: I could expect Louis to give 5 to DiCaprio, Hardy, Fassbender (Macbeth), McKellen, Foster and Courtenay. I should have said expect, in my earlier comment, sorry.
Anonymous: I meant 17 Overall (that includes Davis and Cotillard) and there was 12 fives in Lead last year, which isn't going to be broken anytime soon.
Fair enough. I generally don't like Craig at all so my views might have something to do with that.
Anonymous: That's alright.
This might be the most commented page on Blogspot ever.
Its a shame as I do like Craig as Bond, but Quantum Of Solace might be the worst James Bond film ever, yes worse than A View to A Kill, at least with films like that, Die Another Day, Octopussy and Moonraker, there were some unintentionally funny moments =D, Quantum was just boring lol.
I confess that I enjoyed Craig well enough in Layer Cake, and thought his performance in Casino Royale worked for the film. However in general I just find him incredibly bland and boring, no charm or appeal, no range, feel free to disagree.
Hey, everyone, who would be the ideal cast for a version of Glengarry Glen Ross made in the 1950's?
Louis, just like Actress, who are your top 10 most overrated actors:
1) Anthony Hopkins
2) Robert De Niro
3) Leonardo DiCaprio
4) Marlon Brando
5) Paul Muni
6) Christoph Waltz
7) Tom Hardy
8) Kevin Spacey
9) Robert Downey Jr
10) Casey Affleck
I know im gonna get serious hate for the top 5 lol
He already did that a few pages ago.
Anonymous: Louis'top 10 most overrated actors are Sean Penn, Jamie Foxx, Will Smith, Warren Beatty, George Clooney, Nick Nolte, Matt Damon, Johnny Depp, Denzel Washington and Colin Firth.
I believe that Paul Muni is in his top 20 most overrated actors. And also, I don't believe that Paul Muni is that overrated, no one really talks about him and is hardly known.
Wow I did not know comments could have two pages......
Anonymous:
Inherit the Wind - 2(If March goes over the top it is not good, and he goes over the top here. His character is already a straw man but March does nothing to alleviate this with his wild eyed over the top performance. He makes Brady just a crazed zealot the whole time, but is not really very believable at that even)
I pretty sure I've given my thoughts on Bogart in Desperate hours before.
Key Largo - 2.5(It's really not a really bad performance so to speak, but he's pretty forgettable here. He basically does as little as possible to the point that I almost forget him throughout most of the film. He basically sits back and leaves it all to Robinson, Barrymore and Trevor. I guess maybe he was tired after giving such a great performance in Treasure of the Sierra Madre)
Stanwyck - (I don't always love Stanwyck but I don't think there is an overriding factor that's ever problematic, just some performances are better than others. She's a charming and entertaining performer in comedies, but also really has a certain edge in her dramatic work that is not often seen. As a whole I probably prefer Stanwyck as Hepburn's lesser work I find more off putting than Stanwyck's.)
Both are possibilities.
March - (It's fairly easy to examine him as he's an actor who was simply best when he went for subtle more withdrawn characters. He's kinda almost a bi-polar performer in a way, fitting for the guy who won an Oscar for Jekyll and Hyde as he sometimes gives powerful and sensitive portrayal that are quite effective, but other times gives wildly over the top performances that worked only a few times. The weird part was this was random throughout his career although in his Oscar wins you actually get to see both, although I think Hyde was one of the rare cases where it fit.)
Edward G. Robinson - (One of the best of the period. He seemed to now his limits and knew how to play beautifully within him. I've yet to see a performance from his that was in any way inadequate. He always has such a presence and always knew how to find variations even in somewhat similair characters. Such as the gangsters in Key Largo and Little Caesar feel like different men)
James Cagney - (Also one of the best of his period and I still feel bad for wrongly giving him a 4.5 originally for his first Oscar nominated performance. Like Robinson he knew what he could do and ran with it. Cagney actually could do a lot though in that he could be in a musical, screwball comedy, or serious dramatic picture and fit right in. He has physicality as a performer that's all his own, and like Robinson I've yet to be disappointed by a Cagney performance)
I believe I've covered the Iceman boys and Bronson and Cardinale before.
Robert:
No not really.
Anonymous:
Garbo
Anonymous:
Blyth - 4(She might go a tad over the top at times, but I found her rather entertaining in her portrayal of a straight up spoiled brat)
Arden - 3.5(From what I've seen from her it's her doing her usual thing which she does fairly well. Nothing revelatory but certainly good)
Anonymous:
Glengarry Glen Ross 1950's Version:
Ricky Roma: Burt Lancaster
Shelley Levene: Edward G. Robinson
Blake: Robert Ryan
Dave Moss: Lee Marvin
George Aaronow: Karl Malden
John Williamson: Gig Young
James Lingk: Van Heflin
Anonymous:
I would not put Muni that high. I mean like you wrote no one really talks about him anymore.
Louis: Your Top Ten Overrated Directors.
Luke:
1. Jonathan Demme
2. Steven Soderbergh
3. Ron Howard
4. James Cameron
5. Spike Lee
6. Tim Burton
7. Nicholas Ray
8. Vincente Minnelli
9. Mike Nichols
10. Otto Preminger
Louis: Reasons why you think they're overrated as well please.
Well, I disagree on Soderbergh. The others I find justified on varying levels.
Louis: To be more specific, your thoughts on them in general.
I just imagined a version of Jurassic Park made in 50's.
Louis, could you repost the ratings for the Iceman boys and Cardinale?
Louis: Can I have your revised thoughts on Marion Cotillard as an actress in general.
Louis: And where would she rank on your top ten actresses list.
If Glengarry Glen Ross was directed in the 1950's, who would be the director?
Luke:
Jonathan Demme - (I'll admit I can't stand his aesthetic of the constant close ups that stare directly into the screen(now let me tell you about how much I love Sergio Leone.....). The difference for me though is Demme's use of it feels like an unnatural flair to be stylistic for the part (although I'll admit it does work in Silence of the Lambs). In addition to that I feel he either wants you to know the power of a scene now now now like in Silence (which does work for its extreme material) and in Philadelphia where he makes sure to show you baby footage to ensure that you find the main character's death moving, or he just let's the scenes sit there in an awkward aggravating way like in Something Wild or especially in Married to the Mob which is basically a comedy without timing.)
Steven Soderbergh - (Get those filters out of my face ahhhhhhhhh. Well you could say I don't care for his use of color filters. The same goes for just weird choices of his like making Contagion look as small scale as possible for an outbreak movie or having The Informant! looking like it takes place in the seventies for no reason. There's also his choices to play around with the audio of scenes and having pointless cuts to make it seem "edgier". I found this particularly obnoxious in The Limey. I'll admit most of his more stylistic choices hit a nerve for me, not in a good way, to the point that I'm sorry I just could not get past the first thirty minutes of Magic Mike)
Ron Howard - (The patron saint of all workman directors everywhere. There is no creative spark in his direction, he can be competent, but if the material calls for more he does not deliver. For example if you take just the fantasy scenes from Parenthood there is something so bland about them. The material has to be direct for him which explains why Apollo 13 is his best film. Even in that case though compare it to The Right Stuff, and you'll see how Howard's work does not quite compare to a director with vision)
James Cameron - (I'll admit it is more of writing thing, but he insists that he writes his films so it goes hand in hand with his work as a director. Aside from Aliens, his work is always filled with an abundance of corny lines thrown in there, and just in general he creates often excessively simplistic motivations. Hey that's actually even in Aliens. Past that I don't love his action, and it does not make up for his work as a writer)
Spike Lee - (Again it's really his work as a writer that thwarts his talent as a director. He just does not know how not to be heavy handed. Although even in that case he's the guy who said "you know what Malcolm X needs an extended dance sequence because that's essential to telling the man's story". There is a bit of tendency for flair for flair's sake. That dance sequence is a perfect example of it because it does nothing for the story of Malcolm X, it makes no sense for his personal story, it does not fit with the film's later tone in the least, but hey look Spike Lee did a huge dance sequence)
Tim Burton - (Hurts me a bit to include him because of how much I love Ed Wood. I never felt him to be the visionary so many viewed him as even when he did well like with Beetlejuice, Big Fish or Pee-wee's Big Adventure. His style though can be tiresome and becomes quite horrible if he falls off the track with it. With his late career though it is often his fault even when the material has promise. With Big Eyes his Burton moments felt very forced, and he let the tone go all over the place in the last third, and with Sweeney Todd he for some reason excised all the humor from the material to make an excessively dour film)
Nicholas Ray - (He could go up if I see more from him. From what I have seen though his direction seems to purposefully amplify any material that was considered taboo at the time which results in an too many over the top moments, while he still seems to want to tell a realistic story)
Vincente Minnelli - (I do rather like Lust for Life, but otherwise I find his choices often bland or off-putting. This is particularly the case for Gigi where he seemed set out to make the ugliest yet most colorful film he could imagine)
Mike Nichols - (A case of not quite seeing what all the hubbub was about. I don't dislike his work but I certainly don't love it either. A lot of his films frankly feel just a bit standard to be honest)
Otto Preminger - (This mostly has to do with his inconsistency. I do love Anatomy of a Murder and Laura, and to be fair he did create a considerable amount of atmosphere in Bunny Lake is Missing it was not his fault it has one of the dumbest twists of all time. The problem is when the material is lags like with The Cardinal or Exodus his own work becomes quite banal)
Oh, but I LOVE the color filters in Traffic. It added so much to that film.
But, Robert, they are so distracting! Just like the lens flares and the explosions!
It fit that particular film perfectly and set the tone without being intrusive.
Anonymous:
Cardinale - 4
Bridges - 4
March - 3.5
Marvin - 3.5
Anonymous:
Sidney Lumet
Luke:
I don't think much revision is needed on top of my thoughts other than she's one of the most fascinating leading performers around.
Louis: When is the review.
Louis: Also, you forgot to tell me where Cotillard is on your top ten actresses list.
Agree entirely with your thoughts on Minnelli and Nichols.
I think that the best directors for a version of Jurassic Park in the 1950's would be the guys who directed the 1933 King Kong. Wouldn't you agree?
Agreed. With Edmund Gwenn in Richard Attenborough's role, and Richard Attenborough in Sam Neill's role.
And who should play Laura Dern's role? Maybe Grace Kelly? Willis O'Brien and Ray Harryhausen would do the special effects.
And Max Steiner would compose the score.
Luke: #5
Anonymous:
I'd recommend Michael Powell actually for director for the cast:
Grant: Richard Attenborough
Sattler: Deborah Kerr
Malcolm: Eli Wallach
Hammond: Edmund Gwenn
Muldoon: Roger Livesey
Gennnaro: Elisha J. Cooke
Nedry: Ernest Borgnine
Arnold: Walter Matthau
Eh, don't know Powell. I believe that Cooper and Schoedsack would do a better job with the film than him, but that's my opinion. Also I would love to see a version of Blade Runner in 1949 with Bogart and Back to the Future in 1955 with James Dean.
My basis for Powell is he had a good eye for visuals and utilized special effects quite well in his films. I'd say he would have captured the grandeur of the story quite well.
Eli Wallach would be an interesting Malcomb. But say what you want about Jeff Golblum...it's hard to think of a replacement for him in anything.
Michael: That's quite true.
Is the review already over, Louis? By the way, I was thinking that Jack Arnold would be a great choice to direct a version of Back to the Future in the 50's. James Whale would be a great choice to direct Blade Runner in the 1940's. Michael Curtiz or Mervyn LeRoy could be great choices for directing a version of The Departed in the 1930's. What do you think of these choices? And the supporting cast for The Departed in the 1930's?
Is your review already over, Louis? By the way, a great choice for a version of Back to the Future in the 1950's would be Jack Arnold. James Whale for Blade Runner in the 1940's, while Michael Curtiz or Mervyn LeRoy would be great choices for The Departed in the 1930's. What do you guys think of these choices? And also, who would you cast for The Departed?
Oh, sorry about writing the same comment, my mistake, lol.
Livesey for Muldoon, perfect. Kerr for Sattler, perfect.
Anonymous:
Whale seems like a fit for Blade Runner. I'd probably go Richard Fleischer for Back to the Future. Curtiz is perfect for the Departed.
The Departed Cast:
Costigan: James Cagney
Costello: Walter Huston
Sullivan: Pat O'Brien
Queenan: Edward Arnold
Dignam: Humphrey Bogart
Ellerby: Thomas Mitchell
Madolyn: Olivia deHavilland
Post a Comment