Christian Bale received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Michael Burry in The Big Short.
The Big Short is a mess of a film which tells three separate stories of Wall Street investors who all decide to bet against, "short", the housing market.
A common problem when a broad comedy director, like Adam McKay, tries to make a more serious minded film is that it can result in an odd tone as they can't seem to let go of their urge whenever there is potential for a cheap gag now and again. The problematic tone is found in The Big Short and crosses over to the performances where every one is not exactly on the same wavelength. Ryan Gosling plays his role as though he wandered off the set of a not as good version of The Wolf of Wall Street, Brad Pitt plays his role dead seriously, John Magaro and Finn Wittrock play their roles like they're the hapless heroes in a broad comedy, and Steve Carell's voice and walk seem like a comedic creation yet his intentions for the role never seem to be a such. Then there's Christian Bale whose story seems to be in even more of his own bubble than the other two as most of his scenes never leave Michael Burry's office, or are just him having some sort of reflective narration about himself. In turn Bale's performance actually is in a bit of a bubble all its own, though to be fair in this case the film's portrayal of Michael Burry is that he's suppose to be a guy in a bubble all his own.
Bale gives his performance very much a take it or leave it quality, though this is technically very much required for the part of Burry whose suppose to be detached from most everything and probably has Asperger syndrome. The film puts an emphasis on this all the more in the way his scenes are edited as the narration will be over his normal interactions as though to make it so we also are disjointed from him all the more. The film does this as an attempt to show that this disjointed quality in Burry is actually what enables him to see the flaws in the Mortgage market which propels him to start shorting it. Bale in turn gives a portrayal of Burry that from our position seems quite random, and actually to Bale's credit he perhaps gives the performance that might have been what the tone of the film should be. Bale in no way gives a comedic performance, but rather presents Burry exactly as he is. He's never playing for laughs but the potential for that is there. I will say this approach might have worked quite well if the film had been more intelligently directed and edited. Not that this causes Bale's performance to wholly fail though, but the film's tone is too random to make proper use of what he's doing.
Now what Bale is doing just in terms of an abstract view is some random behavior....a great deal of random behavior. Burry has a lot of personal tics as Bale has him speak in kind of an internalized way even when he's directly speaking to someone, and never quite feels like he'll talk right at you. It does not stop there as he just does what he does in terms of behavior whether it is brushing his teeth, or drumming to music in as though he's oblivious to others. Bale keeps his body language withdrawn that always makes him seem a difficult man to approach. Bale will even have Burry sometimes suddenly laugh or smile in a somewhat awkward fashion. Now what Bale does well is he makes this randomness feel natural enough to make it all seem like something normal to Burry, and in fact should be a bit off putting for someone else watching him. It's random to us but it's not random to Burry. Bale pulls this off, and I did not feel like I was just watching Bale act, I felt like he made all of it feel as something a guy with Asperger syndrome would do. Now having said all that, this performance really did very little for me. Again because the film does not make use of what Bale is doing in an effective fashion.
The only interactions are from either those who are playing it dead seriously too which means again Bale is still stuck in his bubble with only the occasional brief minor character having some over the top reaction to him. None of it becomes very amusing, but it did not necessarily have to be that way. It should be engaging at least but the way the scenes are handled there's Bale there doing his thing, and that's it. There's no where to take the behavior past...... well the behavior, especially since Burry basically just gets his short set up then just ignores everyone. This leaves Bale only with the behavior, which in itself becomes a bit repetitive and not too compelling. The film is basically done with him before it even reaches the half way point but it still occasionally cuts to him as he is doing something on a computer, writing down a few numbers, or doing some more drumming. Again only behavior, as the film never bothers to come up with something for Burry to do that's dynamic, which might be true to life but who cares it's a movie. I frankly felt the film halted whenever it came back to Burry, at no fault of Bale's either. All you're left with is a guy acting like he has Asperger Syndrome. To Bale's credit, once again, he pulls it off, but film does not let him take Michael Burry anywhere past the set up.
35 comments:
Yep. Extremely ticcy and with no real arc to speak of. Gosling would've made a far better nominee, personally (even though he doesn't make my Top 10). It's a real shame that we've got three titanic supporting performances this year against Bale (who isn't overly bad) and Ruffalo (who is legit the worst nominee in the category since Plummer, and who is definitely my Arquette this year).
Louis: The Film Sucked and Carol was Robbed. :(
Bale's a low 3.5 for me and I'm now even more pissed with Del Toro and Elba missing out.
There all of this talk about a lack of diversity in the Academy's choices, and while that's true, including minorities just for the sake of it is stupid. They have to deserve it, just like everybody else. But the Academy done fucked up because, as has been mentioned here time and again, there were at least two: Elba and Del Toro, and they were snubbed horribly in favor of Ruffalo, who is indeed just plain horrific (haven't seen Big Short, so I can't comment there).
@Michael: Disagreed entirely. In a year like this with the worst Best Actor lineup since maybe the 80's and at least six or seven black leading men who would have been better than all five of the nominees combined, the indignity is entirely justified.
Michael B. Jordan would've been a far more deserving nominee over Eddie 'Future Razzie Winner' Redmayne.
And John Boyega.
To be honest I feel the systematic racism is more to do with studios failing to push black performers campaigns as hard as they could than with the Academy.
Forgot about Abraham Attah as well.
Also, on Bale, I must admit he's the closest thing I have to a favorite performance in the film if only because of the weird sincerity he brought to all of Burry's eccentricities. It's the film's fault for not doing anything with him. I must also dissent with Psifonian concerning Gosling, who I thought gave a career worst and was one of the big reasons I loathed the film's sense of humor.
Louis: Will we get Hardy's review tomorrow.
Disagree on this occasion lol =D, been a while but I disagreed this time on Bale.
Definately not a 3 lol.
3 would probably be the rating I'd give him, and I hate the movie a lot more than anyone else here.
To me I just found Bale to be just the most interesting guy and I saw a lot of me in him here =D, I also am quite glad he doesn't share screentime with any of the major players as for me his scenes were the only ones that were completely fine and interesting as Carell is just body slammed by bad supporting players and overdone writing. I also saw him more as a guy who also had a Social Anxiety disorder (like me) as well so =D, I will stand up and defend =D lol.
Psifonian: Who are your top 10 for lead and supporting?
Calvin,
I want to wait until I see Room, Macbeth, Son of Saul and a few others before I answer.
Also, Louis, have your ratings for the other members of the cast of the Big Short changed, because I have a feeling Gosling and Pitt aren't quite 3.5's anymore.
Psifonian: Sure thing.
Luke: Maybe.
Calvin:
All down to a 3.
Louis: Knew it.
What is your top 10 female supporting performances of the year?
Calvin:
1. Jennifer Jason Leigh - The Hateful Eight
2. Alicia Vikander - Ex Machina
3. Elizabeth Debicki - The Man From Uncle
4. Elizabeth Banks - Love And Mercy
5. Sonoya Mizuno - Ex Machina
6. Kate Winslet - Steve Jobs
7. Cate Blanchett - Cinderella
8. Jennifer Jason Leigh - Anomalisa
9. Rachel McAdams - Spotlight
10. Tessa Thompson - Creed
And yes I did upgrade a few.
Did you take my arguments about what Banks added to the role into consideration?
Thoughts on Blanchett in Cinderella?
Louis, do you have a rating and thoughts for Mikhail Gorevoy in Bridge of Spies? Because on rewatch he stuck out to me the most of the supporting cast sans Rylance. He reminded me a lot of Peter Lorre.
Has anyone seen Jauja?
Louis: Had a feeling Banks would go up. :)
Your thoughts on Cinderella and ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Louis: Is Debicki still a 4 or is she now a 4.5.
Saw 99 Homes. Shannon was very one note but definitely would've been far more deserving of a nomination than Bale.
Louis: What are your thoughts on these films and their respective ratings?
Little Caesar
Public Enemy
Scarface (1932)
The Untouchables
I'm extremely pissed that this film got a nomination for Best Picture and Carol didn't.
Join the club.
I was a bit confused by this film, so by the end did Bale win and get what he wanted? if you get what I mean?
Honestly your guess is as good as mine.
According to Wikipedia, he did get what he wanted.
Robert:
Well that was one where I looked back at my rating and said wait why? Could not give myself and answer.
Anonymous:
Blanchett - (Nice bit of classic deviousness from her she plays it up just enough without going overboard, and her whole style is fits perfectly with the tone of the film. Plus to her credit she manages a bit of depth and pathos in there to that in no way alleviates the horrible qualities of her character, but does grant her a bit more depth)
Michael:
Gorevoy - 3.5(Actually really liked him the first time I watched the film as well, but did not stalk down his name. He offers such a deviousness in all of his behavior as everything he says seems slightly false yet always has this certain incisiveness. I particularly love the odd calm in his delivery when he basically lets Donovan know that he had his coat stolen)
Luke:
Cinderella wasn't anything too notable but I thought it completely worked as a fairly straight forward telling of the story. It looked pretty and was appropriately pleasant. I certainly liked it more than I expected to.
James - 3(She's appropriately likable and charming in the role. There's not much asked from her but I thought she fit exactly into the tone of the film)
Madden - 3(Get an extra bit of good feelings if you've seen Game of Thrones first. Madden though is nicely charming and felt he was genuinely moving in his scenes with Jacobi)
Jacobi - 3(Always should stick with Branagh I suppose. Again he fulfills what he needs to do, and adds a bit more in his scenes with Madden)
Carter - 2(Not much was asked for her, but I thought she over did it all)
Up to a 4.5.
Anonymous:
Noted.
Anonymous:
They did a terrible job at explaining shorting, wait a second they never bothered to. He got what he wanted. The film, despite the condescending "we'll talk slow" tone, actually made some things seem more complicated then they were.
Post a Comment