Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Emilio Echevarria in Amores Perros

Emilio Echevarria did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying El Chivo in Amores Perros.

 

Amores Perros is Alejandro González Iñárritu's remarkable debut that tells three intersecting stories involving love, betrayal and...dogs. 

The three stories in this film intersect, though I think Iñárritu makes a better decision here than in his later similar and lesser efforts of Babel and 21 Grams, to make the stories more of a piece on their own rather than constant cross cutting and chronological shifting. There is a little bit of that as in the first story we are briefly introduced to the central figures of the other two stories. One being Emilio Echevarria as just a regular old vagrant it would seem as he goes about his particular living. Echevarria, despite the brevity of these scenes, makes an impression with an innately captivating presence within his performance even just moving around his belongings, but also does inspire some pathos in just an excellent bit of acting from him as we see the vagrant passing over a specific obituary. Echevarria's reaction of heartbreak is moving in the moment and does make one immediately ponder more about this man, this as it follows along as we see him more attending the funeral related to the obituary, and just on the streets. Echevarria again is innately captivating here in creating the idiosyncratic manner where there seems so much more to the vagrant in his eyes, this as he seems to not be there, but rather actively observing in his own way. 

We finally get to Echevarria's story in the last third of the film. We find him living in his ramshackle apartment living with his group of dogs he lovingly attends to, but also as a hit-man for hire. Echevarria's performance is essentially then this duality between two sides of this man, and effectively pulls off the juxtaposition through the inhumanity of the man's living against his humanity outside of it. We bluntly see this in the car accident, that directly connects the three stories, where Echevarria's El Chivo is one of the first on the scene and takes action by "helping" one of those in the accident by robbing the man. Echevarria's performance in this scene is key as there is a lack of hesitation of any kind in the robbing, despite the man crying in pain the moment, and shows a man acting on this survival instinct in the robbery. Echevarria emphasizing that really the robbery is nothing to him. This is in strict contrast to a moment later where El Chivo attends another passenger from the car, a dog, who unbeknownst to him was used for dog fighting. Echevarria couldn't be gentler in this moment of treating the dog, his eyes filled with compassion and gentle care in every moment of attempting to deal with the dog's wounds then bring it back to his home for the sake of recovery. 

Echevarria's work manages to make sense of this juxtaposition as he naturally shows the man who lives the survivor, where he seems so blithe in every moment, particularly when tracing his next target for death, against the dog lover, or even the man looking at his past. In the latter two instances Echevarria reveals perhaps the good man that once existed within him as he portrays only the most earnest moments of care for the animals and genuine sadness in looking upon his old life that has past him by. Echevarria's work makes sense of this though by painting it not as the survivor versus the human, but rather the man whose lack of faith in humanity removes his own, while that can still be found within his treatment of animals. Echevarria has two amazing scenes late in the film that show the two sides, and what is so remarkable is that Echevarria makes them so different while coming within the same character. The first when he sees that the dog he was treating has killed his other dogs from his conditioning as a fight dog. Echevarria is wholly devastating in his reaction that shows his anger towards the dog, and but more so the intensity of his heartbreak towards all his killed dogs. Echevarria is amazing in the moment of anger in particular though in suggesting so potently the frustration yet still hesitation as he chooses to still not kill the dog despite what he has done. 

 

Echevarria naturally realizing the whole conflict within the moment, and so powerfully the humanity in the man when it comes to dogs. This is against as he captures his target and here Echevarria excels in showing the smooth and efficient seeming criminal. Echevarria bringing this certain sardonic humor, just as he also naturally excels with a command of self as a man who knows how to handle this task. This however takes an unexpected path however even in these actions Echevarria presents a similar spirit this in this quiet distaste within his sardonic asides towards seeming the lack of humanity in the men he has been tasked to associated with. After this decision though Echevarria naturally seems to bridge the two sides of El Chivo in this moment of rebirth where the man wears his heart on his sleeve, and we just see an investment in humanity once again. Echevarria brings this to life in one long monologue that is masterclass for him as in his delivery he speaks in every word a real sense of history of his loss, that he lost due to that change he has now passed, but also that palatable distress of a man who truly cares once again. This is a great performance from Emilo Echevarria as it is a turn that is compelling before we even know his character, but only becomes more so in his realization of a portrait of a man of essentially coming to terms with his life in most unusual circumstances. 

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Joaquin Phoenix in The Yards

Joaquin Phoenix did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Willie Gutierrez in The Yards. 

The Yards is James Gray's Mean Streets I suppose, though it might owe the most to On the Waterfront, this about the seemingly more level headed, recently released ex-con, Leo (Mark Wahlberg), who gets deeper into the criminal level due to his more unpredictable friend Willie (Joaquin Phoenix). Superior to his Little Odessa, particularly in what can be admired, though also similar it doesn't quite match its seeming ambitions. 

 

Now a flaw right off the bat in the film is found in the imbalance in the central casting, much like We Own the Night, where Joaquin Phoenix is in another league from Mark Wahlberg, though I think Wahlberg is better here overall. Phoenix, in what is both his banner and breakout year, delivers his best performance from his trio of turns in the 2000's. This as Phoenix delivers a fully confident performance here in the role of Willie, a criminal with certain ambitions who we initially meet as Leo's friend who is more than eager to get the man back into the life. Phoenix delivers the right confidence here inherent for such character and needed to convey his stature, or attempted stature within the life. Phoenix has that natural bravado and just manner of the man seemingly within his state, unlike Wahlberg's Leo who seems somewhat out of place, both intentionally and to a degree unintentionally. This is exacerbated by Willie's girlfriend being Leo's cousin Erica (Charlize Theron), who Leo is obviously in love with since Gray like many dramatists is clearly from Shelbyville. 

Phoenix though delivers what you would want from a character like Willie, and in many ways suggests his most potent elements as a performer that he would call on far more regularly in his most recent and remarkable efforts. That side of Phoenix though is here, though I think really realized in a fascinating way here as Willie because he does not make it the initial basic state. In fact he does create enough of a likability as the friend initially, there is enough of a charm he brings and just attempted endearing manner as he pulls Leo back into things. Phoenix delivers that vibrancy of the character and you get a real sense of the wannabe gangster in every moment. This in that you do believe his relationship with Erica beyond vanity, and even with it with Leo beyond that point. Although Phoenix doesn't hide the obvious bad influence that is Willie, he also wholly convinces us of his appeal. This as the little grin that Phoenix brings is just the sense of status as he makes every deal, but in his eyes though there is the further ambition that drives Willie. This quickly driving Willie to kill an associate at a rail-yard, while Leo gets accosted by a cop leading him to become accidentally the center point of the investigation, and here we get perhaps the bread and butter of modern Phoenix.

Phoenix of course doesn't disappoint in revealing the killer edge in hectoring the railway worker, in fact we see why he is such a tremendous talent in the moment. This delivering that incredible intensity of his with such ease, and in turn showing us the vicious edge of Willie without exception. Phoenix though goes further though in the nuance of the moment though showing as much as his killer intent is natural for Willie, in his eyes there is the sense of fear really with having gone beyond the pale. This made clearer in his conversation with Leo shortly afterwards over the phone, where Phoenix's delivery of screen is really masterful in that he grants this kind of perfunctory conviction in explaining the killing, while also still conveying the cracks in Willie's confidence as this criminal. Phoenix is wholly captivating in creating this conflict within the character, and in a way makes Wahlberg's performance's limitations all the more obvious. This as Leo's conflict seems so thin, while Phoenix just brings us this wholly tangible man in this situation from every moment. This as Phoenix never lets a scene merely be, as each moment he keeps alive the history of Willie's mistake from there on. I particularly love a tender moment he shares with Erica shortly afterwards, as Phoenix says barely anything yet you wholly understand the tensions just wearing down his face as Erica speaks of the future, and Willie can only think of the immediate present. 

Where an obvious flaw of the film comes in is as we follow between Leo and Willie both dealing with the fallout of the night, and one is absolutely captivating, while the other is less so. Sadly the former is less focused upon, nonetheless Phoenix steals the film wholesale in creating Willie's journey as he deals with his murder and tries to keep himself up within the situation. This is to the point that the success of a given scenes is maybe a little too dependent on whether or not Phoenix is in it. This is as Phoenix is so gripping in creating the complexity of the man who is largely morally onerous, yet not entirely. It is in that gray area (No pun intended), where he makes Willie such a compelling figure here. This as every point, including when the heat moves to Leo from him, Phoenix speaks as the man compromising however he never makes it so easy within his physical performance. Phoenix conveys the fear, the weakness, but also the actual concern in the man. His falling apart and turning on Leo, particularly as his relationship with Erica is revealed more obviously to him, I think honestly could've seemed more pedestrian if not for Phoenix's consistently potent work here. Phoenix as much as he in the end is playing the villain, never portrays him as such. His final moments of showing the man completely falling into despair within where his actions have left are genuinely heartbreaking. This is due to Phoenix's complex work that creates a detailed sense of this man. His flaws most certainly but also the humanity behind that weakness.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Stephen Tobolowsky in Memento

Stephen Tobolowsky did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Sammy Jankins in Memento. 

 

Back when Christopher Nolan's films had things called characters, we'd even have stories within the film telling a bit more about these characters, giving a novel thing called depth. That is the case here in Nolan's breakout film where much of the film we follow our protagonist Leonard (Guy Pearce) as he tracks down his wife's killer in reverse sequencing, however during this time we all see Leonard recounting his past earlier as an insurance claims investigator where he investigated a man who claimed to have anterograde amnesia, the condition Leonard is now suffering from. In short a condition where the person retains their past, however can construct new memories and instead is always attempting to understand where they are and what exactly it is that they are doing. This man who was just a normal man living with his wife (Harriet Sansom Harris), who is struggling with this condition as he tries to live his daily life. I think what one can highlight with character actor Tobolowsky's, most famous for his work in Groundhog Day probably, and to an even greater extent Harris's work, is the old adage of "No small parts". This as Jankins story is supplemental though provides an essential thematic element to the story, which is the simple humanity and tragedy of living with such a condition. Tobolowsky's performance shows the devotion one can bring to even a minor role, and in this we get this in Tobolowsky portraying a man in this state who isn't actively fighting against as Leonard technically is or think he is. This as Tobolowsky's performance is this one of a frequently vacant and confused look of a man. The only change being when he sees someone where this is this knowing smile, however carefully this preconditioned smile, not one for anyone in particular, but rather everyone in particular. Tobolowsky showing a man who just is in this constant state of being lost for himself and in turn unsure of everything in particular. Tobolowsky has two brief, yet pivotal, moments that speak so much to the real trauma of the situation where his wife can no longer can believe that her husband is so lost. In both moments Tobolowsky is heartbreaking in his reactions as he brings such an honest sense of confusion but also care of the husband trying to respond with whatever it is he needs to do, while not having the slightest idea. He delivers the right humanity to the condition, and speaks to a hidden truth that is within our central character's journey the whole time.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Lucas Black in All The Pretty Horses

Lucas Black did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Jimmy Blevins in All the Pretty Horses. 

All the Pretty Horses is a bit of a failure as a film, and marked the immediate end to Billy Bob Thornton as a potentially notable director despite his success with Sling Blade, though the film falters in more than a few ways in its tale about two cowboys who go through quite a lot while searching for work, I think one of the central flaws is in the main casting of the romantic leads (Matt Damon, Penelope Cruz) who are both dull and out of place within the style Thornton seems to be going for.

Supporting my point to an extent I think here is one of the few carry overs from Thornton's previous film, Lucas Black, the young performer who gave a successful performance as the young boy who befriends the unusual central character of Sling Blade. Black appears here, and again, despite being a little bit older, maintains that feeling of authenticity, notably missing from Damon's turn. Black appears a strange young man riding a seeming stolen horse who comes across the other two men of Damon and his riding partner (Henry Thomas). Black's performance honestly does seem out of a different movie, or perhaps the movie Thornton was unsuccessfully trying to make. Black brings an off-beat energy to his performance, though also distinctly feels honest to the setting and attempted style of the film. This as he brings this certain bluster that he plays just the right way, to be too much in regards towards how the characters see him within the film, but not too much that he becomes obvious within his own acting. Black finds the right elegant balance there, and has this right nonsensical, but also quietly endearing power to the role. Black makes his Jimmy Blevins, who rides on what seems like a stolen horse, a fool but a fool you don't dislike. 

 

Eventually we find him again as the prisoner of a corrupt Mexican prisoner, where he has been mistreated and abused. Black's work again is just engaging at a far more complex and interesting level then his co-stars. This as there is a real sense of intensity and even dread in the moment of finding in the prison. Black giving a sense of what the boy has been through, but also still a sense of the earnest seeming innocence that still exists in the kid. Black's recounting of the boy's story, in which he killed several men. Black's performance is terrific in this moment as he manages to create a sense of the kid's character as in his delivery of explaining what happened, Black is able to craft some sense of innocence even though it involved the death of the men. He delivers the right earnestness about even as there is this somber undercurrent showing the pain of the situation, while also showing more than anything the boy ran into problems as a fool not with maliciousness. Black ends up being quietly heartbreaking in his final scenes this as he still carries that same earnestness in his manner as the boy's spirit isn't completely gone as dire as his situation appears. Black brings a troubled optimism as he believes there's something for him still even as it is clear his captors have little interest in his side of the story. Black is altogether great in his final scene in portraying the moment of realization that he is about to be taken to be executed. This just physically showing the boy doing everything to try to fight in his escape, and being wholly devastating conveying the terrible sense of fear as he is taken off to his death. The last frame of his performance being rather haunting n showing the boy finally fully understanding where it is that he is going. Although it isn't saying much to say he's the best part of the film, his work suggests the path the film could've or should've taken, that feels this authentic tale of the modern west, not some glossy Hollywood nonsense that the rest of the film comes off as. Although I think Black is an actor who is often cast in the wrong films, glossy Hollywood nonsense, he's actually consistently good when given the right role with the material that serves his honest and unfussy presence as a performer.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Malcolm McDowell in Gangster No. 1

Malcolm McDowell did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the old Gangster in Gangster No. 1.

Gangster No. 1 remains a bit of an underrated gangster film about the rise of an English gangster in the 60's. 

 

Okay, let's talk category confusion for a moment, this as Malcolm McDowell plays the titular gangster and the leading character, however he plays the character only in the film's brief introduction, slightly longer epilogue, and through narration. The character as a young man is portrayed by Paul Bettany for the vast majority of the film, this resulting in an odd spot as McDowell physically is barely in the film, but portraying the main character. I though can only defer though to the placement I typically give to the older man recounting his younger times, like The Green Mile, and Life of PI, where I deign the recantour as supporting. I will note though if only it were so simple however as McDowell feels far more dominant and important than those equivalents. Part of that is there is a bit more of him, but I also think a great deal of it has to do with McDowell and just the impact of his performance. Not sure I can exactly say for sure where McDowell should be, but for now I'll keep him supporting...for now.

Anyways, let's speak to McDowell's work here that opens the film with his introduction where we see his Gangster on the top of the world, living the good life, smoking cigars, watching boxing, peeing in champagne glasses, anything that anyone could ask for really. McDowell seems to be aware that this is one of his best roles since his breakout, and bites into the role with great aplomb. This right in the opening scene where he carries this magnificent swagger of a man on top, even in his dismissing of the bathroom attendant he acts as some kind of benevolent King commending his servant. This is instantly twisted when it seems he's about to drink his urine soaked champagne, though stops to directly address the audience and ask "What do you take me for, a cunt?" which McDowell delivers with a malevolent glee. From the start McDowell is both what you'd expect, but also delivering something you don't expect. There is something innately unpredictable right from the opening, who goes from one insane act, to really a different one, and we know that his gangster isn't exactly someone we should assume too much about. McDowell then technically takes the backseat to Bettany who leads much of the film as the younger gangster, who we see rise from hired henchmen to much much more. McDowell's presence never leaves however as he recounts the tale through his narration. This led already by McDowell's brilliant accent work here, this as this minor cockney variation that is both lurid and blunt in the best of ways. His delivery of the narration throughout though is remarkable because it is one of the most active narrations you'll hear, in that McDowell delivers not just as this recounting, but this emotional detailing so often the nature of his gangster. Bettany is often a man of few words in the flashbacks, and it is through the voice of McDowell we truly come to understand the gangster. 

McDowell's delivery has this innate viciousness and really unpleasant, in the best of ways, intimacy about it as he truly pulls you into this derangement. There are moments where he speaks just lovingly, even nostalgic for his early success or his commentary on his hatred of including women's one life as though he is imparting some kind of wisdom. There is far more though within McDowell's delivery though this in an early scene where the young gangster is eyeing his rival, McDowell insistence at "look at me" is of this violent predator, a searing not even hatred but rather this insatiable urge for violence. Other moments though are of the explanation of the method, including one specific slow speaking his past's way towards a slow and brutal murder of the leader of a rival gang. McDowell's speech you can almost seem to hear the spit as he names the room numbers, and the directions. McDowell speaking eloquently yet wholly in this rapture of a man reliving seemingly his greatest experience as a self-envisioned apex predator. McDowell speaks to far more than just words and puts us within the deranged mind of the gangster as he speaks. This isn't a recounting of the past, but truly the way he experienced it all within his specific set of reality. And in this McDowell shows what is essentially different between the gangster and his original boss Freddie Mays (David Thewlis), who seems like he could enjoy life within his success, as brutal as he could be, and would even allow him to love someone else. McDowell's narration though paints anything else other than killing towards success to be nonsense. 

Of course, as shown by the opening of the film, the young gangster finds his way to the boss's chair therefore, according to him, the top. A way entirely painted with blood. When finally there this is where we return to McDowell with the release of his old boss from jail, and we stay with McDowell in person for the last 20 minutes of the film. McDowell is wholly brilliant throughout this sequence as his performance is nothing of the expectation, and in a way is not the continuation of Bettany and that is the point. Now McDowell carries himself with the expected swagger now of the boss, he's still a leery gangster, wavering his gaze to look at beautiful, brutally talk to his underlings, there's a slight change in that now he's the guy seemingly in command, and now much older, however this isn't the point still. When McDowell is asking an underling whether he's killed a man, and whether he would kill a man, McDowell is amazing as on the surface seems still brutal gangster talk, however the minor pause in his manner, and the certain stress on the man's face notes a man contemplating the concept in a way he has not before and couldn't have as his younger self. Still McDowell as bluntly speaks towards the same underling "Who says I'm not going to?" when the man inquires why the gangster hasn't killed him yet, but there's more going on with him. We see even more this when he goes to see Freddie's old flame Karen (Saffron Burrows), who was nearly assassinated with Freddie. McDowell is amazing in the same in the playful approach as though he feels he can flirt with her like an old friend. When she treats him as the wretch he is, McDowell naturally falls to the inherent cruelty, however there is more that is so potent in his performance. When he mentions that he "deserves love" within his rage, McDowell is oddly kind of heartbreaking as you see in his eyes there's a real pain in there even as speaks so cruelly. Even more essential is perhaps meeting with Freddie again, who despite having lost his power and having been incarcerated for a crime the gangster committed, seems to be enjoying his life much more than the gangster seems to. McDowell is outstanding in the scene by internalizing such distress even as he postures his power and anger towards Freddie. McDowell's performance as he tries to essentially break down Freddie, it is with this potent desperation and anxiety. McDowell playing with this need for the other man to admit his failures, or else what exactly does the gangster have? When Freddie desires nothing from all the gangster's ill gotten gains, McDowell's reaction is incredible by his expression shows a man whose fashion of reality is breaking, and in turn he is falling into such dismay over the issue. This leaving nothing but threats and anger, however McDowell always shows the shy man within it all. When he recollects his old killings that gave him his power, McDowell speaks not with pride rather this sadness over the fact that it really gave him nothing in the end. McDowell creates this fantastic duplicity between the man's realization of the meaningless of his life and his attempts to create meaning just through the most superficial and violent "achievements". McDowell crafting from Bettany's performance, this man who reveals his internal monologue of his youthful tunnel vision, but in the end also this tragedy of what comes from such a life of violence. The greatest scene that exemplifies this, and the greatest scene of his performance being his final one where McDowell is screaming all to nothing in speaking of his greatness with all this bluster on the surface with his repeated "I'm number one" that McDowell speaks with rage, but more so of a man trying so hard to convince himself of his success. This until his final delivery of number one, where McDowell face so remarkably shows a man who at last has this realization and acceptance that his life has been meaningless.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Song Kang-ho in Joint Security Area

Song Kang-ho did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Sgt. Oh Kyung-pil in Joint Security Area. 

2000 seemed just a year where Korean cinema was beginning to reveal so many of its great talents burgeoning with so many of their, now, most essential directors making their start, or continuing their start, and so many of the actors starting to make their name. One such actor was Song Kang-ho who, despite earlier wrongheaded comments on my part, deserves to be mentioned right along with Byung-hun Lee and Choi Min-sik, as the three best Korean actors currently working, and really three of the best working actors of their generation regardless of country. Song in 2000 actually had a particularly great opportunity to explore his range this with his two performances, one in the comedy, with a bit of drama, in Foul King, directed almost paradoxically by Kim Jee-woon, where he got to be a failed banker who becomes a wacky wrestler. The same year though he worked with another of the Korean trio in Park Chan-wook, with the excellent Joint Security Area, about the unlikely friendship between border soldiers from South and North Korea. Where Byung-hun Lee played the senior soldier on the south side, Song plays the senior officer on the North side. And in turn we get a dynamic between the two great actors that helps greatly towards the immense success of this film. 

Now with Song we get a completely different seeming actor from his other work in 2000 frankly as we see his earliest, chronological scene, where we get this calm, frankly powerful, presence of the soldier of a dictatorship. There's just this sort of innate no nonsense strength within Song's work that is remarkable in itself compared to his "silly" work in Foul King, Song here exudes a man who has this innate power of self and is wholly convincing as this career soldier. Although what is fascinating though is in his first chronological scene we get that presence, however we also get a brilliant subversion of it within his performance. This as he stands as the presence of the North at the border, however a visitor losing their hat, the Sergeant hands it back over, and just the slightly facial movement of a near smile suggests powerfully yet so subtly the man within the soldier. This is each of these earliest flashback scenes where Song brings the sort of command of such a soldier, yet what is so essential is the way he does these minor little indications to the real nature of the man. Even a moment of a threat to Sergeant Lee, as they both are at their post, Song delivers the threat with a quietly comical sentiment that makes the threat a true joke, and shows the man enjoying the potential connection with his sworn enemy. 

Song is expectedly wonderful then in crafting the chemistry with Lee, and the two actors with the privates who also join the other two in their border friendship. This as Song just crafts the chemistry with just showing the indication of the nice man beneath it all, openly with these moments of sincere and sweet conversations of the men bonding together. Song is great by playing these scenes really without reservations in terms of the humanity of the character. Even his physical manner delivers this way of the man being embracing and supportive. Song reinforces in every way of his performance just the loving man beneath the soldier ready and willing to get out. The man indicated by the earlier brief moments completely exposed for the joy of life seeking man beneath it all. Song does great work by showing really the confidence within this manner, and showing that as a soldier it isn't even exactly a repression, just a requirement as there is no hesitation in the man when given the chance. One small moment I love is Song playing with this speaking with a sharp determination to speak of his hopes for North Korea to develop proper sweets, though again Song showing really the Sergeant himself actively subverting the expectation of the type of soldier he is. 

Despite the camaraderie we follow as their nations' differences enforce themselves upon the group's conversation, and I love the way that in a way Song shows his Sergeant as the wisest of the group, and clearly the man who has seen the most. This as in each of his deliveries there is a blunt sense of experience and understanding the Sergeant. Song showing a man who knows really the truth of the situation at every point. This including the climatic moment, which the film slowly unwraps, where a North Korean soldier, who is not part of the group, comes in leading to a bloodbath. Song is fantastic throughout the scene as again showing the man who is consistently calm within the conflict, but also trying to be persuasive towards the others for calmness. There is such a palatable sense of empathy in every word that Song brings in his words, but also just in his manner throughout. He never loses that sense of decency even as guns are fired, and his expression of shock at the actions of the others are truly powerful in showing the one man whose decency cannot be shook by anything that occurs. This making just his moment of looking at the shooter of the scene with horror, Song is heartbreaking in granting the real sense of loss by showing the man who despite the circumstance never forgets that they are friends. This as even as the Sergeant takes action to help the men, who have killed his comrades and almost him, Song performs every moment with this intensity but also certainty of a man trying desperately to help his friends despite all that has transpired. This nature is even reinforced in the scenes that take place beyond the incident, such as early one where investigators meet him when he is unwilling to cooperate. Song shows the man putting on the tough soldier in displaying his battle scars, and just trying to ignore the situation. When they bring the two sergeants together again, Song is excellent in showing the subtle sense of recognition of the past so subtly, and then properly is all bluster when frankly putting on the facade of the angry North Korean soldier filled with hate. This is in stark contrast to his final major scene, which is a quiet yet powerful moment. This as Song speaks with a sense of regret for what happened, yet it is still filled with this incredible empathy. An empathy that Song wholly earns by always showing throughout that this is but the innate nature of the man. That as imperfect as the situation is, Song shows the good man who was only seeking friendship throughout. Although less overtly as expressive as Lee's powerful work, Song's contribution is essential in showing a man perhaps more equipped for what their unique situation, but only due to the unshakable nature of his humanity.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Sean Connery in Finding Forrester

Sean Connery did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying William Forrester in Finding Forrester. 

Finding Forrester is perhaps an overly straight forward, though wholly good film, about an aspiring athlete/writer Jamal (Rob Brown), chancing upon a reclusive though extremely famed writer with whom he strikes up an unlikely mentor-ship/friendship. 

Sean Connery's last decade of his active career is easily his least impressive as a performer. This decade was marked most frequently as a somewhat self-indulgent performer. After his Oscar win many of his performances suggested an actor who had nothing left to prove critically or commercially, so he just kind of coasted on his general charisma while calling it a day. This was certainly the case for his final performance in the properly maligned League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, but if Connery had ended his career one film earlier, he would've exited the profession on a performance he bothered to actually try. That being this film in Gus Van Sant's spiritual followup to Good Will Hunting, a film also about an unexpected young genius finding guidance via a bearded star, though to be fair there's more of a back and forth here, and Connery was bearded at most times post Bond. Anyway though, Connery plays here outside of the aged badass and instead plays a renowned literary figure, modeled on JD Salinger by being a recluse, having one age defining novel, and also an interest in baseball evidently. Connery's own presence is used well in the introduction of his Forrester, by basically an importance to character is naturally enforced because, well, it is Sean Connery, and he naturally makes an impact. 

Connery is playing into a type initially as the cold man with a past, though what I like here is that actually Connery nor the film dwell on this too much. We get a bit of exasperation from the aged man, and Connery delivers this well. He brings much more of an edge than we got in a lot of his 90's work, where he was often so Connery, it was a problem. That presence of his is here, but in his initial reaction towards Jamal, when he trespassed on him based on basically a dare, Connery's intensity actually reveals character and he's not just coasting on his remarkable presence as a performer. Honestly before watching the film I had imagined a little bit in my head the lazy version of this performance by Connery himself, this just as the exasperated old man who is harsh yet secretly caring. I think what I found special here then is one being the moments of exasperation Connery doesn't sugarcoat it creating a real sense of the bitterness in the man in these moments. What is even more surprising though is how much of this performance isn't that coldness, and really we get a genuinely warm performance from Connery. This in the moment of Forrester saying his limits, which essentially Jamal needs to largely not ask him about his reclusiveness, Connery shows an honest eagerness for connection with the young man. This as his moments of teaching are with enthusiasm and in his eyes there is the sense of the old spirit of the writer being encouraged by this young man's own talents. I mean the fact that Connery's delivery of "You're the man now, dog!", doesn't come off as ridiculous is a testament to the devotion he brings here, and makes just this natural moment of Forrester being playful with Jamal.

Connery earns the warmth here by portraying each moment of this as really this excitement within the act of teaching, and the enjoyment really of the life behind writing. Connery finds a nice balance within his delivery of Forrester's wisdom that brings both a sense of the fun Forrester has with imparting wisdom, while also the proper conviction to convey such a form of wisdom. Connery devotes himself here in a way that feels like prime Connery and through his chemistry with Brown creates a genuinely moving and endearing friendship/mentorship at the center of the film. There is that entertaining quality in the unlikely pair, but they are also wholly believable all the same. This to the point when Forrester pours out his trauma to Jamal, essentially his reclusive life is from the death of his brother, it feels like a natural progression and is helped all the more by Connery's delivery of the moment. He brings a natural vulnerability here that speaks to Connery's best work. He isn't James Bond in this moment, or some variation of the character, he's Forrester the writer hurt by his seeming failures. This as Connery conjures a genuine sense of the history in his quiet delivery of the monologue. A monologue that he paints not with big melodrama, but a quiet sense of a buried pain that has left the man anchored to such a singular existence. And again as much as this isn't a great film, partially through the plot progression that makes things a little too clean, Connery is always good. This being most notable in the film's somewhat contrived climax where Forrester needs to come out of his home to deliver a dramatic speech to save Jamal from a jealous college professor (F. Murray Abraham). Connery though gives credence to the situation through his performance. What I like so much about the scene is that Connery doesn't over play it, or just play it as pure passion, as he easily could've. Rather he stays with the character of recluse, giving some awkwardness to the speech at points, almost stumbling in moments, and bringing a degree of shyness befitting a confident man, but a confident man who has spent years speaking to few people. He plays the moment as William Forrester, not as Sean Connery. And in that sense this is that performance, that should've been his swan song, as it features Connery giving a truly devoted turn here one last time, one that speaks to his strengths as a star presence, but also his strengths as an actor.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000

And Nominees Were Not:

Emilio Echevarria in Amores Perros

 

Kyle MacLachlan in Hamlet

 

Malcolm McDowell in Gangster No. 1 (and to continue to contemplate his placement)

Stephen Tobolowsky in Memento

Sean Connery in Finding Forrester

Predict those Five, These Five or Both.

 

Joaquin Phoenix in The Yards

Lucas Black in All The Pretty Horses

Jeremy Irons in Dungeons and Dragon

Paddy Considine in A Room For Romeo Brass

Song Kang-ho in Joint Security Area

Alternate Best Actor 2000: Results

4. Denis Lavant in Beau Travail - Although limited by the film's perspective, Lavant still makes strong use of his unique physicality as a performer.

Best Scene: Final dance

3. John Cusack in High Fidelity - Cusack gives kind of the final sendoff of his romantic leading side, in a wholly winning turn.

Best Scene: A bit of maturity.

2. Sol Kyung-gu in Peppermint Candy - Although the impact of his work is limited by the film's repetitive nature, Sol makes a strong impact of a man slowly losing himself in reverse.

Best Scene: Opening

1. Lee Byung-hun in Joint Security Area - Although a powerful volcanic turn as per usual from Lee, but also a surprisingly heartwarming one as well.

 

Best Scene: Recounting the truth. 

Updated Overall

Next: 2000 Supporting

Alternate Best Actor 2000: Damian Alcazar in Herod's Law

Damian Alcazar did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Juan Vargas in Herod's Law. 

Herod's Law is terrific film about a low level civil servant sent to a literal dead end job as a puppet mayor in a small town in Mexico.

 

This film is quite something to say the least, and is the first collaboration between Luis Estrada and Damian Alcazar with Alcazar in a leading role. The role of this character actually begins a lot seemingly like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, as a political machine boss sets up a seeming simpleton to perform this political duty. Of course that is where the comparisons cease...mostly. This as Alcazar's performance early on actually carries with it this kind of earnestness that I wouldn't say is entirely unCapraesque actually, as he portrays the eagerness of a man ready and willing to do what he can as mayor. Alcazar is a very dynamic performer as is, this as he's one of those actors of a smaller stature who carries with him this large presence. The large presence here though is that of more of a fool than anything else, however a wonderful fool he is particularly with that earnestness he brings initially. This as everything he reacts to with this bright smile of the man just happy for his job and even more joyous at the idea that it seems he may have any prospect in life whatsoever at this point. At this point Alcazar makes for an endearing hero, of sorts, as he brings that energetic personality as we see Juan trying to make it in the town with his wife, and bringing as much gusto as he can to be the best mayor he can be. 

Before he can even settle in though Juan quickly sees forces against him with a local doctor filled with his own aspirations, to the local brothel owners who like things done their way, to dealing with a random American (Alex Cox, randomly though enjoyably) who comes across on the road when Juan is having car trouble. In each of these initial interactions Alcazar is great in coming with that earnest attitude eager to ease some sort of tension or make some sort of practical deal for the "good" of the village. In each though he finds people ready to exploit him in one way or another soon as they can think of it. Alcazar's performance then is one of this comical surprise to each moment of this. His moment of realization filled with a kind of disbelief but also humorous befuddlement in each moment he is cheated as each of the people quickly happily fulfill Herod's Law, which is to perform intercourse before intercourse is performed on you (to censor the film severely). As much as in his reactions there is comedy, that isn't all there is to Alcazar's work. This as each and every infraction against him, there is something in Alcazar's eyes of a growing spitefulness but also eagerness in towards accepting corruption related with this state. This as his grow with greed, and speaks with an even greater bravado of something more than willing to stain his morality a bit to get ahead. 

Alcazar's performance that becomes this fantastic type of grotesquery in many ways as he shows the easy embrace of the corruption, as much as he gets consistently slapped in the face even as he begins to take more than a few bribes. This as we see though finally a snapping moment with the spitefulness towards the other corrupt people becomes more overt and frankly he just starts shooting people without hesitation. Alacazar's performance makes this descent though this natural state of corruption as the man now shows the same kind of eagerness, however that eagerness is defined by the ease in which violence seems to solve his problems. This in his eyes bringing this palatable sense of desire for whatever he wants, though still maintaining some comedy in the outrage in his eyes each and every time things don't quite go his way. This crafting a real sense of the lunacy of his situation as the man just flaunts every morality to do what he wants, and Alcazar portrays a most vicious cutthroat quality that reveals itself as this state continues. Alcazar making for a wonderful fool we follow through the nature of Herod's law as he begins to be the one on the better end of things in his mind. This until the ending of the film where we get two brilliant dueling, yet supportive scenes of one another. The first being as the man loses his power again seemingly, and Alcazar's performance is fantastic as we see the old nothing civil servant reveal himself in his performance again, though now gripped in fear. This against though his actual final scene, which feels almost like a prequel to The Perfect Dictatorship, where the man now in true power lording everything. Alcazar delivering his speech now as a completely amoral man owning every moment of his speech as someone who absolutely believes in what he is saying, since now he believes in nothing at all. This is a terrific performance by Damian Alcazar as he brings us along a more unusual but wholly tangible dramatic and comedic arc from a foolish man to a foolish monster.