Best Actor 2023: Paul Giamatti in The Holdovers

Paul Giamatti received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Paul Hunham in The Holdovers.

The Holdovers tells the tale of boarding school students left over Christmas break, along with their teacher assigned to watch them during the winter of 1970. 

Paul Giamatti finally has gotten his due for leading an Alexander Payne film after his, to this day, fairly inexplicable snub for Sideways, which I'd argue was considered so substantial that it caused him to get a makeup nomination for his role in Cinderella Man the following year. Giamatti, though in his reunion with Payne as actor/director, finally earned his leading Oscar here for playing the much disliked teacher Paul Hunham of the prestigious boy's boarding school of Barton. A character that seemingly is right in Giamatti's wheelhouse, which sometimes there's nothing wrong with that. Although I think notable in that Giamatti is in no way playing his previous down on his luck Payne lead of Miles rom Sideways, Giamatti decidedly makes Mr. Hunham his own man. His own man being most similar to, in my mind, the great teacher character/performance of Andrew Crocker-Harris from The Browning Version as portrayed by Michael Redgrave, who also was a boarding school teacher of similar stature. A key point of that character is the teacher who basically fashioned himself through certain mannerisms that he accentuated to be a self-imposed caricature in the way he is viewed by the students. We find this in a similar way with what Giamatti does in the earliest scenes of the film where we see the Barton school on its last day before break. Giamatti's first scene of course comes in as the great grump with a lazy eye, and while it is something we know he can do, this is as good as he's ever been at being the grump. As Giamatti brings the wonderful comic ire of Mr. Hunham as he grades the student's tests with a dismissiveness that he presents as coming from years of being exasperated with the student's substandard efforts. Giamatti instantly establishing Mr. Hunham is not just a grump but really THE grump of teachers, who you seemingly just know are ready and wanting to fail you the first chance they get.

Giamatti's portrayal of the specific kind of teacher though immediately has nuance, though nuance you might not see on first watch but it is there, when he is immediately called upon by the dean of the school, a former student of his, to be informed that he will now be watching the holdover students over Christmas break, after another staff lied about a family illness though more accurately because Hunham refused to pass a student with important doner parents. Giamatti changes between two voices, not overtly, but subtly. Largely one is that of sardonic realism where he bluntly gives off his disdain for the dean, a former student of his, as carefully as he can while maintaining his job and more than a lot of disdain for the students. Something that I think Giamatti thrives by managing to do it in the way that is convincing of a very opinionated teacher where he manages to be both funny and appropriately pompous at the same time. There's something else though where he speaks about the expectations of the Barton students, there is an elevated way of speaking but there is genuine passion if only for a brief moment. Giamatti suggests perhaps what Hunham was like when he first started teaching in his firm belief in the Barton standard as personified by the old dean and clear mentor for Hunham. In that moment Giamatti does grant some idea of Hunham's genuine belief in there somewhere even as his basic state is that of more than a lot of ire for what he believes is the privilege of the unworthy. Something we see all the more when actually teaching, where Giamatti is full force with a confidence and disdain in his voice, where he is essentially playing the part of a brutal dismissive teacher, while being a brutal dismissive teacher. Giamatti accentuating the extremes of his Hunham brilliantly by showing the caricature he has constructed for himself. 

Hunham therefore seems to be the absolute worst person to run a vacation time for the students, who runs the holdover time still as an educational system of study even though the boys are supposed to be having fun. Giamatti chews wonderfully into the scene of describing his itinerary with the grandiosity of it as all some grand gestures that are helping the boys, though with the venom behind it not at all hidden as Giamatti puts more than a little bit of glee into it. My favorite moment probably being when one of the boys questions this treatment, and Hunham is too quick to remind them via a historical fact about the Romans bathing in the freezing Tiber river. Giamatti's performance of these historical facts is key I think to his performance as we see the progression of this. His earliest use of it, it is not as a fact he's sharing, even if his way of speaking is someone with the utmost understanding of this fact, but rather it is a dismissive confidence he projects into the fact in order to belittle rather than enlighten with it. Giamatti for me hits the exact right note with these scenes where he's naturally comedic, in that he is very much selling the humor of the character's overt cruelty in the situation, but doing so in a way that always feels honest to Hunham. Part of this is Giamatti's way of weaponizing the way of the man, but the reality is more so mixed in. Such as when Hunham first reacts to a fight between the boys with actual disbelief and annoyance that is much more low key, before then going into Hunham as the dictatorial teacher method with a very purposeful showmanship particularly as Giamatti devours every word of a potential punishment of library cleaning with a fiendish glee. 

This IS a performance by Hunham, even if one fashioned over years as a teacher as such, not unlike the aforementioned Crocker-Harris, as we see the first most overt glimpse of the real Hunham when one of the boys make a dismissive remark over their cook Mary Lamb (Da'Vine Joy Randolph) and you get a bit of just amazing acting by Giamatti. As his lashing in anger against the young man first is just raw emotion of anger towards the blithe attitude of the young man, but what's so remarkable about the moment is as he turns the initial real direct anger against the one then shifts it to a lesson to the rest of the boys about their privilege, Giamatti reverts back to the expected teacher timbre that is far less aggressive if still biting. We see more of this when he visits Mary watching the Newlywed game and they just talk as two people.  Giamatti's manner is very different, albeit in an understated way, although he's no longer playing up to the class, now he's just a man conversing with another person. This isn't to say that Giamatti suddenly becomes the ideal man, although even the negativity of the man is presented differently. When Mary cautions to go easy on the boys, Hunham once again speaks of all that they have, and you see a more intense, though quiet internalized bitterness where this is clearly something fundamental within the man's bones. When Mary asks him, as a former Barton student himself, if he had a privileged life, Giamatti's quiet moment of recognition has so much emotion in it even if for a moment. Although there is much negativity Giamatti is terrific in the scene actually by just the quiet empathy he does convey as Mary talks about her dead son, and naturally shows the warmth is in there somewhere. 

The film narrows its focus effectively when most of the boys end up finding an out when one of the boys ends up being picked up by his rich father leading to all of them leaving, except the considered somewhat troubled Angus (Dominic Sessa) due to Hunham being unable to contact his parents. There's a particularly interesting bit of work from Giamatti in a scene after this situation is created where he chats again with Mary and Angus is in the room. Giamatti isn't quite either version of Hunham as he's part being himself and just slightly putting it on still. Regardless Giamatti makes the most of a few moments, one where he notes not having been married with an over accentuation on his own attractiveness, which another moment later on, Giamatti shows a sort of defensiveness by Hunham almost overplaying the defense. His following statement of liking to be alone though is with a resignation that is very specific where Giamatti articulates a kind of determined thought, of some compromise that Hunham has made in his head to allow himself to live in his perpetually alone state by being "fine" with it. I adore the moment though where Mary asks where he would go if he actually left the area and the eagerness in which Giamatti says Greece reveals an instinctual passion connected to history, that even in his rather bitter view of the world, his love for history is still very much alive within him even if more than a little bit hidden. 

We get one final scene of the performative Hunham as he tries to reign in Angus who's fed up with being trapped, and Giamatti's good for a few more hilarious expressions in his strained attempts to catch the young man before his horrified face at when Angus injures himself in "the escape". Giamatti notably drops the sort of performance as Hunham as he reveals much more the real sad sack behind it all as he admits he's likely to be fired for Angus's injury, only for Angus to make up an excuse at the hospital to avoid anyone else getting informed. This leads to Giamatti easing up in portraying some kind of connection now, if limited at first. Giamatti shows naturally that Hunham can now be himself a little more. Giamatti's great though in not making it a switch without some difficulty as there's moments where he corrects Angus where he slides a little into the surface teacher Hunham, though they become briefer as the film proceeds. Giamatti though initially lets out more exasperation, just directly and in a more understated way as he would slightly closer to a real mentor though not quite. Giamatti's work opens up in an earnest pseudo connection which he doesn't make easy at any point. The connection initially is just less of putting on the defense and more so being himself, which often is as a far less than perfect self in front of Angus. 

An essential scene within the film is where Hunham, Mary and Angus go to a Christmas party hosted by the perky Lydia (Carrie Preston), a fellow worker at the school, who Angus even encourages Hunham to try to pursue romantically. I have great affection for even Giamatti's physical work of preparing before the party with a serious look that is both a mix of conviction and intense anxiety in a single expression. And Giamatti's great in the way he is able to articulate throughout the scenes the shifting of emotion of a man who clearly this isn't what is probably the easiest state for him to be in. And we see what throughout the film is always his way to often revert in social situations to his knowledge of Ancient history. Something that Giamatti always breathes a specific striking life, as the real passion of the man that you could even see as potentially something he could convey to his students even if he brought it to life in this way as we do see in these moments. where he makes the passion just a little stronger each time, as though unearthing from within himself. Giamatti mixes that in though with glimpses that come in and out naturally in his face of a quiet sorrow of almost looking for the situation to go wrong. When he speaks to Lydia about his past, Giamatti's fantastic in his way of speaking of real hardship in his past with a mix of nostalgia but mostly some sense of real sadness. When going off on his old passion mixing to a nihilistic view of the world, there's such a festering pain in him deep within the blithe statements of dismissiveness. Making his little smile when Lydia does encourage him, such a poignant moment of hope. A moment that is quickly crushed when he sees she's already obviously in a very passionate relationship, and Giamatti's reaction pictured above, is just absolutely heartbreaking because it isn't of shock, rather just this very sad resignation of a man expecting any hope of happiness for him to be crushed. 

But what the party does lead to is important words by Mary telling Hunham to try to actually make the abandoned Angus not feel unwanted. and much like Ebenezer Scrooge, Hunham attempts to make everything right Christmas morning. A grump to the better man transition has been done before of course, but what really matters is if a character and performance make you not care, which is the case for Giamatti's depiction of this for Hunham. In part because Giamatti beforehand did allude to the potential of something better deep down in Hunham prior to this point but also just how he acts the moment out of going about making at least an okay Christmas for the three of them. I love just the moment of contemplation before the choice, as you can see in Giamatti's eyes just the expression of just real empathy and decision. Then what eases it along is that Giamatti shows the effort in Hunham in a way where his eagerness is a mix of earnestness but also someone trying very hard to be earnest, which in a weird way makes it feel all the more genuine. The topper though being Hunham taking Angus to Boston to actually enjoy his vacation. Through this though we get greater connection between the two, something on one end I will get to more at a later date, though Giamatti is lovely in easing out a bit more warmth and just care in his interactions. An especially great moment is when Hunham shows Angus some Ancient pottery, where Giamatti delivers such an intense passion for the moment we see perhaps the most real fervent teacher of old that Hunham was at one time, who truly cared in every sense. Giamatti carrying this arc just in the delivery of these moments to show the real potential of the man he has long buried away. This is only topped by the following moment where Angus bluntly tells Hunham of the dire perception of him by everyone, where Giamatti's resigned recognition of that as the truth is incredibly moving in showing just the sad state of Hunham as he truly looks at himself without an obfuscation.

The real depth of connection comes at the end of the trip as Angus sneaks off to see his dad, who he previously claimed to be dead. Giamatti's amazing in this moment because you see in his outrage this time as he catches Angus genuine sense of betrayal, as though opening up as he has to the young man, for it to only be abused, as he sees it in the moment, is particularly painful. Earning then his absolute sincerity, and really relief when Angus reveals the truth to him, that his father is in fact in a mental institution. Afterwards when Angus reveals his own concerns of potentially suffering the same fate, Giamatti is just pitch perfect in the amount of emotional empathy he brings in every word as he not only tries to assuage that fear but also is so supportive towards the young man. There's almost a desperation in Giamatti, but not of weakness, but rather this desperate belief that's he's finally found again as he genuinely tells the young man he thinks he's smart and has a chance. Leading eventually to the final confrontation when after the break is over, where Angus may be kicked out for going to see his father, but Hunham instead chooses to lie to save him. A scene that 100% depends on Giamatti selling the moment, which he absolutely does because it has been such a long and difficult process to this point, and in Giamatti's voice you hear the weight of the connection and the real emotional connection he's formed in his passionate defense, that saves Angus's place in Barton even if dooms Hunham to be fired. But I actually think this is immediately topped by his moment with Angus, where Hunham reveals which of his two eyes to look at. His delivery of "it's this one", is such a pitch perfect bit of vulnerability in a way of truly showing unconditional affection for this young man. Which Giamatti carries to the final scene with Angus as Hunham is about to leave....a scene I think I'll save because I NEED to talk about both performances. And even without that I feel I've praised this work enough. As I absolutely adore this performance, which is at its base level is in Giamatti's wheelhouse but in the best possible way and as an expansion of it. He is a great grump here hitting the comic beats wonderfully well, but he's also so much more in creating this dynamic and truly moving portrait of deconstructing the uncaring teacher. That isn't about just showing the truth of the man within, but actually the man himself rediscovering that truth. 

Best Actor 2023: Jeffrey Wright in American Fiction

Jeffrey Wright received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Thelonious "Monk" Ellison in American Fiction. 

American Fiction follows an African American writer as he attempts to publish a new novel while dealing with familial issues. 

As much as we can all criticize the Academy it is hard not to feel more than a bit of joy in getting to see long overdue actors finally get their recognition, particularly for someone like Jeffrey Wright. Wright has been one of the great character actors since the 90's, who has proven his talent again and again, in a variety of roles. So regardless Jeffrey Wright being an Oscar nominated actor feels right, though what about the actual performance? Well for much of the film this is a rather subdued character within Wright's oeuvre, which are frequently more innately emotional or more stylistically intense characters. Where the character of Monk, as we enter the film, is an intellectual writer of apparently middling success who is put on leave from his college professor position due to his willingness to confront students. Wright grants the part the proper balance from the offset as it would be very easy to have overplayed the superiority of the character as the intellectual, whereas Wright manages to still convey that however in a way that is approachable. Wright brings a directness in his delivery, with that particularly wonderful voice of his, but in a way that conveys a certain convincing exasperation of someone who is fed-up with  the sensitivities of others, but also just might be a little fed up with in general. Wright conveys the state of the man as intellectual, but also a man who isn't exactly in the best place either.

And we find that to be the case as he is reprimanded for his candor but also reminded of his lack of published works by his colleagues, before being reminded of them again by his agent (John Ortiz) who informs him his most recent book still can't find a publisher. Wright hits just the right note in balancing a potentially insufferable quality of the author who very much decides what he thinks should be written and has perhaps an inflated sense of the importance of his own work with just also being a man we feel we can care about. Wright's manner conveys the affluent nature of the character and his stature, but he never goes over the top in this manner, like say Damon Wayans did in the very similar Bamboozled. The intelligence is just something he wears with definitely the ever critical eyes of a man who does believe him to be smarter than most, but Wright keeps a trait like this still understated enough that he makes a man rather than an idea of one. Of course this is essential as most of the film is centered around his Monk Ellison as he returns home to his family, going first to see his sister Lisa (Tracee Ellis Ross). And this is perhaps where Wright excels the most in this performance, which is just crafting relationships through performance. We are of course told plenty, but what makes it convincing is not what we are just told but more so what we feel between both actors. 

Wright and Ross are honestly great together because every interaction has this unspoken warmth in their connection that suggests the years of being siblings, which isn't to say this is at all just a loving pair. What we see, and will continue to see throughout the film, is that part of the Ellison's family dynamic is their constant desire to riff off one another regardless of the situation. And Wright and Ross are exceptional at portraying this in a way where even when they make some fairly harsh statements about one another, that sense of loving warmth is something even within those one liners. Their chemistry manages to even naturally obscure the amount of exposition in their car ride where we hear about Monk's closer relationship with their father, his degree of distance from both of his younger siblings and his theoretical "abandonment" of the family from having moved to California. It's a whole lot all at once, really too much as written, but it is to the credit to both actors that the conversation is naturally convincing in their interactions even if overstuffed. In fact Wright and Ellis's chemistry is so good, it becomes a bit of a shame in the scheme of the film that Ross exits so quickly due to dying from a surprise heart attack, as their relationship is one I would've liked to have seen more of. But they do create enough immediate investment that the following scene where Monk reads Lisa's own often comical eulogy is moving, where Wright manages to find a pitch perfect tone between showing the heartbreak of reading the words of his sister who is now gone to being quietly amused by her random comic asides. He expresses that bond beautifully, and as quick as the exit is, thanks to the actors, it does make an impact. 

Parallel to this story is the continued exasperation of Monk as he sees his books placed in the wrong section at a bookstore where we get my most hated of Indie film scenes, hassling minimum wage workers for something they have no control over. But forgetting that the bigger thing for Monk is seeing the success of another African American author Sintara Golden (Issae Rae), via a book that he believes plays into all the most obvious negative stereotypes of the African American experience, so Monk writes his book within that expected genre as a joke only to find publishers are interested in it. I'll admit the satire on rewatch wears decidedly thin, because it really does pretty much mainly reuse the same joke of white people being stupid, oblivious, pandering and still condescending all as fairly over the top one note caricatures. Whether it be the excited publishers or the excited director (Adam Brody), they are all saying the same thing of just being completely obsessed with the book immediately. And I do need a quick aside and just say filmmakers as a whole, not just Cord Jefferson, need to get better at making fake movies, as Brody's character's Plantation Annihilation, doesn't sound remotely like any film by a prestigious "issue movie" white director, even twisted to an extreme, it sounds like a trash tubi movie, so just do better in general. ANYWAY, Wright is the best part of this aspect in bringing more genuine comedy in his reactions of just growing exasperation and annoyance at the love of his writing, he believes to be terrible, only seem to give him more fame and more money. However the ruse goes beyond the book, as he's also tasked with playing the author of the book, the wanted convict Stagg R. Leigh. Wright fashions the "street" persona wanted by publishers where he puts on a false physical intensity mixed in with over the top voice of the "hood". This too is broad, but Wright sells it well as a man like Monk would fashion his own stereotype, creating an amusing caricature for a few different relatively brief scenes. 

Anyway back to the family drama, and if you thought that transition was sudden, just watch the film that doesn't all that naturally bounce back and forth between the storylines. But after the death of his sister Monk ends up being tasked with dealing with his drug addict formerly closeted brother Cliff (Sterling K. Brown), his mother who is suffering from dementia (Leslie Uggams), and the lingering memory of his father who had committed suicide, making one wonder if Monk's family really lived in Boston and not in fact the nearby Manchester By The Sea. Anyway what the film explores is this man who separated himself from his family and now has to deal with all of it at once. Where Wright excels is developing every relationship separate unto itself though convincing as such. His relationship with his brother Cliff is well realized also by both actors, as you too get the similar sardonic connection though I think what Brown and Wright do effectively is separate the chemistry from Wright and Ellis, by bringing a bit more intensity between the sardonic one. One liners that I do think the film over uses and misuses at times, and really just sometimes the one liners just aren't great. Regardless of their overall quality though Wright always delivers them with a real honesty, and timing, even when the joke is never going to work, Wright always sells it to the best of his ability. The distance and connection between the brothers is a given in each of their scenes together, where we see more than anything the separation is of Monk's ideal view of his parents against his siblings who see their parents as much more flawed. A concept that I think is a little underwritten in certain aspect, most notably their father's suicide that strangely seems like a muted point within the film. Where this is made up for is Wright's moments with their mother where Wright is terrific in just portraying a direct loving warmth with his mom, and shows no complication. Even when she deteriorates from her condition, Wright's performance is always as the deeply caring son even as his brother constantly expresses far more complicated feelings. Wright's performance in this relationship though works in presenting a lack of direct complication of the sense of love, even if in his expression Wright also quietly portrays the sort of contemplation in certain moments of essentially a man trying to entirely figure out what was going on with his family that he failed to see, or perhaps ignored for some time. Although the biggest challenge to Monk ends up being his sudden romance with a Boston moment Coraline (Erika Alexander), who honestly comes on to him. Wright and Alexander though do have a romantic chemistry that works by providing an understated honesty in their interactions which don't make this sudden intense romance. The romance rather is of two people who have been around long enough to maturely pursue it in this way. Monk though eventually is confronted by his ego when he finds that Coraline is reading Monk's own joke book and likes it. Wright suddenly accentuates every dismissive quality and sense of superiority in the scene as he expresses disregard in his attitude. Presenting really what has always been Monk, but really at his worst as articulates his thoughts as though only his thoughts matter. Of course all these threads are only sorta resolved, I guess, as even the film chooses to have it both ways or three ways really. But hey life doesn't always resolve, which is a lame excuse for a film if it tries to cover too many threads....anyway I don't dislike the film but it does have some serious holes in there. Either way Wright isn't one of them, in fact the consistent honesty of his work  as Monk through every tonal shift, every relationship, every scene, keeps the film together. While I wouldn't call it his best performance, it's a very good one from him, and writing Academy Award nominee Jeffrey Wright, just feels as it should be. 

Best Actor 2023: Colman Domingo in Rustin

Colman Domingo received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Bayard Rustin in Rustin. 

Rustin tells the story of the titular civil rights leader, specifically how he organized the march on Washington, a subject who obviously had much to say, unfortunately this film has very little to say. 

Colman Domingo has been making a name for himself in recent years as a reliable and dynamic character actor, so it is always nice to see such an actor get a chance to bite into a leading role. And Domingo seems to have a juicy role as the civil rights leader who is almost abandoned by his own people due to being a homosexual in their ranks. We open the film in a flimsy, seemingly quickly slapped together sequence as Rustin falls in and out of favor in the hierarchy of the African American rights movement, originally as one of the strongest proponents of Martin Luther King Jr. Domingo though goes head first into the part regardless bringing this sort of showmanship to the part as the man purposefully selling his energy, in this instance to sell the energy to King, and is successful in creating an immediate sense of charisma for the man. The poor writing here though hinders him a little as the relationship between he and MLK is supposed to be extremely close which we are just told in a quick snippet of the relationship where blunt exposition fails miserably to create a history, though Domingo is eager to try in expressing an excited warmth to be known as "uncle" Bayard by King's children. But just as quickly as we seem to hear so much about this he is quickly expelled for his homosexuality where we get a quick expression from Domingo, which certainly delivers on the weight of that disappointment unfortunately adds up to little more than a simple expression because we had so little build towards this moment, it truly just happens though Domingo tries his best to give it weight. 

Honestly so much of this film is a completely vapid surrounding a figure who should be anything but. Domingo's whole performance strives to not be the former, which on a technical level is impressive. The very expressive mannerisms he grants to Rustin that speaks to his eccentric but also electric personality are just naturally drawn by Domingo despite being overt. Domingo makes himself simply be Rustin in style and makes every eccentric way he presents himself as Rustin expressing himself naturally. The mannerisms are consistent and do amplify his character, in a way where we see how his big personality enlivens many but also is questioned by others, including those with most of the same goals. Domingo unfortunately isn't typically tasked with much after he crafted this characterization. We have two basic scenes repeated ad nauseam, the first type of scene are those where we see Rustin as the activist. These scenes are all pretty similar where someone has an idea or is being dismissed only for Rustin to come in to encourage the idea or to challenge that dismissiveness with his powerful candor. As much as these scenes suffer from just how little genuine detail is in there, or insight into the relationships of the people being "activist", Domingo is consistently effective in them. The reason being he does bring that energy even if selling the same idea again, the sense of passion, the positive manner of the man, but also the conviction towards his cause are all illustrated in Domingo's performance. Unfortunately these scenes rarely let Domingo go to the next step. We have minor variations, such as a scene of a spirited delivery of explaining how his group of police officer activists must behave, Domingo playing it almost as a preacher expressing enlightenment when describing the methods. We also have the occasional flashback of him being brutalized in his protests, where again Domingo does convey well the internalized fear of the physical pain believable wrapped within the conviction of his belief still in his performance, showing both the hero and humanity in the moment. Brief though are even these minor variations but Domingo makes use of the opportunities these moments do grant him. 

Where the film underwhelms the most is the depiction of Rustin's homosexuality, which has one of the most horribly written lines of 2023 where Rustin is told by a white activist that he's homosexual because his parents abandoned him as a kid. The "telling" rather than showing here is abysmal because of how unnatural it is among other things, but it also prevents Domingo from depicting Rustin's feelings of abandonment. Now despite the terrible writing there, the film isn't critical of his sexuality, though it also fails to develop it as a meaningful part of the man. We see two key relationships, one with a white man who gave up his own family to be with Rustin and a relationship with another closeted African American activist. Neither relationship has any depth, nor is there any depth to Rustin even being unfaithful to his partner who sacrificed much for him. There are just perfunctory moments of attraction, comfort and conflict. And there's kind of a strange passiveness about Rustin in these scenes as though both the relationship and questionable decisions within the relationship just kind of happen. Domingo does what he can but the simplicity of these scenes leave Domingo with little to work with in terms of engaging character development. Instead Domingo is forced to portray an extremely generalized version of a relationship related to just "caring" about both men rather developing either into anything truly complex or even just honest feeling. Domingo's frankly stuck in these moments because the material just isn't there for him to launch into any direction with his work. He just kind of maintains the same slightly uneasy expression mixed with empathy on his face. It never goes anywhere, and for what was such a fundamental part of the man it feels woefully underserved. I don't put this on Domingo, he plays the note well, it is just an aggressively limited note. He's never bad but it does almost feel like he's waiting to do something much more interesting than what the scenes ever grant him. Of course as underwhelming as these scenes are, it is not as though the activists scenes are inspired, and in away, I would say Domingo has a slight advantage in part of the reason he stands out in these scenes, is because he's the only truly good thing about them. But I won't diminish that because Domingo is charismatic in every one of these scenes, even when selling repetitive material. He's captivating in these moments even when the film is far from it. It only really offers anything new when he sees the NAACP show support for him despite the bad press around him and we see Rustin breakdown over appreciating the support. Again a well performed scene by Domingo in showing just how much the message means to him and letting it out the emotion with the sense of years of feeling ostracized. Even that though only feels like a surface scratch to what could've been explored though, because as much as Domingo sells it, it's not nearly as moving as it should be because the relationships even with the other leaders were so vaguely drawn up until this point. A moment that is a testament to the entirety of Domingo's work, which is always good, but also frustrating because what you see is the opportunity for something special that the film is always missing. In the end Domingo absolutely was the right man for this part, it's just a shame it had to be in this mediocre film. 

Best Actor 2023

And the Nominees Are:

Paul Giamatti in The Holdovers

 

Jeffrey Wright in American Fiction

Cillian Murphy in Oppenheimer

 

Bradley Cooper in Maestro

 

Colman Domingo in Rustin

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Results

 5. Sterling K. Brown in American Fiction - Brown gives an entirely good traditional supporting turn, where he provides the right dramatic and comedic chemistry with his onscreen brother. 

Best Scene: Talking to Monk at the reception.

4. Ryan Gosling in Barbie - Gosling gives one of the funniest performances of the year in throwing himself headfirst into Ken's journey in a mix between silliness and a strange kind of earnestness. 

Best Scene: "I'm Just Ken" 

3. Robert Downey Jr. in Oppenheimer - Downey gives an exceptional portrayal of the facade of professionalism slowly giving way to a personal vindictiveness. 

Best Scene: Outburst. 

2. Robert De Niro in Killers of the Flower Moon - De Niro gives a surprising and disarming portrayal of evil, where there's an ease and lack of hate, creating a particularly chilling portrait of a man who kills purely for profit. 

Best Scene: Final scene in jail. 

1. Mark Ruffalo in Poor Things - Good predictions Oliver, Luke & Perfectionist. Ruffalo tops this impressive lineup for me which included another very funny performance, but this one just took the laugh rate to the extreme as where Gosling was one of the funniest performances, Ruffalo is THE funniest. Ruffalo gives a convincing portrayal of a smug cad turning into a mad fool, but what's more important is every moment he's onscreen he finds a way to be hilarious in a way that only amplifies that journey. 

Best Scene: Duncan makes one more appearance. 

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Mark Ruffalo in Poor Things

Mark Ruffalo received his fourth Oscar nomination for portraying Duncan Wedderburn in Poor Things.

Poor Things is a wonderfully bizarre tale of Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), a woman reborn via an infant brain, discovering the world.

Mark Ruffalo isn't an actor I have always praised the most here, in fact frequently quite the opposite for his mannered turns like his previous Oscar nomination. Of course his Oscar nomination before that, and his work in Zodiac were also heavily mannered, and I liked those quite a bit, because it's not about if one is mannered, rather how they are. And with Ruffalo it also might not be if he's mannered, but who is directing him. As in those aforementioned ideal cases, a very talented director in each, and perhaps he just needs the right director to put his talent in the right direction. Well in the case of Poor Things, Yorgos Lanthimos is the right director for this job. Ruffalo here instantly makes an impression as Duncan Wedderburn the lawyer called upon by mad scientist Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe) to set-up the very specific marriage to surgeon in training Max (Ramy Youssef), and is most intrigued by this woman to be kept away from the world. Ruffalo's impression here is utterly ridiculous, and utterly brilliant. As one may question his absurd accent that is essentially the most ridiculous English cad accent fashioned in the style of something Peter Sellers might do at his most broad, and I mean that as the highest of compliments. Ruffalo doesn't just do the accent, he luxuriates in it. And if that were not enough, his whole smarmy smiling expression, even when setting up the legal proceeding is with the most wonderfully ludicrous sneer, and immediate lustful glance as he becomes intrigued by this woman. Only to walk off with his needlessly raised hands, but they need to be raised because it makes it all the more amusing particularly as he immediately pratfalls as he seeks out Bella Baxter.

Ruffalo only continues his hilarity as he goes about seeking Bella and conversing with her in his most unabashed manner where he makes his desire immediately known. And his delivery of "I'll have to pinch you to see if you're real" with just the utmost sleazy desire, that is also just perfect in setting up his not at all remotely hidden ill-intention for Bella. Ruffalo beautifully embraces the dumb in projecting the romantic, while obviously being just the lusting cad, towards Bella, such as when he invites her to her roof, where even just the way he glances around outside her window is worth a few laughs thanks to the ideal randomness of it. Ruffalo though isn't just funny, though he is that wholly and completely, as he delivers this sort of invite for Bella most falsely sincerity in his eyes only registering one idea, as he makes his overtures of romantic notions of seeing the world which Ruffalo delivers dripping with enticement. And Bella is granted the leave to go off with Duncan, though the idea is to eventually return and marry Max. Of course much furious jumping first as we see Bella and Duncan have sex every which way one can think are off in Lisbon. Ruffalo's comedic mastery here is something I can't get enough of with his delivery even of the most extreme smugness of Duncan as he denotes his sexual prowess which Ruffalo doesn't put even a hint of modesty. Ruffalo's delivery of "furious jumping, I love that" in his reaction to Bella's description of sex is just beautiful work of pure indulgence, only topped by his equally hilarious eye shifting when he ponders the limits of a man's sexual virility when Bella ponders why he can't keep having sex with her. 

Ruffalo is terrific in the way he effectively portrays the true controlling cad in every moment as even the way he has Bella eat pastries is as an indulgence where the indulgence is his teaching of her as he pleases with an emphasis on control. But for Duncan Bella isn't all that easy to control and we get another hilarious note for Duncan to play as he has to try to instruct Bella to be part of "polite society'. And Ruffalo's comedic timing again is perfection in his reaction to every one of her lines of portraying the unease and distress just pitch perfectly. Ruffalo wonderfully being the complete opposite of the indulgence before and just the right sense of the unease of the man as he fails to have any control over her. Ruffalo is as funny as he is, which frankly few performances make me consistently laugh as much as this one does, he is equally strong in still creating the sense of his character as he now tries to control Bella to the point he can. Ruffalo brings out an intensity in the desperate need to control as he instructs Bella to only say a few kew phrases that he wants her to say to be "proper" in his view, leading Bella to slap him. A moment that deserves special mention as a pure comic gold in first just how funny his face is mouth agape, then followed by the complete flawless timing of the slight delay with an eye movement before his purposefully phony "ow". Things only get worse for Duncan as Bella continues to be unpredictable, speaking of unpredictable, she leads Duncan into a dance that is marvelous, delightful and crispy insanity. Ruffalo's dance and expression being silliness on an epic scale rarely seen and rarely seen as complete wonderful madness. Ruffalo going in full force, no hesitation and none needed as he's just thriving in the ludicrousness of it in the best way possible. 

Things don't get better for Duncan with Bella finding more freedom including more men becoming interested in her where Ruffalo is just splendid in he manages even to play Duncan's overblown jealousy in a way that conveys the dissolution of the man's pompous control of the situation, while again being very funny. Ruffalo shifts instead to the emotional distress we see as the insecurity in him over not being able to control Bella becomes obvious...and this is also just still hilarious. Ruffalo's playing the anger with a boneheaded recklessness, but also even his emotional breakdown when Bella was talked into sexual behavior of another, the way he cries is convincing yet also ridiculous. Every choice of Ruffalo in a row being a big swing, but also a homerun. Leading Bella to become discontented entirely with Duncan's controlling nature, but Duncan tricks her onto a cruise ship. And again I could name frankly every individual reaction by Ruffalo, but I do have to at least single out his reaction to Bella hiding in the bathroom after a request for disrobing with his "jilted lover" head turn being just simple comic brilliance.  A brief second in his performance but what a second it is. And Ruffalo's increasingly pathetic state as Duncan continues into a marvelous mess, as we see him gamble and drink more. Ruffalo accentuating the sheer miserable desperation just oozes out of him in every scene, as this drinking and gambling seems to gradually remove any remaining sanity away. The tipping point being Bella giving his gambling winnings away, where Ruffalo's horrified and equal parts blistering anger being absolute genius work in showing a man being completely on an edge, while being this again in a way that is never not amusing. What is perhaps most impressive is that Ruffalo manages to go lower and lower, even though he's already pretty low, as they get left off in Paris where Bella turns to whoring. Ruffalo's breakdown somehow goes even further, yet never losing the path of his character, the comedy of it, and more importantly the impact of it. Ruffalo conveying this insanity in his eyes, an insanity as not only has he lost all control over Bella, Bella mentally controls him, even indirectly. Ruffalo brings this lustful obsession still while marked with a broken psyche and just a man completely lost in his mania mixed with obsession. Every physical movement, every expression on his face, creating vividly, and again hilariously, this state of a man whose whole command of even the smallest mental space seems out of his grasp. Ruffalo manages to tie so much within his work in having this physical state as though he's about to burst out of his skull, and his eyes essentially traumatized by his inability to remotely understand Bella, or how she's done this to him. Ruffalo creates a completely convincing dissolution of that confident pompousness of his first scene, to just a festering puddle of nothing as we see him rotting in a mad house. This would all be enough already for me to call this one of the most dynamic performances of the decade, and with an especially high laugh per second average, but just for good measure, let's throw in one more scene. That being as Bella is about to marry Max only for Bella's body/mother's husband (Christopher Abbott) appearing to stop the wedding, due to being told of the strange situation by Duncan. The scene is masterful for Ruffalo as every spiteful line delivery couldn't be slung better nor could his manner in the scene. I love how Ruffalo basically summarizes Duncan's pettiness and cowardice, as he hides behind Abbott, to only peek out to send out his insults in a rage, looking like the worst henchmen, and doing it all as just one last bit of comic glory. And just another example of Ruffalo looking for any excuse to be hilarious in a scene, and succeeding for every second of it. In case it wasn't clear, I loved every second of this performance where Ruffalo delivers the most winning tight rope act in his portrait of a man intending on making use of a woman as he pleases, only for him to be turned inside out by her in the process instead. 

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Robert Downey Jr. in Oppenheimer

Robert Downey Jr. won his Oscar from his third Oscar nomination for portraying Lewis Strauss in Oppenheimer.
 

Sometimes it is all in the casting, or at the very least casting can provide an immediate shorthand if not innate dynamic which the audience can identify within a certain actor. And Robert Downey Jr., who was featured little in much of the promotional material for the film, has the second most screen-time out of any actor in the film, providing a deuteragonist which allows for the one firm alternative perspective from J. Robert Oppenheimer (Cillian Murphy)'s own personal perspective. And what is the most familiar presence that Downey is known for general audiences at this point? Well likely Doctor Dolittle, but more likely I suppose, is Tony Stark aka Iron Man of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And who is Tony Stark, an arrogant, but also goodhearted genius who is a hero through and through. And that is where Christopher Nolan utilizes the outset of Lewis Strauss by placing Downey in this role. As we open the film with Strauss as a nominee under President Eisenhower for secretary of commerce, Downey comes into the film with a very specific choice in the amount of charisma he uses to realize Strauss. Downey of course has charisma to spare, being of the most charismatic actors on and off screen currently, so what we have here is a purposeful regulation of that to be more fitting to who Strauss is as a person. That isn't to say Downey rids himself of that charisma, in fact he uses just enough of it to immediately disarm you about Strauss in the opening scenes of the film, that he makes Strauss seem likeable enough. There's a slight seeming self-effacing quality as he talks to his aide (Alden Ehrenreich) about his relationship with Oppenheimer as just a professional relationship any other, if not even some sense of pride in the association before we flashback. 

The first flashback between Strauss and Oppenheimer is key to the film but especially essential to Downey's performance as Strauss, where Strauss is attempting to get Oppenheimer to take a position at Princeton. And the first scene is where Downey is creating the man we see and the man we come to know. A scene where every interaction is of Strauss attempting overt cordiality to get Oppenheimer into the position and seemingly every response by Oppenheimer being some slight rejection or accidental insult to Strauss. And Downey on the surface is putting on the reduced though still very present charm with every delivery being an invitation for good feeling towards Oppenheimer, which is somehow dashed each time. And in every statement that Downey makes is eager and wanting to make a connection overtly, there is more going on with his performance that will establish what will in fact be the real relationship between the two. And Downey's fantastic in this way he begins very subtly in the dismay of this as even his correction of Oppenheimer's mispronunciation of his name there's just a hint of annoyance as is his correction that he is also Jewish regardless of pronunciation. His moment of needing to state his lack of being a physicist and a self made man with a little more internalized frustration. And the moment where they do seem to make a connection about Einstein's Theory of Relativity, there's a genuine smile on Downey's face before allowing a modest remark of choosing to sell shoes instead of training in physics. But the biggest blow then is Oppenheimer's response to call Strauss a "Lowly shoes salesman", though in fact probably a statement of admiration in a way, Downey's delivery and reaction of "just a shoes salesman" speaks volumes of the very real dismay at the comment. Only for one more insult as he still puts on a smile as the prospect of getting to introduce Oppenheimer to Einstein, only for one more blow as Oppenheimer bluntly states he has already known Einstein for years, and Downey's glare at the two meetings without his intercession shows the real seeds of bitterness quietly. But overtly Downey just shows a more general frustration of a man just hoping to get Oppenheimer to work with him. A brilliantly acted sequence by Downey because he manages to give it all away about Strauss in the margins, while not overtly giving any of it away.

Chronologically the next we see Strauss and Oppenheimer together are as members of the Atomic Energy Commission, of which Strauss was chair and Oppenheimer a key member. And there are two key scenes, the first seemingly a small but important one in a hearing where Oppenheimer again humiliates, perhaps more intentionally though perhaps not as maliciously as Strauss believes, Strauss by showing his expertise over Strauss on isotopes, and again Downey plays two shades at the same time, one being just the gentle modest smile of man accepting a hit, and the eyes where a hostility is ever growing. The second scene is more fundamental where we see a group meeting between the members over the discovery of the Soviets having successfully tested their own Atomic bomb, therefore leading to both questions about security on the creation of the original bomb and the potential of creating the Hydrogen bomb. And Downey's great in the scene by again playing two sides but playing two different sides in this instance. On one end he's bringing the passion of a potential lead of a different film, that Strauss might've written himself, as a man intensely dismayed at this outcome with a real fervour in his voice to make sure his country's safety is secured. His eyes convey a man with this belief and determination of someone who is ready to do what it takes in doing what he believes is the right thing for his country. BUT, Downey also accentuates parts of lines that skew towards some pettiness towards Oppenheimer, some direct passive aggressive emotion, not overtly but part of it. And within his delivering creating the moments not just of disagreement over policy but directed anger towards the man. Downey creates the duality effectively of just the man perhaps concerned genuinely for what this development is, and the man who just hates the man who seems to belittle him at every turn, even if largely unintentionally. 

The framing device of Strauss follows his testimony before Congress for his potential appointment and we see the phases of essentially what Strauss presents to the public. And Downey initially again seems humble, funny even in his way of being more than willingly to accept merely knowing the great man of Oppenheimer, speaking about this relationship with almost shades of nostalgia. When questions continue over his potential part with the security clearance inquiry for Oppenheimer, Downey plays just this befuddlement of any idea that he could have anything to do with it. Presenting as the trustworthy Downey one would expect from the day of Tony Stark, even his way of saying "he's easy to blame" is just waiting for someone to say "no you're not". Downey though shows the facade slowly breaking first in his idea of saying he fought Oppenheimer and "the US won" though this as just an imagined almost playful idea. But again Downey again alludes to a break as he comments on who the scientist who might be testifying on the matter of Oppenheimer may be, as first asking if Chicago, again as just curiosity seemingly sincere just to find out, but then proceeds to mention Los Alamos, Downey again is doing clever way of just barely holding the bile in as he notes those scientists to be in the "cult" of Oppenheimer, but just a little bit at the end of the sentence. And through this though is revealing in plain sight that Strauss has always been the man who undermined Oppenheimer, something I knew before going into the film, but still found it wonderful how Nolan utilized the presence of Downey to craft this twist. And it isn't just presence, though it starts there and Downey knows how to use it to create the wool to blind you into believing Strauss as the innocent man of circumstance, but also how Downey blend that with the real truth of the man throughout the film. 

 

Downey creates the effective double meanings to every action of Strauss between the phony surface and the real. A fantastic moment in this regard when Strauss is revealing to an already down Oppenheimer that one of his scientists was a soviet spy. Downey puts on the perfect face of a phony sympathy while in his eyes loving every minute of the humiliation of the man, and just holding back the slightest smile that he just barely keeps inside. And when we see the truth of the man orchestrating this attack on Oppenheimer, Downey shifts completely to the master politician in his performance, detecting every movement as the master tactician with an ease of every manipulative suggestion and a determination of a different kind. No longer the man who is confused by the accusations or humbled by his connections, but we see the true ego of the man displayed with an intensity in his vindictiveness in every decree. But the other true side of the man we see even more bluntly as it is clear that his nomination will not come easily or at all, and Downey explodes in a moment his performance has been leading to throughout the entire film through every single instance of the quiet bitterness and the hints of pettiness that come to a climax. It all comes out in his portrayal of anger, which is outstanding work by Downey. The reason it is great is because Downey isn't conveying a single type of outrage at Oppenheimer. There's self-righteousness as he denounces Oppenheimer's moral faults surrounding the bomb, there's jealousy in every word as he mimics Oppenheimer's words as false, there's personal bitterness as he so venomously notes that Oppenheimer turned the science community against him, but most of all it is a near petulant manner of the most fragile yet oversized egos in his nearly breaking voice. Where Downey speaks the heart of all of it, is just feeling slighted and never being able to be the "great man" so many viewed Oppenheimer as having been, as he speaks it with indignation but also a sad resignation all the same. Downey delivers one of his best performances. It goes beyond a return to being more than Tony Stark for him once again, as the measured restraint he utilizes properly builds towards this most explosive finale (no pun intended). Crafting a dynamic unwinding of a parallel portrait for Oppenheimer of a man not haunted by his ambition as the titular man, but rather haunted by his failure to coexist with such a man.  

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Robert De Niro in Killers of the Flower Moon

Robert De Niro received his eighth acting Oscar nomination for portraying William King Hale in Killers of the Flower Moon. 

Killers of the Flower Moon follows the story of the murder that transpired around the indigenous Osage nation after they had become unexpectedly wealthy from having discovered oil.

I will admit coming into the film I pretty much thought I was going to know how Robert De Niro was going to approach the role of William Hale, one of the most evil men of history, and to the credit of the great actor he instantly surprised me the moment his nephew Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio) stepped on his estate after having returned from being a soldier in World War I. The first being De Niro's accent, which in the tricky mid-west to southern regions it is easy to become overwrought very quickly, perhaps even a co-star of his is, and maybe even De Niro fell to this trap in his last Oscar-nominated Scorsese turn, but here De Niro's work is on point. De Niro's accent not only makes him simply fit the setting of Oklahoma it also oddly disarms you within the character. As De Niro's accent isn't just of the period, of the area, it is also surprisingly welcoming innately. There's an ease in his voice that seems to want to invite everyone into his good company, not just his kin even, he appears to be the man of the people everyone says he is within the story early on, not the monster that you'll learn he is throughout the film. Take the first scene, where yes Hale is welcoming his nephew back, but De Niro's whole demeanor is just exuding a generous warmth towards him, but just also seemingly to the world as he tries to accentuate every positive in Ernest's story of war, which mostly involved feeding other troops and almost dying of a burst gut. And on rewatch De Niro is simply brilliant here in what he is doing, in actually immediately creating the full intention of Hale even as he seems like just a man being happy to see his nephew again. But when going through specific motions about Ernest's prospects, De Niro eyes shift towards a more incisive stare at times, and you can almost see the calculation in his head processing what value the nephew may have for him. 

The surprise of De Niro's work resonates even more towards the scenes where we see Hale in public. And in public De Niro exudes a charisma that is so specific to period and kind of the time of this man about the community. And part of this creates the suspect in plain sight because his performance is so much as seemingly a good man, but the thing is, which is the choice I find the most fascinating, is this isn't entirely a facade as played by De Niro. Not just because he's convincing either, which De Niro is, as take this as a different film, remove some scenes obviously, and you'd think that Hale was merely the wise old man who everyone can trust. In the sequence where Ernest marries the Osage woman Mollie (Lily Gladstone), who is heir to a substantial fortune, De Niro is, for the lack of a better word, lovely. First in his advising Ernest as he'll be married with frankly a sweet sense of encouragement, then at the wedding where Hale reminisces of seeing Mollie as a little girl, his eyes are filled with nostalgia, his manner as a man just encouraging love, because De Niro's delivery is with this earnest quiet conviction and more than that the surprising warmth about the man. De Niro from the outside perspective doesn't leave you any room to even suspect the man would be anyone but a good man. When the man is stating his own claim to support the Osage when they offer a reward money to discover the perpetrators of the local murders, De Niro appears to be absolutely sincere though with this specific accentuation of "come see me", where De Niro couldn't be more inviting. His big speech to the support of the whole nation in the moment, De Niro's eyes glisten with optimism, hope and affection. He seems like a man who genuinely, absolutely wants to help. And historical spoiler alert, I guess, Hale is the mastermind behind all the murders.

De Niro's choice in respect to the outward Hale and the inward Hale though is I think the genius of this performance. Because here's the thing, within the way De Niro expresses this it isn't entirely a facade, even though Hale is actively advocating for the murder of multiple people. Therefore part of him is most definitely lying in terms of the wanting the killers found, however De Niro doesn't entirely portray the hospitality of Hale as completely false. Partly this is because the man is truly disarming as he speaks and you wouldn't immediately suspect him so there is the completely successful ruse as such, but De Niro I think gets to something more insidious within Hale through this approach. De Niro does not portray sadism in Hale towards the people he's killing, in fact he only shows them warmth, and for me the twisted brilliance of his performance is that Hale isn't lying entirely. Rather De Niro presents a man who loses nothing in his warmth, but the warmth isn't something that keeps him from orchestrating the murders. De Niro though presents Hale as treating them as merely obstacles to him, and as such their deaths are meaningless, while also not having the meaning of even hate to them. He can say he "loves" them even, even as he says it's time for them to die, because De Niro accentuates that it is all just merely something that needs to be done for his benefit, which is merely the profit from the murders. There isn't a single scene where De Niro voices a hint of venom to the natives, he saves that for Ernest, but rather leaves it to Hale's actions. And as odd as this seems, Hale is truly vile by showing a man who is entirely detached from it. De Niro expresses in his performance that killing the natives is something to happen, Hale has no ill-feeling towards them, but he also has no ill-feeling towards their deaths either. It is just merely a step in his horrible plan. 

De Niro's choice to create a charismatic villain for the piece not only is dynamic, it is particularly essential because so much of the film he needs to carry the scenes featuring Leonardo DiCaprio. DiCaprio's very mannered performance falls into the category of many of his Scorsese directed performances, which is going off on the wrong end. I actually find that DiCaprio's performance, while in itself not ideal, is made worse by his influence overall on the film which is centering on Ernest Burkhart as the main character. And while I had reservations the first time in this regard, it was only exacerbated the second time around for two main reasons. One, there isn't anything interesting about Ernest. You can have a fool as a main character, but you either need a fool with more going on or just briefer runtime. Ernest is a big nothing, whose motivation is simple and his conflict feels frankly false. What does make this even less ideal is DiCaprio's performance, and I'll say this is a constant for me with lesser DiCaprio performances, where his more obnoxious choices grate on me the more times I watch the film. As I can kind of ignore it the first time but it is hard to keep ignoring his needlessly attempted showboating the second time, similar was my response to Gangs of New York and Shutter Island. And DiCaprio's choices though just stick out for the worse, in just his over the top choices to make Ernest as a cretin, with a ridiculous grumpy cat face of conflict for no reason, and an overdone accent to make sure you know he's playing this low class man of the west and not Leonardo DiCaprio. But in a film where just about everyone else feels just so authentic, he sticks out like the sorest of thumbs, until I guess he gets to share a scene with Brendan Fraser. And just spending time with Ernest became even more of an arduous time, because he's just not interesting on any level, and even the attempt to show the pull between loyal nephew and husband, just feels forced. I didn't mind getting through it thanks to nearly every other element, which I still love, but having to go through his pointless tomfoolery the first time was when I did think, "this could be trimmed down" but over again, made me really think "most of this could be cut". And as a film that is just as an overall tapestry of the murders with different characters of equal importance, that could've been the complete masterpiece, as opposed to this film which has qualities of a masterpiece but is not one. 

Anyway back to De Niro, and the reason I gave that brief review is in part to praise De Niro more, because his performance kept me engaged in his scenes with DiCaprio, almost in part as it was very easy to enjoy his scenes of being semi-comical in his berating. And I will say I do quite enjoy his "now don't swear on your children, it makes you sound foolish", which is a well realized bit of pitch black comedy on his part. And it is in his scenes with DiCaprio where De Niro does implement the true evil of Hale, though still not again not quite in the way you might expect. As we return to the calculating stare in his scene of greeting Ernest, and it is in his eyes where De Niro expresses the truth of Hale. As part of his eyes isn't again looking with hate, towards Osage, but rather this chilling sense of eager opportunity. The true full classic De Niro intensity, is largely towards Ernest's idiocy, where we see the vile evil of Hale. Although De Niro carries this, most strikingly often in just a slight switch of his look to a glare that speaks of the true killer nature of the man. De Niro implements this intensity only in the moments where something may threaten his eventual profit. De Niro there reveals the truth to Hale's want which is purely for the greed of it, and it is only when something gets in the way do we see the real menace of De Niro. A menace that he presents with the expected ease, though specifically weaponized and you do see the hate in the man, though the hate for any idiocy that will get in his way. And what De Niro essentially crafts is a businessman who is treating this whole affair as a business agreement, and much like a businessman, everything is smiles and joyful good feeling until something gets in the way of profits. As even when dealing with the FBI investigating him, De Niro brings that graceful charisma who eagerly greets the agent, though still with the angle of working the man as he ponders if there's anyone he might be able to influence behind the investigation. De Niro though showing a man working a deal, and working a deal with outsiders, the man must always put on the good face of business. I love the sequence of him going to his own arrest, and frankly I think De Niro kind of purposefully evokes his 70's cohort Robert Duvall in the specific way he carries himself in the scene, with this generous spirit as he essentially laughs off the murder charge as an impossibility. As do I his final conversation with Ernest, where Ernest says he's going to testify against him, and I'll credit it as one of the few scenes that DiCaprio doesn't detract from by easing back a little bit. De Niro is outstanding in the moment because it is a true blend within his performance. As De Niro shows the greatest struggle in Hale to maintain his face in semi-public of the investigator, where his face is hardened with that intensity but he's just barely maintaining cordiality, though explaining with chilling disregard that people will just forget about his crimes. And ending with his final words being back to the pure jovial face of the man in his delivery of "I love you son" as one final "sell" to change Ernest's mind. And this is yet another great performance by Robert De Niro, though one that again truly took me by surprises with some of his choices, and wholly won me over with each of them them, in his disturbing portrait of a man whose business is genocide. 

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Ryan Gosling in Barbie

Ryan Gosling received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Ken in Barbie. 

Barbie follows the story of Barbieland as one set of Barbie and Ken venture into the real world. 

In the story of Barbieland there are many Barbies though the focus on the center of it all is stereotypical Barbie as performed by Margot Robbie, where her "companion" is technically Gosling's Ken as stereotypical Ken who performs the job of beach, which is to hangout and "do beach" though not actually anything involving water or a general thing known as work. Ryan Gosling seems already well cast as Ken by just more or less looking like a Ken doll, only requiring much more blonde hair in this instance to fully embrace the reality of being Ken. And what is there really to Ken as a character here? Well perhaps the most, but what Gosling does in the role in the first half of the film is "be funny", which sounds simple yet can be the greatest challenge of all. And I'll say even more challenging at times is when the silliness is ever present in the tone of the piece. As when everyone is goofing around being a little silly so how does one stand out? While just simply being the best at it. And as great as Gosling can be at internalized emotionally raw performances, he's also quite capable of extravagant ridiculousness. And what does Gosling do here, well basically what his performance is doing is looking for any excuse for comedy, and has much conviction in that. And Gosling proves himself to be an expert as such as just take the initial moments of Gosling's frustrated reactions as Robbie Barbie is distracted. Gosling has a particular brilliance here in always conveying what the character is going through just being funny when doing it, as here he sets up Ken's frustrations and the looks he gives about them are hilarious. Or his manner after attempting to go headfirst into a solid wave, Gosling's injured face is hilarious, his way of so meekly saying everything about his position as doing beach is proper comedy, his little petulant though also sweet smile when Barbie pays more attention to him is also funny, while also establishing his state of perpetually looking for any attention from Barbie. 

Gosling finds wonderful comedic variation that keeps Ken consistently fresh and importantly just funny in each interaction as early Ken, Barbie is just barely putting up with. And Gosling's performance is both over eagerness and a bit of a subversion of that eagerness. As towards Barbie it is always with a bright smile he looks at her with and every delivery of his with a bit of a baited breath hoping she's going to see him as more than the status quo, while outside of that Gosling bringing this desperate sneering anger when Barbie pays any attention to anyone else including alternate Ken played by Simu Liu. And it's all very funny while also establishing Ken in his state of need, which ends up attempting to help Barbie as she journeys to the real world to solve her existential crisis. Where again Gosling thrives in just his delivery of every line with that certain foolhardy enthusiasm when talking to Robbie. When asking him if he has his roller skates for example, and Gosling replies with the most sincere affirmation. When we get to the real world, where both find it isn't at all as they expect, their reactions are quite different with Ken becoming intrigued and Barbie getting lost. Gosling though is terrific in just making the most out of his reactions, as his eyes widen with excitement every time people notice him and he just exudes this unabashed joy at this whole new world that sees him. And special mention does need to be made out of the pictured image that symbolizes the first half of Gosling's performance. In that Ken getting his picture taken by the police could've been mildly amusing, but it is far funnier because of the extreme level of joyful silliness he manages to contain in a single ridiculous image as Ken poses for the image with as much joy as possible. And that's Gosling role of just bringing that conviction to the silliness in a way that works, he even convinces of Ken's naive acceptance of the patriarchy when presented to him, where Gosling's eye opening fascination is pitch perfect, as is then his most directly faulty delivery as he tries, and fails to get any job with this newfound sense of self-worth. And I would say some of these moments are fairly easy jokes that I might've not even liked if not for Gosling's delivery of them where he just believes in this Ken so convincingly that he makes even a lesser joke far greater through sheer will. 

We then shift to the next phase of Gosling's work where Barbie returns to Barbieland where Ken has transformed it with all the women subservient to the men due to Ken's exposure to the patriarchy. And Gosling shifts his comedic energy slightly as he plays this kind of nefarious quality as the mix of bitterness towards Barbie's lack of attention to him, while also now just owning his new philosophy. Gosling's performance switches particularly in his physical work, which is more aggressive and more grandiose within Ken's over the top full 80's Sylvester Stallone attire. And again Gosling owns it with confidence at certain moments, like putting on two sunglasses is a silly gag, but again what makes it funny is that Gosling's certainty and faux seriousness as he goes about each glasses sells the moment. Gosling successfully becomes this villain of sorts, while comedically as such, and that is both as the now dominating man brandishing his new found power, but also his outrage towards Barbie. Where Gosling's way of screaming out his distress is quite amusing in itself, and again not even necessarily funny in conception but made comic through Gosling's delivery of it that manages to never sacrifice where the character is either. The highlight of the section though is two songs, the first Ken's delivery of "Push" for four hours to serenade Barbie, where Gosling's singing even is funny through the slightly off squeaky over the top "rugged" sound along with his very intense joyful staring at Barbie the whole time. And of course "I'm Just Ken" where Gosling brings that song to life for all its worth as the ballad of all of Ken's sorrows and all his joys all beautifully performed by Gosling once again with such dramatic emphasis to every point of Ken's singular journey towards self-actualization...through the song's placement doesn't exactly make sense....but regardless it works in-spite of that, with a major reason why being Gosling once again. And the climax of the film, aka one speech after another. And if you maybe haven't noticed I took less to the film on re-watch, with the flaws I saw the first time becoming more present but liked everything Gosling did, including realizing Ken's ending. The ending of finally honestly speaking to Barbie who apologizes for taking him for granted, after Ken is at his lowest, which again Gosling does sorrow to an extreme, that makes the point while still being very amusing. BUT the final moment of just sort of finding his place again as a separate entity, Gosling earns this discovery of earnestness without any exception or bitterness at the end, and we see Ken become his own man. And while overall I don't love this film, Gosling's performance consistently sold the tone the best out of anyone in the cast, sold the humor by the far best and realized the most complete arc within the film. 

Best Supporting Actor 2023: Sterling K. Brown in American Fiction

Sterling K. Brown received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Clifford "Cliff" Ellison in American Fiction. 

The reliable Brown, plays the role of Cliff the brother of Jeffrey Wright's Thelonius "Monk" Ellison, who we are first introduced after the surprise death of their sister and we essentially cut into Brown at the ceremony of getting rid of her ashes, where Brown basically has to sum of the nature of his performance in short succession in a single scene. We first see the grief well portrayed by Brown as he listens to the eulogy by his brother, written by his sister, and then when disposing of the ashes a neighbor complains leaving both brothers to admonish the man. Admonish though in a very comedic way, where Brown instantly shifts to the state we'll see as the typical mode of Cliff with a quiet dismissive exasperation as he yells out his insults as though that is his natural state. We follow that as he and Monk talk things over after the funeral. Brown and Wright have strong chemistry because you do sense in their interactions both the distance and connection of brothers. The distance in their differing lives and the relationship with their father and family, where you see in Brown a callous indifference and a very blunt delivery towards it all. He's not hollow, not completely heartless, but in Brown's eyes is a man who wants to be past, well, the past. Where we see connection is actually when the two insult each other for different reasons, often petty, but it's played nicely as at the end of every insult and every reaction Brown shows a little smile and you are granted the sense of their history actually within the conflict.

Brown comes in and out of the film, mostly for quick scenes of comedy where he is often presented as the challenger of Monk's state of superiority by being a much more callous voice of maybe not reason, certainly cynicism but also sometimes reality. Brown mixes petulance with honesty in his performance that contains a definite comedic quality in the ease with which he broaches these moments but in his eyes there is an intensity speaking towards some sense of what's really going on inside him. And what that is that Cliff is a divorced plastic surgeon and in fact a gay man, who never came out to his father, and his mother with dementia also does not recall this. And we have a key moment of this when we see a greater warmth in Brown's work as he dances with his mother, before she brings up a dismissive remark towards his homosexuality, and Brown storms off. His portrayal of this is almost a falling into a base dismay as the state the man just is simply used to and almost expects it with an ire, but an ire he always couches in cynical humor. We get the heart of this in a key conversation with Monk where the two discuss where they are in their lives and both let their guards down a bit. And Brown is good in easing into a quiet vulnerability in his eyes when he notes the unfortunate fact that his father never knew or accepted the real him, and it is a moving moment of Brown naturally revealing the hurt son behind all the one liners. And that is much of what Brown does here is to provide contrast to Wright's Monk and more frequently criticism in a few scenes, that is comedic but with an emotional core. Brown delivers on both sides and is a good scene partner for Wright. I do wish though the writing behind some of his one liners was a little stronger and maybe there was a bit more meat in certain sections such as a minor subplot involving their family housekeeper where Cliff treats her as nothing but she treats him as family. An idea with potential but literally handled by two lines in the film. But to Brown's credit he's good at portraying sort of the blithe indifference of the first line and then the caught off guard emotional realization of the second. And on the comedic side I kind of wish Brown had gotten into the satire of Monk’s phony book for more than just one brief scene at the end of the film, where we get a quick mildly amusing back and forth between brothers, which does show progression as we know see no direct callousness and bit more just overt warmth between the two even if they're still insulting one another. But with all these wishes I might have, this is still a good performance, that truly is supporting, as we see Cliff support the main story of Monk/Wright effectively throughout thanks to Brown's performance. A performance that carries the humor and heartache of the character with relative ease, even if perhaps I wish there was a little more of the former and maybe just a little more depth to the latter.