Wednesday, 25 September 2024

Alternate Best Actor 1977: Rutger Hauer in Soldier of Orange

Rutger Hauer did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Erik Lanshof in Soldier of Orange. 

Soldier of Orange follows a few Dutch resistance soldiers during Nazi occupation during World War II. 

That description probably gives you the immediate wrong impression about this film despite being completely accurate to the plot of this film. The plot is of a WWII thriller, the execution is pure Paul Verhoeven, as it is far more chaotic, horny and satirical then that plot would lead you to believe, despite treating the plot seriously...kinda. It's a strange film that is almost like a party film but the party being held in and around Nazi persecution and fighting the Nazis. Honestly I'm not sure it entirely worked for me in its approach maybe because it is kinda all these things while not being entirely any of them, not that I dislike the film but it is extremely specific in a way that I didn't always adore either. Within its crazed tapestry you have Rutger Hauer as the central role of one of the men who we find in the opening scene will be the Aviation hero who helps lead the Dutch Queen back onto her own soil. We proceed to flashback to try to uncover essentially how this man got there, which is kind of a curious sight to those of us who typically Hauer best in his domineering performances in his English Language roles. As we see the young man enter into a hazing situation where Hauer exudes this naivety and weakness of such a state, and seems like such a passive sort particularly compared to Jeroen Krabbé as the older much more confident Guus. Although the slightly older man takes him under Hauer's Erik under his wing, we see the men become friends in what is driven by Guus's, for lack of a better description, anarchist lifestyle. Hauer however is effective in gradually moving his presence just a bit towards the Hauer of his later years as we see Erik become just a bit more confident around Guus, though certainly the secondary man in their relationship (though for the record of this review Krabbé is supporting). The film's progression however will then surprise one as Holland gets invaded by the Nazis and proceeds to quickly surrender. Something that leads the men to join the resistance, however even this isn't quite the way you'd expect, as even Erik expresses his antisemitism, hardly being a true believer in terms of fighting against the evil of Nazis and more so a nationalistic sentiment. 

The men are almost immediately captured and tortured, where Erik escapes only to be captured again, though let go to be used as bait. And again the nature of the character isn't what you'd expect within the seemingly dire situation, where people are tortured and killed. But even within the approach by Verhoeven Hauer is able to maneuver himself within that specific approach. As he naturally segues to this moment of a bit more gravity, if only for a moment, that even then works into a erotic moment when one of the fiancée's of the men ends up helping him then sleeping with him. Hauer's performance is able to be whatever he needs to be in a scene for Erik, having moments of intense severity in his performance but also scenes of slightly romantic. The men end up leaving to go to England to get formal training where again things don't go as expected as it is much about Erik and Guus both trying to sleep with an English secretary as it is getting prepped to go home and launch some missions. And as strange as all this is Hauer manages to create some consistency by indeed being whatever is needed while creating enough of an arc in the progression of his character to being more charismatic and more confident in each sort of task or change we see. Hauer is good here even what here is, is not anything I've seen quite like this, which is never precisely a compliment. As the film never loses the chaotic sexual energy even when one of the characters gets brutally tortured and guillotined by the Nazis. It proceeds in its own way regardless, as those scenes are interrupted by Erik having sex with the English secretary failing to maintain his potency as he lists all the people he's going to bomb during the war. What Hauer does more or less works in this scene, much like all the scenes regardless of what happens. It's a completely good performance within the scheme of a film that I struggled to entirely reckon with though not for lack of trying on my part or the film's. 

Tuesday, 17 September 2024

Alternate Best Actor 1977: John Gielgud in Providence

John Gielgud did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning NYFCC, for portraying Clive Langham in Providence. 

John Gielgud's role here is one of the strangest leading performances you might encounter in terms of the construction of it. As for the first hour and 20 minutes, of a 110 minute long film, you rarely see Gielgud, but you almost constantly hear him. Although not your standard narration of a man describing his life, rather it is something more difficult to pinpoint, although more common for Alain Renais with a certain degree of a stream of consciousness, though this isn't exactly that, though partially that, as it also appears the ideas of a writer constructing ideas, while either sleeping or not sleeping through a long night. Although this may seem a tethered Gielgud in description, it is perhaps Gielgud's most untethered as a screen performer. While Gielgud otherwise has memorable cinematic roles, the vast majority of them are within a certain regal requirement in terms of the overall range within which he is allowed to play, the role of Clive Langham allows a far greater expression than was usually granted within Gielgud's characters. All of that despite our introduction of him being only his voice as he speaks to this story he appears to be relating about his son as a cold lawyer, his daughter-in-law as an unsatisfied wife, his bastard son as the strange potential love of his daughter-in-law and his wife as his son's much older mistress.

Gielgud's voice is one of those that cuts through any moment, even when not seen, by just the regal grandness of it. The way he speaks here though is a bit different from that, occasionally as he Clive seems to overtly directly the action there is that power to it, but Gielgud underlines it with maybe just a bit of distress to make things go his "way" in his vision/dream/subconscious, I'll just say story going forward for the sake of brevity. Gielgud's performance isn't not at all narration in the typical sense, closer to commentary, if not even argument with maybe Renais himself as he goes about watching this tale unfold, even if he seems to hold the power in such a story. Gielgud's exact delivery advises meaning within the words spoken in reaction to or in trying to create the story. Occasionally this is simple, even comical by Gielgud as he consistently acts in disgust to the repeated appearance of an older gentlemen, which Gielgud immediately grants you the exasperation for a man he views as a bit of joke, though is far too familiar with and just wants out of his mind as swiftly as possible. There's more complexity with those that are his family, particularly his son, where Gielgud brings a callous viciousness about every little change in his plan, such as giving him an older mistress, and his constant criticism Gielgud denotes a certain vile plotting against the nature of him each time.

Gielgud owns the quality within Clive's voice conducting it with this bawdy insistence for his perspective of his "children" where Gielgud plays with it in this combination of a more earnest joyful playfulness and something more sinister in a combined measure. Gielgud's commentary creates this fascinating combination between a certain entertainment in his conducting combined with something a bit more off-putting in the bitterness within the cattiness. His manner with potential illicit love affairs, Gielgud brings this insistent need for the idea to be true in every word he speaks, with a fixation not built so much on lust rather a necessity for his mental well being. Gielgud only through his voice crafts a tapestry of the man's world through every word, while doing so in such a way where his voice alone is captivating. The story is occasionally interrupted with a horrible vision of an old man being dissected, hence the nature of the story not exactly being just that, which Clive seems to treat as a challenge to whoever is constructing his visions, where Gielgud's reaction every time is pitch perfect in the combination between disgust and discontent that such easy imagery of perhaps his own corpse isn't enough to disturb him, while also still suggesting that it isn't as though Clive is undisturbed. 

The man is more literally disturbed by his physical pains as he awakens in this night, and we do suddenly see Gielgud more than a few times writhing in his discomforts. The descriptions of his pain are brilliant deliveries by Gielgud each and every time, as he fashions the pain within his words, even though we also see his expression this time to match it. There is a vividness within the description, and even as Clive attempts to maintain his cleverness, Gielgud's performance creates a very real and visceral anguish. There's an essential moment however during the long night that seems to speak so much more about the truth of Clive than the story that is being related as we pause for a moment for us to see Clive talking about a seemingly innocuous story about his son, at an earlier younger time, stating that they had a dinner where the son spoke of maturing through learning moral language as a logical proposition. A seemingly odd yet incredible moment as Gielgud makes it such a powerful scene because it is the expression of Clive finally reveals so much emotional vulnerability suddenly and you see perhaps the raw nerves in the man that he hides through his dismissive tale. You see that in the moment of the real father who has dismissed his son and hates himself for it behind the veneer of callousness. Revealing the real beating heart and shame of the man. Something that becomes clear in perhaps the most telling vision where we see Clive approach his wife having committed suicide, where we see a relatively brief but essential moment of Clive finding here. Gielgud's presence is so very different in the moment in this sort of resigned sadness, as a man not devastated in the same way as this almost expectation of the results of his failures. 

The film unexpectedly shifts for the final twenty minutes into "reality" and away from the story. Where his son, bastard son and daughter-in-law all come to visit him for his 78th birthday, something earlier bemoaned in that brilliant way only Gielgud can in his pithy way. But now in the real world of Clive, all three seem so much happier, more content and altogether complete people. They aren't living in drama, they just are generally comfortable, with the only discomfort coming from Clive. Gielgud's outstanding throughout the sequence and doesn't waste his now consistent appearance, as it is in his performance that he must unlock the truth of the man. As much of what happens is just generalities of a birthday party, such as gifts from his children, which Clive accepts graciously enough between pleasantries. The truth is in the break, not by the guests, but by Clive, where Gielgud reveals the intensity of the insecurity through the subtle moments of reactions and questions. While Gielgud presents Clive being on his best behavior he allows you to read between the lines such as his overcompensating when saying his bastard son is restrained with this phony force, of such a blunt man, of someone convincing himself that his sin was less than it was. When inquiring about just how healthy his son's marriage actually seems to be, Clive asks again, with Gielgud being charming his way, but with this seething desire for some sort of flaw in the marriage to somehow satiate his need to downplay his own failures as a father and as a husband. Gielgud's performance is a fascinating example of one where it thrives even within a film that most certainly is a "director's film". Gielgud's greatness is within every moment, heard or seen he does have in creating the emotional key towards the purposefully enigmatic narrative. He helps you find the way to connect to this strange tale, by uncovering the broken heart of the man, through every expected snipe, but also a more honest moment of genuine regret. While Gielgud certainly excelled as the regal force in so many films, Providence offers the opportunity for Gielgud to uncover more within his cinematic presence, not wasting a second or even a word in creating an entertaining, captivating, dynamic but also emotional portrait of a man compensating for the failure of his life. 

Monday, 2 September 2024

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1988: Michael Keaton in Beetlejuice

Michael Keaton did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Betelgeuse in Beetlejuice. 

Despite being called Beetlejuice, the film is in fact about a recently deceased couple the Maitlands (Alec Baldwin, Geena Davis) dealing with new living humans the Deetzs in their homes. 
Eventually the couple seeks help with the actual titular character, a "human buster" who specializes in getting rid of human infestations for ghosts. A character we only briefly see in the first act from behind seeing a new opportunity in the Maitlands as some sort of opportunity for himself. He appears more clearly as he performs a tv cowboy ad for the Maitlands selling his services like a bad used car salesman with phony energy right down to his western accent. He appears partially one more time to lure than eat fly as we get more of the craggy voice Keaton uses before he goes about devouring the protesting fly. He eventually appears past the halfway point when the Maitland's finally decide to potentially use him to scare out the new humans. 

And we have Keaton's full entrance, which has become such an iconic character for him that it is easy enough to forget he was mostly slightly off-beat lead before this performance, which is a complete transformation for him, not just for the rather extensive makeup. Keaton's performance is one all about energy as he just goes at the part of Betelgeuse full force for his technically brief screen time as the titular character, and goes all in. All in as a disgusting lout, where Keaton's whole manner is about as idiosyncratic as they come. From that voice again as a dead man, guttural to whatever comes out, though personally I think his funniest moments are when he shifts that up, and his physicality of the performance. There isn't a part of Keaton's body that he kind of just let's be, in the manner of which he stands with his gut forward, the way he saunters around as though to always be some kind of surprise, to particularly the way he cocks his neck around, with a kind of snake like demeanor even when he's not turning literally into a snake. His delivery to go along with this is rapid fire, in going from idiotic, to weirdly insightful, to accommodating, to crass, to complete perversion all in a matter of a few seconds as Keaton just plays around with the part fitting for a supernatural man whose had nothing but time to indulge himself, and seemingly make use of any mischief he can that amuses himself. Keaton's performance is just the ball of energy to what the film orbits, despite again not really being in the film all that much, but it doesn't matter because he is indeed captivating every second he's on, to the point he just infects everything with the Betelgeuse name because he is indeed so memorable. And part of this is of course just being funny by "taking the piss", for the lack of a better phrase, out of everyone and everything he sees. A favorite of mine being his rundown of his qualifications where Keaton goes to his most normal Keatonness if more refined, as he starts as a proper Juilliard actor, before quickly falling apart to every bit of viciousness of state in the black plague and just loving laughing at The Exorcist.

But even in that bit of comedy, which completely works as such, what Keaton also manages to do is create both an unpredictability in his performance and an unpredictability in the character. Although I wouldn't call it a full tone shift exactly, what Keaton is able to do is dance a bit in the darkness along with comedy to provide some sense of danger to the character even as he's more than a bit of a goofball. This is best represented when he is tasted by the Deetz's daughter Lydia (Winona Ryder) to save the Maitland's who are being exorcised, on the condition that she marries him in order for him to escape his current existence. All starting with the iconic line from the film "It's showtime", with such a perfect fiendish glee, along with his little dust off gesture before holding his arms as the ideal "I'm ready". And this is the showcase for Keaton who just is on throughout the sequence, from his fully creepy opening circus bit where he disposes of two of the guests, to the following purely hilarious voice change when noting "He won't do two shows a night", until being a different kind of creepy as he welcomes the Deetz's as his family before proceeding with the wedding. Something where again Keaton just is in this particular flow that is just so wonderfully specific in the amount of momentum he brings in every physical move, every vocal reaction to just everything, with particular highlights being his pondering his marriage before his casual yep, to his hilarious squeal when someone successfully says his name, to his callous yet sincere dismissing of his wife, whose ring...and finger he has. Keaton's great because he is the villain, he is the comic relief, he's even the hero all in the same scene. And as much as his screentime is limited, he does steal the show in with the character, which evidently he largely ad-libbed much of, and apparently even gave input into the specifics of his look. None of which is surprising given Keaton just is this role, in a way few actors are a role, where they instantly became a cinematic icon...which is no small feat.