Thursday, 5 November 2026

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1990: Willem Dafoe in Wild At Heart, John Goodman in Arachnophobia, Richard Farnswort in Misery, Ralph Foody & Roberts Blossom in Home Alone & Thomas F. Wilson in Back to the Future Part III

Willem Dafoe did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Bobby Peru in Wild At Heart. 

The great Willem Dafoe seems probably a match made in heaven, or maybe hell for this character, between actor and director with this role. Dafoe and David Lynch just seem right together so it is a bit of a shame that this was their only collaboration. Thankfully though it is a memorable one and I think perhaps a fundamental one in terms of Dafoe’s career and his general approach to performances. From everything I have seen before this performance Dafoe was certainly a striking actor however, he did not have that more overtly stylistic side that many of us have come to adore about him. Bobby Peru may have been the first step into that beautiful. Dafoe’s performance is brief as he enters late into the film as the lovers Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern) are on the run and unexpectedly run into Peru who walks around with several naked overweight women. Peru himself is a very strange man where we get a thin mustache, slicked hair, black leather and of course a bolo tie that in neon lights says sleazeball. Although Dafoe/Lynch up the ante by Peru’s grotesque rotting teeth, the dentures that Dafoe wears in the role that apparently prevented him from closing his mouth. Dafoe evidently ran with ideas as watching he film you see it all part of the open-mouthed predatory manner he exudes. Dafoe is not overshadowed by the teeth or costuming rather owns it with this casual way he walks and smokes that suggests a scumbag who is far too comfortable with himself. Dafoe’s manner is almost like a drunk lizard where there is a strange yet particularly effective combination between that sense of a predatory gaze but with this still relaxed manner that makes it even more off-putting.  Dafoe’s accent amplifies his style with the southern ease that sounds just a little too relaxed to be pleasant. He quickly makes his impression as a hideous criminal of some kind that probably should avoid though naturally Sailor decides to go along with a planned robbery with Peru in the lead. Although before we go to that we get a highlight scene of Dafoe and one of pure depravity where Peru shows up unexpected to Lulu’s room. A scene that honestly could only be delivered by Dafoe/Lynch and Dern with the precise hideousness of it as Peru decides to go about accosting her in what Peru might describe as his method of seduction. Dafoe’s amazing in the scene where he could have been more unnerving the closer Peru gets as he sexually stimulates her with the repeated ask of “fuck me” with every delivery getting more lascivious until Lula repeats his words. Where we truly get that specific achievement of Dafoe is through the instant switch to the most extreme of trolls that is hilarious, in the most brutal darkly comic way as possible, where Dafoe instantly drops all lust to make a literal troll face and the most dismissive casual delivery of “someday honey I will but I gotta get going”. Peru’s horrible trolling only continues as he is in fact hired to kill Sailor during the robbery. Dafoe again is outstanding in the sequence where the grotesque nature of Peru is amplified by the stocking over his face as Peru goes about the robbery violently as possible leading Sailor to want to stop him only to find his own gun has blanks. Dafoe’s delivery of “their dummies dummy” is perfect as he presents Peru’s enjoyment of the troll essentially gets in his own way of even completing his assassination of Sailor. I especially adore his laughing as a man truly laughing like he is living his best possible life to the point of distraction with just how much joy he is getting out of it. It is a great final bit to an especially memorable bit of insanity where Dafoe easily finds an effortless combination between dark comedy, genuine menace, and just straightforward bizarre. 
John Goodman did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Delbert McClintock in Arachnophobia. 

Arachnophobia is Jaws with spiders. 

The Jaws with spiders’ comparison is more extreme than I even remembered as you have the new guy in an important role with town directly dealing with a fear of throughout the film while being worried about his family as they deal with the threat, forming kind of a bond with an expert that comes into town and working with a seasoned hunter of the “monster”. All these traits are with far less in depth and complexity including the hunter who is not the grizzled guy with PTSD instead he’s John Goodman with a silly truck. Although very little of the film is completely serious Goodman is at the extreme end of making fun of the premise as he comes into late into the film featuring his own twangy theme music that is also out of a different movie. The tonal shift with McClintock could be a problem if a lesser performer was in the role but thankfully Goodman comes in with a wholly atypical energy that works. Goodman is goofy here but goofy in a way that entirely works as he presents himself entirely as your average slightly off-beat local exterminator. Goodman’s delivery has a slight dismissive quality not as a pompous intellectual but a blue-collar guy who thinks he knows his tradecraft unquestionably. The idea of his competence undercut given that we know he is up against a super poisonous Amazon spider even as he doubts the deadly spider theory. His confidence is tested as he comes face to face with one of the evil spiders where Goodman initially uses his pesticide like a quick draw where Goodman’s intense face is very funny. Unfortunately, the spider is not killed easily and Goodman’s consternation at the lack of a dead spider continues the comedy. The cherry on top of the scene is as he resorts to the almighty boot rather than pesticide to finally put down the spider. Goodman’s face of renewed determination then his over the top cocky walk and his somehow both confident yet also weak delivery of “I’m bad” is all too hilarious. Goodman then provides ample comedic relief throughout the climax by keeping with the exact same demeanor as before even as the situation becomes more serious and it becomes a possible world ending scenario if the group does not kill the amazon spiders successfully. Goodman just being off doing his own thing consistently is the highlight as McClintock is just as confident around a pompous spider expert, or when he sees he must go about facing an entire horde of deadly spiders. Goodman always brings that same sense of confidence that offers great comic relief because of just how pure he is in this specific character. Although obviously McClintock is no Quint, Goodman makes himself the best part of this silly movie by embracing his own silliness in just the right way. 
Richard Farnsworth did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Sheriff Buster in Misery. 

Richard Farnsworth plays the interruptions from the very dramatic tension between writer Paul Sheldon (James Caan) held captive by his number one fan psychopath Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates) as the local law enforcement in the area where Paul crashed his car and was “saved” by Annie. A role that honestly could feel like a total waste of time, which plot wise it almost is technically speaking, yet thanks to some good writing and great casting are the ideal breathers. Farnsworth was one of the most charming actors and here his charm just shines through from scene to scene. Farnworth charm however was a charm all his own and part of his charm was how not standard actor style he was in any way. Farnsworth just speaks every line his own way and in his own way makes it more lived in. The moment Paul’s agent (Lauren Bacall) calls Buster, Farnsworth is just winning in very warm yet also playful manner of describing his various jobs before claiming to Paul in his “system” the system being a sticky note on a board. Farnsworth instantly makes you feel this smalltown sheriff as wholly real with his whole little life and little operations he undertakes as not the most important man in law enforcement…which he is fine with. Along with Buster is his deputy and wife Virginia (Frances Sternhagen) who is always just a little horny to spend some alone time with her husband. A great little comedic aside that technically does not need to exist for the main plot but just makes the whole film that much better by having these interactions. The two have amazing chemistry where you get in every interaction the warmth of a given that they love each other, the certain comedic back and forth that are just so lightly yet effectively realized of their “bickers” that are just part of their love and even the few entirely serious moments where they do briefly discuss the case of the missing writer. Farnsworth has a certain magic all his own where he is just interesting to watch and makes everything seem sensible in his folksy way. Where Farnsworth does bring in his eyes a certain intention in finding the truth and even when saying he will continue the investigation by reading Paul’s novels, Farnsworth has a seasoned wisdom in every word that feels so natural. It is hard not to love Buster as this calming presence of sorts through every scene as it seems like he is getting closer and closer to figuring out where Paul ended up. Although where Buster seems the possible hero in the initial viewing there becomes a tragic color on any re-watch because we know where it ends up as Buster eventually does show up to Annie’s house in his usual kindly way yet whenever she is not looking, we see his actual determination. We know how things from there but up until then Farnsworth delivers on a certain hope within the scheme of the film, which he could be just a plot point yet finds such a rich character in what is technically a role of function. 
Ralph Foody and Roberts Blossom for portraying Johnny and “old man” Marley in Home Alone. 

Home Alone I would not call a cinematic classic however it is probably the best film of its form in the 90’s where we have a kid of some kind doing something out of a kid’s typical comfort zone. There were many of these, probably due to the success of Home Alone, and most were not as good or not good at all. Why is this? Well, a few reasons, this is prime form Macaulay Culkin as Kevin where he is delivering his sort of “commercial” one liner qualities better than in other later instances, but also does bring a little more genuine emotion regarding a kid facing his fears and such. It is not incredible work but it is good. Christopher Columbus’s directing has a certain atmospheric quality that one can only properly describe as pleasantly Christmasy. Most importantly there are really two factors here not existing in to either the quality of or at all in the imitators, one is better gags, two is heart. The performances I am writing about today are examples of each quality. The first is Ralph Foody best known for this role and this role only. His gag is the movie within a movie of Angels With Filthy Souls about a gangster violently dispatching Snakes for wanting 10% after Acey is no longer in charge and taking a bath (of his own blood no doubt). I have always enjoyed the gag, and the follow-up of Kevin using the movie to scare others in large part due to Foody’s performance. Foody fashions a strange twisted sounding John Wayne gangster impression that sells the style of gangster films so well I am in no way surprised that many are still under the impression that it is a real movie from the 30’s. Foody owns that style yet also amplifies it through the sinister quality he brings in every bit of his glare as Snakes first comes in, his sneer at hearing about the 10% and his sadistic glee at informing Snakes who is charge now. Finishing the sequence with its most famous part where Johnny offers Snake a countdown before he pumps his guts full of lead and Foody is genuinely menacing with no nonsense pronouncement. Foody only ups the ante as he jumps from 2 to 10 shooting Snakes mercilessly as Johnny sadistically laughs and Foody goes all in his ghastly laugh of vicious glee. Foody only leaves with a proverbial cherry on top with his now iconic delivery of “Keep the change you filthy animal” with complete disregard for his victim and only satisfaction at his crime.  A great gag with a good quick performance behind it. 

The other key part however is the heart of Home Alone and that heart comes from Old Man Marley played by Roberts Blossom. Blossom was one of those character actors that you run into random films and he always delivers on whatever is asked of him. He was probably ideal casting then for Old Man Marley because he can naturally serve two purposes in the film with ease. The first is playing the “local legend” of the murderer who somehow can walk free as he goes around salting the burial spots of his victims. A complete quick aside, are those types of stories still a thing or did they get replaced by internet conspiracies…anyway back to Blossom. Blossom delivers the ominous stare of an enigma of a man as he goes around with his shovel and occasionally runs into Kevin, who rather than giving a chance for Marley to talk Kevin screams, runs and usual hides from him. Blossom is purposefully presenting Marley from the child’s perspective in these scenes however nicely finds a balance of allowing one to interpret between a guy who is truly just doing his own thing, being confused by screaming children or the serial killer giving death stares. Eventually we learn the truth about Marley as he sits next to Kevin in a church during choir practice and Blossom is great in the way he instantly disarms both Kevin and the viewer with his performance. Blossom quite simply does “nothing” in that he speaks totally as an adult speaking to Kevin quite frankly as also essentially as an adult. Blossom does not take a lot of time to dispel the rumors he just says bluntly it is not true in such a beautiful directly honest way. His way of telling Kevin that he can say hello is just this clear and concise way of let us not dwell on the nonsense of the past and just treat each other properly. Their conversation however goes deeper as they speak to one another about their mistakes where Blossom can do something fascinating where he provides a genuine warmth towards Kevin in one respect as listens to Kevin’s own regrets yet conveys directly his own regrets and fear over the mistakes with his son. Blossom wonderfully delivers the words of a man sharing just enough in that he would not pour his heart out to a child yet he is sharing just enough emotion to help Kevin understand. Blossom brings just the right childlike quality himself when describing his own fears that his son might not talk to him if he tried and the ease of the way he says “you are never too old to be afraid” is filled with a sense of experience of the world. Blossom articulates that hesitation to reach out so well yet does so in a way that feels honest even when speaking to this young kid. As Marley reacts to Kevin’s straightforward encouragement to speak to his, Blossom brings a very subtle acceptance of the idea fitting a man who in a way was just probably waiting for someone to just try already. I even like the moment where Kevin switches over to pure kids’ stuff about teasing and I love Blossom’s gentle but also direct way of then ending the conversation with this sense of awareness that he does not need to get into playground politics. The scene delivers on providing a needed heart to the film because of the naturalism that Blossom brings in every second of it. He humanizes Marley both for Kevin and the audience. That setup delivers then in two ways one is Marley comes in and saves Kevin from the wet bandits, because paint cans to the head will only briefly stun but a proper shovel to the head will do a permanent stun. Not too much is asked of Blossom in the scene, but he gets through it and brings a nice warmth as he protectively says he will take Kevin home. The real impact of the church scene however is near the very end of the film after Kevin is reunited with his family for Christmas and he sees Marley reunited with his son and granddaughter. All I can say, like George Costanza, the old man gets to me as we get the John Williams’s swell and the appreciative loving hand wave of Blossom over to Kevin. The moment hits the emotional sweet spot and while constructed so well in a directorial sense, you had to care about Marley despite his screen time and Blossom makes you care. 
 
Thomas F. Wilson did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Buford “Mad Dog” Tannen and Biff Tannen in Back to the Future Part III. 

Back to the Future Part III is the final film in the trilogy of not quite diminishing returns, as I enjoy both sequels well enough despite both paling in comparison substantially to the original film. In terms of the two sequels, I think the third film has a bit more that works in comparison to II by moving to the old west setting where it tries to develop character a bit more than just having fun with the setting of the future of the second film. It also benefits from Thomas F. Wilson as the western villain of Buford Tannen. Wilson obviously is the villain of the whole series where we previously got his Biff in the first film, his Griff/Biff in the second, where I have always felt his late scenes as young Biff went to much into full psychopath mode, however he redeems himself here. The question with any western is how realistic is it and Back to the Future III is more Ford than Mann let alone Eastwood. Which is fine if one can play it in the right way and we perhaps get some different takes from the cast, however the best take is from Wilson as Tannen. The character is obviously fashioned on Liberty Valance played by Liberty Valance, given the way we always hear his spurs as he walks and his tendency to brandish a whip just like Valance. Wilson does not play it just like Marvin did, but finds a nice comedic variation while still maintaining enough of the genuine menace you want from a character. Wilson to his credit really goes for it in refashioning everything about his mannerisms and voice to truly construct a western heavy. He has the gunslinger gait, the grimace of a man with horrible dentistry and raw voice of a proper thug. Wilson genuinely brings these elements to life and compared to some of his co-stars would not take too much adjustment to be believed in a more serious western. When Wilson talks about his intention to kill, Wilson delivers the lines as someone who has killed and lacks any hesitation to speak certainties not threats. He brings the right vile quality of a terrible outlaw who exists by his own violent satisfactions. Now having said that the film is still a more lighthearted action comedy, which Wilson’s approach does not get in the way of but rather amplifies. The reason this works is Wilson finds the comedy in making this type of western villain look foolish and if he was less believable it would be less amusing. Some highlights include his utter disbelief when Marty moonwalks tobacco spit on to him where his mind seems to break as he goes straight to murder from it, also when Marty tells him to “lighten up jerk” where Wilson’s disbelief double take before stating that those were “strong words” or when his men correct him, it is shoot him down “like a dog” not “like a duck” where Wilson’s break into rage frustrations over the matter is hilarious. My favorite bit however is in the final showdown with Marty where we get a strong combination of what Wilson is bringing to the part. We get genuine menace when he threatens Doc with real intensity if Marty does not face him, yet we also get his perfect confused look when he loses count after that threat. My single favorite bit in the whole film however is when he faces Marty who refuses to shoot, so Buford shoots him down which Wilson delivers with proper Marvinesque chill of the line “you thought wrong dude”. Although the actual favorite bit is Wilson’s portrayal of his unearned accomplishment as he reacts to the crowd like it was his crowning achievement to shoot down an unarmed man. The setup of course leads to the satisfaction of his surprise when Marty is alive via a metal bullet proof vest and Wilson brings a nice comedic shock then total loss of confidence as he gets beaten by Marty right into some manure. I’m not going to argue this is a great performance however I will argue that Wilson went above and beyond the rest of the cast to really both pay homage to and properly riff on a proper western type. 

63 comments:

Luke Higham said...

Glad to see you've now reviewed all of Dafoe's 4.5/5s thus far.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Thank you for reviewing both Blossom and Foody, reason why the former is a 4.5 for me is because of how much I love his reunion/wave to Kevin at the end.

Louis: Any upgrades for the rest of the cast?

Shaggy Rogers said...

Louis: I know 1982 will be one of the next ones to be revisited. But
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE.
Could you swap it for 1989 instead? That way, we could keep the momentum going while we’re revisiting the Back to the Future trilogy.

Luke Higham said...

Shaggy: No offence, but I've been waiting ages for him to watch Fanny And Alexander and Fitzcarraldo. I can't bear waiting another 3/4 years for those.

Luke Higham said...

Also Part II is easily my least favourite of the trilogy, mainly due to Crispin Glover's absence.

Matt Mustin said...

Honestly the Back to the Future sequels are fun on their own but in full context they almost kind of tarnish the majesty of the original.

Matt Mustin said...

I said "almost" there, please note.

Louis Morgan said...

Regarding Queen At Sea:

Largely effective drama focusing on dealing with a loved one who has dementia where it managed to be surprising, not only in an expected opening situation but then how they in itself shifts in an unexpected way as well. When the film is focusing on the daughter and husband, related by law only, each offering their perspective and really passion for wanting to help the person they love it is at its most compelling because it never goes to the expected turn where the right decision can turn out wrong and a person we paint one way in one situation can show themselves in a far better light in another. When it is Binoche and Courtenay portraying those perspectives the film is great. There is however also the plot of Binoche’s daughter’s budding romance that I understand why it is in the film as a contrast of a new love against a very old love, however I found a little too much screen time was devoted to the not particularly interesting young romance. I do think it should’ve been in the film but I also could see how it easily could’ve been cut down.

Binoche - 4.5
Calder-Marshall - 4.5
Hunt - 3.5
Molko - 3

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Your category placement for Courtenay.

Louis Morgan said...

Tahmeed:

Everyone else stayed pretty consistent for me.

Luke:

A fairly tricky placement actually because he definitely feels supporting for like half of the film then he feels like a lead for the rest. I'm leaning towards supporting just because his screen time is so broken up and he does have very limited perspective for much of the film.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Your category placement for Guitarricadelafuente in La Bola Negra. He leads the 2nd portion of the film but pundits have him in Supporting.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

I think supporting is a fair placement even though he's technically one of the three leads. The construction of the film is where its stylistic sequences very much become the focus over the specific leads, like in Cruz's scenes she becomes the true focus of those scenes, or the Lorca scenes, Lorca is the true focus. I'm not sure about my final placement yet for him but I have no problem with him being put in supporting.

Matt Mustin said...

Dafoe is a 5 for me, just perfectly grotesque in exactly the right way. Haven't seen Arachnophobia but I love me some Goodman. Farnsworth is wonderful and kind of essential to his film in proving the exact right kind of tension relief. Foody is fun in his brief bit. Blossom is wonderful. Agree completely on Wilson.

Tim said...

i don't like Home Alone. Like, at all. But if somebody were to crowdfund an entire version of Angels With Filthy Souls, made THIS believably, i'd check that out immediately

Aharkin said...

Another performance I hope is covered is Paul Sorvino in Goodfellas

Robert MacFarlane said...

What about Raul in Presumed Innocence? My dad always loved that performance since it was a 1;1 match of the character from the book (he was the main character of other Turrow novels). I think he’s able to imply a LOT of unspoken personal history with that performance.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: What are your ratings and thoughts on John Heard, Devin Ratray, and Gerry Bamman in Home Alone, Lauren Bacall and Frances Sternhagen in Misery, Harley Jane Kozak and Julian Sands in Arachnophobia, and Mary Steenburgen in Back to the Future Part III? I couldn't find them anywhere

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

Huh, this might actually compel me to properly rewatch Home Alone during Christmas instead of ignoring it during the annual TV airings.

Shaggy Rogers said...

Luke: I confess 1989 was always the worst year of the 80s, while 1982 was the best of decade. I understand your anxiety about waiting another 3 or 4 years.
If Louis had asked us what the best way to conclude this second round would be, 1982 would be ideal, as it was a year with great films.

Calvin Law said...

Absolutely loved Possible Love, 5's for all the central quartet.

Louis Morgan said...

Possible Love is an outstanding film where Lee Chang-dong’s particular sensibilities come together in a way that enlivens every aspect of the story. One where his little asides and extra bits all sync to amplify the power of this particular story. Weirdly not totally unlike You Can See Everything as both films are about a documentarian and their subjects, although obviously how things unfold is a little different. Regardless, this film is also captivating in the way it explores the relationship between the certain detachment from observation but also the desire to connect on a genuine human level. Finding such a fascinating grey area to explore in terms of how far that goes and how real the connections truly are. I loved the way this film continued to reinvent how it explored this in managing to both be genuinely moving in showing the pain for a man, his wife and his family dealing with a failed union strike, yet making this story unfold in such an atypical way by exploring it through the relationship with the well to do documentary filmmaker and her rich husband. Where it manages to create such a captivating juxtaposition between how the documentary both pushes for the real emotion to come out yet it also is created with a certain artifice of not only the act in front of a camera but also the relationship of the two wives in itself where one can always be certain of the purest intention.

Jeon - 5
Cho - 5
Zo - 4

Emi Grant said...

Gonna take out a mortgage on my house and betting it all on Sol Kyung-gu's first 5.

Looking forward to the film myself.

Luke Higham said...

I guess your wish had finally come true in regards to Sul Kyung-Gu.

Luke Higham said...

Category placements for the cast.

Luke Higham said...

RIP Sebastián Lelio

RatedRStar said...

RIP Sebastián Lelio

Louis Morgan said...

Godzilla Minus Zero delivers once again on the action sequences and specifically gives such a genuine visceral intensity to the Kaiju battles that can feel so lightweight so easily. I have no complaints on that front and the general technical skill once again on display. Unfortunately the story isn’t as strong and the human element isn’t as well realized. Too much of the human drama falls into “you can’t do this” “But I need to do this for the plot to happen” “ok then you have to do it”. I also didn’t think the character interactions were quite as well done in part because we severely reduced the crew’s screen time from the previous film. Then we have the subplot that felt like it was setting up a sequel I think, which I always hate. Can we please just enjoy the film we’re watching right now? Even if it’s not, the subplot is just kind of messy. From one we get a very silly bit of stylized editing for a scene, and then we basically get an eventual flashback that says “oh don’t worry, that was resolved already”. It's a particular shame as I think the actor was definitely game for something a bit more dynamic that we don't get. Although I’ll say as messy as parts of this are, it does still deliver the goods and the less good things still are considerably better than is the basic standard for the genre.

Kamiki - 3
Hamabe - 3
Tanaka - 3.5
Yoshioka - 3.5
Nagasawa - 3
Sasaki/Yamada - 3(Really wish they had done more with them)
Kunimura - 3
Ando - 3(I really don't understand not using her for more given her talent level.)

Shaggy Rogers said...

Watched Possible Love and loved it.
I’m getting a feeling smell some winners of Louis Awards in 2026 for Lead Actress, Supporting Actress, Ensemble and Original Screenplay.
I was also very happy that Sul Kyung-Gu will finally have his big moment. He will be a great rival to John Malkovich and Andrew Scott.

Shaggy Rogers said...

RIP Sebastián Lelio

Louis Morgan said...

Robert & Aharkin:

We’ll see.

Lucas:

Heard - (His most famous role and not really the best use of his talents. Heard is wholly believable as a dad in the situation hitting the general needed tone of believable but not too serious. He defers to O’Hara as the straight man in their scenes and delivers what is needed for the very straightforward role.)

Ratray - (Jerky older brother performance that isn’t anything remarkable but delivers on the general over the top note. There’s no real nuance or sense that they’re genuine brothers even in the tension however, he seems more like Kevin’s bully than brother. This includes the late scene together. I just never bought them as brothers even in a contentious way.)

Bamman - (Always found him a touch too over the top and creepy. I can see why many thought Frank was originally the villain mastermind because of how Bamman plays it.)

Bacall - (Purely exposition however she manages to make a nice impression in her exposition just honestly by having her strong presence.)

Sternhagen - (I mean refer to my thoughts in Farnsworth’s review where their chemistry sings. She brings a nice earthy quality that has a charm particularly in her pseudo horny moments she makes it all part of a warm loving relationship yet can naturally shift in her moments as a more understanding partner albeit briefly.)

Kozak - (Pretty forgettable wife performance. Not bad but doesn’t really make an impression either way.)

Sands - (Standard pompous scientist routine which I guess he delivers on in a general sense but it isn’t anything too notable.)

Steenburgen - (An interesting reverse engineer performance given I saw her in this before I ever went back into her initial kooky performances and in some ways this is a reprise of her performance in Time After Time though also in the reverse. Anyway, I like her chemistry with Lloyd. They are genuine together and in the break up scene in particular she is playing towards a deeper note of betrayal. I think honestly one of the flaws in the film is making her reunion with Doc so instant then just jump to the magic time train that makes very little sense. But the real problem is it wastes the moment of her earnest portrayal of distress to be such a quick resolve rather than a stronger affirmation of love between them.)

Luke:

Sul and Jeon are definitely leads. Zo is definitely supporting. Cho I think you could argue either way but I’m leaning towards supporting as she is mostly secondary in perspective to Jeon though there are a few moments where she’s not.











RIP Sebastián Lelio

Razor said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the cast of Your Mother Your Mother Your Mother and Behemoth.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: What are your ratings and thoughts on the cast of Godzilla Minus Zero?

Perfectionist said...

Louis: "I can see why many thought Frank was originally the villain mastermind because of how Bamman plays it".... I mean, isn't that a fun and actually valid theory though? That line he says to O'Hara's character in the plane "if it makes you feel any better, I forgot my reading glasses", priceless 😆😆! What a shithead.

I think as much as the movie gets talked about being about "Christmas Spirit", MOST of the members in the family are supposed to be vexatious, self absorbed, inconsequential pricks. The heart of BOTH of the movies is simply Kevin and his mom's dynamic and reconciliation. I think both of Kevin's parents are the only ones in that giant ass family that genuinely care about the kid. The rest of the family are pain in the ass, that create shackles in their relationship. Granted, she should know better than to succumb to everyone's bullshit.

Luke Higham said...

Updated lineup predictions

Best Supporting Actor
Giamatti (The Debut)
Rockwell (Wild Horse Nine)
Garfield (Artificial)
Leguizamo (The Odyssey)
Guitarricadelafuente (La Bola Negra)

Alternate
Pattinson (The Odyssey and Dune Part III)
Dafoe (Werwulf)
Courtenay (Queen At Sea)
Driver (Paper Tiger)
Buscemi (Wild Horse Nine)
Banderas (Tony)
Skarsgård (Wicker)
Oyelowo (Clarissa)
Ahmed (Digger)
Abdul-Mateen II (The Further Mis-Adventures Of Cliff Booth)

Best Actor
Malkovich (Wild Horse Nine)
Damon (The Odyssey)
Scott (Elsinore)
Gosling (Project Hail Mary)
Pattinson (Primetime)

Alternate
Fiennes (28 Years Later: The Bone Temple)
Turturro (The Only Living Pickpocket In New York)
Bardem (The Beloved)
Sul (Possible Love)
Chalamet (Dune Part III)
Taylor-Johnson (Werwulf)
Borisov (Artificial)
Pitt (The Further Mis-Adventures Of Cliff Booth)
Ali (Your Mother Your Mother Your Mother)
Teller (Paper Tiger)
Alt. Ippolito (I Play Rocky) and Pattinson (The Drama)

Louis Morgan said...

Razor:

Let me hold off on Behemoth because it is difficult to avoid the technical spoilers of the film to talk about most.

Cho - (Given the over the top nature of the character I was impressed that he managed to hold it together. One is that when the character is violent Cho is genuine in the menacing intensity he brings to these moments. He does bring a wielded over the topness where you see him very much selling to his troops so to speak at every notion and is effective throughout in bringing enough nuance to ponder how much of it does his character actually believe and how much is it just a way to control.)

Esposito - (Along with Pickpocket it is nice that he’s not just playing a cold evil guy though I wish he got a little more to do. He’s good though as the voice of honest morality bringing the right combination between earned judgment but also genuine passionate concern for his family.)

Ali - (A very over the top character and an over the top performance. I will say he mostly didn’t work for me but he could’ve been worse I guess. He does occasionally have moments of sorta nuance where I thought he was fine but overall I did think he consistently went too big.)

Tillman - (Not an overly complicated role but it was nice to see him not playing a variation on Severance. Brings a nice understated warmth and caution…though I feel he and Esposito probably could’ve been merged on a screenplay level.)

Nakli - (Brings an effective “mob boss” type energy where he hits the note well between friendly but with that sense of threat just below the surface consistently.)

Adia - (A really strong breakout performance where she brings such a great naturalistic quality throughout the film. You really instantly sense her history with her dad both some better sense of the past but also tension. She finds more thought in her own little eccentricity as a balance of just who she is, and her little asides have a great just ease and honesty about them. Although the ending doesn’t work for me, I will say she sells it quite effectively emotionally by delivering on the moment particularly as this earnest contrast to showing how much she genuinely cares.)

Kamara - (Less focused upon and less to do, however also brings a great naturalistic quality where you really do just accept the dynamics and history of the family with considerable ease.)

Lucas:

Kamiki & Hamabe - (Like the first film I think both have a tendency to go to the most intense note a little too quickly. I don’t think they do it terribly, it just really mutes the impact but being so intensely emotional all the time. Only proving that the few non-emotional moments they do have are good in finding an earnest connection and sense of love.)

Tanaka - (Finds the vicious sense of devastation along with just a powerful sense of gravitas in terms of selling the science of the monsters. He also does deliver on the needs of the extra note he is given to sell but sadly the film doesn’t really make use of it beyond a quick moment. I liked what he brought consistently but the weakness of the script in parts reveals itself with how jumbled his arc is.)

Yoshioka - (Though he managed to have an earnest sense of the human weight to all the exposition he had to deliver and sell. He brought a conviction consistently though I do think they could’ve maybe given him more of a personal element beyond just scientist guy trying to solve things.)

Nagasawa - (I thought she was fine but didn’t really make much of an impression other than a slightly off-beat exposition machine.)

Kunimura - (Brings a lot of weight in his exposition though obviously doesn’t get more than just that to do.)

Sasaki/Yamada/Ando - (All three are good but get almost nothing to do.)

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the Uprising cast.

8000S said...

Louis. He never really worked with him, but Mitchum is kind of the perfect actor for a Melville flick, wouldn't you say so?

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: Your thoughts on Sandra Hüller and Caro Braun in Rose?

Bryan L. said...

8000s: I asked Louis once for his 1960s Ronin cast and he picked Melville + Mitchum for the De Niro role, so there you go!

J96 said...

Rest In Peace Donnie Dunagan.

Luke Higham said...

If Louis has no desire to watch Digger again then I'll replace Ahmed with Cooper Hoffman in Artificial.

Michael McCarthy said...

As much as Digger frustrated and aggravated me, Riz Ahmed 100% deserves a review. He’s the only one who actually made the absurd tone of the film work, and somehow managed to make me feel the urgency and weight of the films ideas at the same time. He might be my supporting win honestly.

Robert MacFarlane said...

I honestly didn't think Ahmed was much better than the other broad-strokes supporting roles.

Luke Higham said...

This may not make any difference but does anyone have MVP predictions for Avengers: Doomsday.

Harris Marlowe said...

RatedRStar: What's your rating for Mantzoukas in Taskmaster, and how would you rank the seasons so far?

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Ratings and thoughts on The Weight cast.

Lucas Saavedra said...

RIP Stacy Keach

Matt Mustin said...

RIP the endlessly reliable Stacy Keach

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

RIP Stacy Keach

Luke Higham said...

RIP Stacy Keach

RatedRStar said...

RIP Stacy Keach

RatedRStar said...

Harris Marlowe: I would give him a 4.
Great: 4, 7, 9, 12, 16 and 19.
Good: 2, 10 and 13.
Decent: 1, 3, 5, 11, 14, 20 and 21.
Mediocre: 17, 18 and 22.
Bad: 6, 8 and 15.

J96 said...

Rest In Peace Stacy Keach.

Maciej said...

RIP Stacy Keach

Tim said...

R.I.P. Stacy Keach

Shaggy Rogers said...

RIP Stacy Keach

When 1972 rolls around, I hope Louis provides an analysis of Keach’s performance in Fat City.

J96 said...

Rest In Peace Irma P. Hall.

Luke Higham said...

RIP Irma P. Hall

RatedRStar said...

RIP Irma P. Hall

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

Garfield - 3(I guess the role is purposefully vague as the point though it doesn’t quite work. Garfield brings the general emotions per scene effectively for most of the film. Whatever he needs to convey he does. Whether he’s distraught, rageful, pensive or whatever. He does what he needs to be. Would be a totally fine performance but then in his last scene he starts talking like he’s Batman for no reason and is utterly ridiculous.)

Norman - 3(He’s actually pretty interesting early in conveying the sense of being pulled apart by different emotions. Conveying the sense of fear of his position but also seemingly an earnest want to do right by his position in some sense. Creating an interesting presentation of the challenges of leadership…which then he drops to scream like a psychopath in one scene then just screams in fear in somehow an even more over the top fashion.)

Bell - 3.5(A potentially very interesting character that we end up getting just a quick snippet of. Bell is good in portraying this specific reasoned passion in his delivery where he is able to express the notion of the man weaponizing his faith in a way. Where Bell brings the right conviction to his reckoning of why everything is happening, we sadly don’t do much with that after a certain point but he’s good up till then.)

Hollander & Dillane - 3(Basically need to be stuffy and dismissive then intensely gripped with fear. They do that, but pretty limited roles.)

Jarvis - 3.5(He’s there for much of it though in a convincing way. I thought he was pretty good in his last scene though in both presenting the genuine passion of his conviction but with the sense of a man suddenly maybe getting a little too comfortable within his presumed position.)

Waterston - 3(Thought she was alright in a role that she certainly could’ve been worse in. Largely hits one note with the role as concerned regal queen but I thought she delivered on it well enough.)

Hawke - 4(Rock solid leading man performance. Where he brings the needed warmth with his scenes with his daughter to instantly establish the importance of that relationship. He then brings the wily nature of his character where he suddenly makes the advancement seemingly in the prison with a natural wit in his delivery as the smartest man around. He’s then effective throughout the process of the thriller aspects in conveying the intensity of each situation while also bringing the needed visceral edge to every different situation. Hawke makes for the proper capable type where you always sense gravity but also the sense of determination to survive.)

Crowe - 3.5(Although has a “day of shooting” type of screentime he’s good with what he has, bringing the right combination between understated menace but seemingly jovial calm in a natural combination. Finding the right somewhat likable demeanor that you just might trust even though you really probably shouldn’t and then is quite effective in his final scene in purely silent acting where Crowe tells you everything his character is thinking without needing to say a word.)

Louis Morgan said...



Amelio - 4(The most dynamic of the supporting prisoners and he’s quite good with what he has. Where we get him as the man who presents himself as the slick one even though he’s obviously not and in turn makes himself the man we feel is the most untrustworthy. He then manages find some power in the complicated journey of his character where we get the best and worst of him and Amelio brings earnest emotion to define each trait. He’s especially strong in his pivotal scene in his impassioned delivery towards Hawke’s character to push him towards a plan one more time.)

Nash - 3(Manages to be distinctive enough to be believable as his “red” type though I didn’t think he went beyond to become fully believable beyond the type.)

Jones - 3.5(Fine straightforward supportive but has been through hell type performance. She isn’t given too much real estate but delivers on the needs of what she has.)

Tonnesen - 2.5(Fine but doesn't really leave much of an impression.)

Burgess & Newman - 3(Serviceable but somewhat generic as jerk sleazeballs.)

Lucas:

Hüller - (A performance that so effectively creates the required tension and needed internalization of the character at the start. She is able to convey this certain intensity innately of someone pretending to be something in such a trick situation. Where she is able to blend an interesting confidence and lack of confidence at the same time. A confidence in presenting the main overtures of what she is presenting then within a moments where she runs into an obvious challenge she immediately brings the immense awkwardness of the situation. Where she finds even a natural bit of dark humor of trying to find what exactly she needs to come up with in order to fulfill her husbandly role in particular. When we get to the switch the internalization of the first half of her performance becomes the intense externalization of the second half. She is amazing because we very much get the wrath of emotion of someone who had to bottle it all up for so long. She brings such a powerful ferocity where we sense the disgust of the person now at the very least getting to unleash all that she has been feeling directly in a way that she has had to mute herself during all times prior. It is consistently striking work where she manages to convey the very idiosyncratic nature of the situation in such detail while also just so powerfully conveying the very universal emotional pain of dealing with the injustice of the situation.)

Braun - 3.5(Her performance is very quiet though I think she largely works in just portraying her own basically unstated game of just going with the flow of the situation. She brings not exactly a warmth but an understanding within her interactions with Huller that effectively creates the sense of kind of an acceptance of a situation.)






RIP Stacy Keach and Irma P. Hall

RatedRStar said...

Louis: I know you saw this film and gave it 2 stars but I don't think you gave thoughts on it, I was going to ask the awkward question of what your thoughts were on Song of the South? more so much out of curiosity of the animation rather than everything else.

Louis Morgan said...

I mean not even considering the aspects of the film for which it was buried it mostly just terribly dull where the live action portions are just boring. The animation is obviously not free from those certain elements however technically somewhat interesting as a step forward in live action merging that is less than perfect but has a moment or two such as the most reprinted part of the Oscar winning song. That sequence works, the others are shtick that aren't all that aren't particularly good.