Showing posts with label Gerard Depardieu. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gerard Depardieu. Show all posts

Tuesday, 19 November 2024

Alternate Best Actor 1986: Yves Montand, Gérard Depardieu & Daniel Auteuil in Jean de Florette & Yves Montand & Daniel Auteuil in Manon des Sources

Yves Montand, Gérard Depardieu did not receive Oscar nominations, despite receiving BAFTA nominations, for portraying César Soubeyran aka "Le Papet" & Jean Cadoret respectively, nor did Daniel Auteuil, despite winning a BAFTA, for portraying Ugolin all in Jean de Florette. Auteuil and Montand were also not Oscar nominated for the same roles for Manon des Sources. 

The first half of a two film series, shot back to back, Jean de Florette is just an incredible film which is both beautiful and heartbreaking in depicting an honest dream against dishonest ambition. 

Quickly it is hard to put Auteuil in supporting when he definitely has more screen time than Montand, and possibly more than Depardieu, and seems like it was a case of "servile equals supporting" which is extremely silly. Anyway, the film opens with the unlikely characters to follow in such a story, as more often we would begin with our tragic hero then see the villains who will try to stand in his way. This film is the opposite where we open with the colluding villains as they set their plans. We have the paternal, though in this instance being the Uncle, role of a long standing family in Southern France looking for some avenue to increase his family's wealth, along with his nephew Ugolin played by Auteuil. Although related the two are dissimilar in manner, and performance. Montand's performance is very much defined by his status as the old noted actor, with that whole type of regal presence accentuating the nature of the man of this assumed privilege and even prestige. Contrasting that most bluntly is his nephew, where Auteuil is made up quite a bit with his teeth and nose, to look almost rat-like, and is something that Auteuil wholly embraces with his performance. A performance that is my kind of mannered performance, because I never even thought of it as mannered when watching it. Although it is entirely so where Auteuil accentuates his makeup and prosthetics with his whole facial expressions, that is unlike any Auteuil I've seen, along with his voice. Each element being extremely specific in creating this specific sniveling quality, although remarkably performed because he wholly convinces you just of Ugolin as this person. A person who very much is defined by his life of labor, who lives with the dirt, and Auteuil accentuates every bit of this by embracing those mannerisms making you believe and sense the history of this man's life.  

We are presented with their unlikely state of being even from their earliest conversation where Montand comes in with this gracious even warm spirit to his nephew making suggestions that Ugolin might attempt to woo a local woman to find a wife with this paternal wisdom as the defining feature of his delivery. Something that Auteuil reacts to with nearly deaf ears and just kind of a confused expression of why exactly he'd want to "burden" himself with such things. Mentioning instead his use of prostitutes as all the women he could possibly need, Auteuil makes this pronouncement as honestly as Ugolin knows, which there isn't a second of consideration and such a life of expectation isn't something that Auteuil's work suggests even phases Ugolin. Crafting the odd pairing of the two as despite being family what draws them together is only the collusion of family, as we see César as this instructor for Ugolin even if we hardly feel they are as one despite working as a pair. Something that becomes more evident as the two come upon a dying neighboring farmer, which is perhaps where we see the clearest bond of the two reacting not with concern for the man, but rather this instant connection of the possibilities each man senses with the potential death. Even the notion of criminal murder being sort of danced around which Montand delivers with regal distance and Auteuil with dogged, well, dog eat dog mentality. The man indeed dies, which while watching the property the men find the all important water source for the property, where we see the master criminal and his fool apprentice. Montand bringing this shifty manner in his eyes of catching something to steal, while controlling Ugolin who Auteuil portrays as less able to stay calm in expresses this energy at the potential that César controls lest to alarm others of the whereabouts of the spring.  

Their plans hit a snag when the inherited owner Jean Cadoret appears, along with his wife and young daughter. A man with a hump, and played by a more than dubious man, Gérard Depardieu, which speaks to truly the nature of acting as he manages to deliver such gentle earnestness from the second he enters into the frame. Depardieu's performance is brimming with such approachable excitement as he enters as Jean, a man of the city, who reacts in wonder as he sees the gorgeous hills of southern France. Depardieu is truly endearing here as he manages to make the character's enthusiasm something which is completely honest and entirely contagious. As he looks upon in wonderment and pronounces all his dreams, it is hard not to caught up with his splendid ideas of making a home for himself with his family, because the sincerity of the dream just seems to rest in the initial glowing eyes of his as he seems drawn into such a fantasy place, for him anyways. One of the many brilliant ideas of this narrative however is the presentation of the dream, from the outset, is not from the dream, but rather how the dream is the obstacle of the two men we were introduced to first. César sees him as a threat to his plan which he then suggests to Ugolin to befriend Jean only to be in the position to undermine him when possible. Montand's performance is without overt maniacal quality, rather it is with this overly practical dismissiveness. Montand's performance will be consistent for much of the film as he appears basically as commentary on the attempts of Jean to make it as a farmer on the land, basically as this worst kind of commentator who speaks of every challenge that will befall him, and even shrugs off every potential victory of Jean with some negative alternative in the future. Montand's performance makes César a villain whose villainy exists largely through callous indifference in just observing the failure with conviction that it will come sooner than later. Montand's performance is effective though largely one of consistency, where there is maybe a touch more frustration a few times within his still confidence at Jean's assumed failure, however I would say within the scheme of the film Auteuil and Depardieu have the purposefully more dynamic arcs.  

Speaking of, we are given the perspective of knowing the truth so what we see instead is this cruel game of Ugolin presenting himself as a friendly neighbor to Depardieu's Jean, something Auteuil excels with but not entirely excelling with in terms of the quality of Ugolin's own "performance". Ugolin isn't exactly the best but gets by as Auteuil presents very much an act, though only something someone with a bit more cynicism would catch onto right away. Auteuil's main delivery in these moments is as the doubting "friend", where any idea Jean presents Ugolin has some negative slant on the idea that undercuts it in some way. Auteuil presents it with a certain effective simplicity where seemingly the simple man is just putting forth his own wisdom, as limited as it is, which is a combination of the doubt of his voice and confusion in his face on the atypical thinking presented by Jean. Auteuil tiptoes around the idea of honest confusion with put upon negativity effectively to make Ugolin seemingly reliable enough for the very much trusting Jean. Contrasting that is Depardieu's own work that is so endearing through the sincerity of every moment of his optimism as he explains his ideas of breeding rabbits. There's the energy not of someone with a plan but a fundamental truth to make choices to fulfill his dream. Even when Ugolin offers a negative slant to every single one of his ideas, Depardieu doesn't react as someone brushing the ideas off, rather as someone who honestly cannot see such negativity because his belief is so pure. Something that perhaps makes a little bit of a complication for Ugolin where Auteuil is quite excellent in being able to balance the degree of which guilt ways on the man, as he offers some minor help to Jean, but never of course tells him the truth that would make his plans completely thrive. Auteuil puts just enough shame in his eyes in certain moments, where Jean's trust is so pure, or even in the moment where he hides away to renege on an offer he had made. Auteuil doesn't redeem Ugolin but does offer the right glints of humanity to suggest a man who knows he's doing wrong though can't quite overcome his faults to do the right thing. 

The progression of the degradation of Jean is where the power of the film exists because Depardieu begins with such a potent sense of that dream and what we see is the way that dream seems to be slowly purged away from him, however not in the way you might expect. Depardieu is wonderful in accentuating every moment of success with such joy, a joy that isn't selfish but rather something he wants to not only share with his wife and daughter but anyone nearby. In his eyes you see a man who believes himself to be nearly living in some kind of heaven for himself, so much so that even when he comes upon squatters on his land he only is inviting towards them. Depardieu is not presenting as foolish but rather the nature of the man to love and welcome all to be part of what he sees as an ideal experience. Unfortunately due to the lack of the spring it does eventually take its toll upon him, as he begins to run out of money. One especially heart-wrenching moment comes as Jean asks his wife to allow him to pawn her prized necklace to allow them to get by a little longer. Depardieu is so moving in the scene because you still see the dream in his eyes as a man who is convinced it will all work out, yet there is the first crack in the heartbreak within him as he must ask his wife to do this. Something Depardieu burys within his performance, as the emotions he's trying to hide away from the doubt and the loss of the prized possession, only to find out that his wife already pawned it for the sake of the family. Depardieu's reaction is devastating because you see finally a full break in the dream, and the dawning reality that is tearing at that dream do you see such pain. Something that continues with another powerful though painful scene of a full storm coming, however not close enough to Jean's farm. Depardieu again is so heartbreaking because he goes from such real excitement to the rain to such fundamental anguish, particularly in his delivery of "there's no one up there" as God doesn't answer his prayers and Depardieu brings not just a sense of defeat, but a destruction of a dream. But what is fascinating in Depardieu's work isn't that he doesn't suddenly become just a cynical man, rather he makes something that feels all the more tragic from where he began, which is twisting the dream. Depardieu brings the enthusiasm still however now it isn't with optimism it is reeking with desperation. The same manner of the man wanting for the dream, but now the intensity is making a horrible obsession. Depardieu shows the man clinging onto the dream now rather than living it, and makes it a harrowing act of suffering, leading to his final accidental end. Depardieu makes it an especially powerful portrayal by realizing that shift within the dream from something you can believe in to something that nearly disturbs you. Within the final moments you also have one great moment from Auteuil where you see Ugolin witness what he helped wrought, and that hint of shame suddenly becomes something absorbing in the moment. He still doesn't act as a good man, however Auteuil realizes in his face the real extent of his shame and sorrow. Although not enough as we find both Ugolin and César, after having purchased the land, unplugging the water spring as vultures devour the rewards of their misdeeds as we close out the masterful Jean de Florette. 

Manon des Sources, while still largely effective, does feel more so the epilogue of the previous film than one that completely exists on its own accord for the most part. 

The sequel offers the fallout of the acts of César and Ugolin several years later where they have found profit with the spring, though Jean's now adult daughter Manon (Emanuelle Béart) still resides in the area as a nearly mute shepherd. It seems the ideal life for the pair as the two now live in their success through their ill gotten gains and continue on as such without a seeming worry to anything they have done. That is until Ugolin happens upon a naked Manon to which he becomes instantly infatuated with her. Auteuil's portrayal of this is that of immediate fascination befitting a man who before dismissed the need for a wife as unnecessary due to prostitution, it is simple but also pure in Auteuil's portrayal of his fascination in her eyes but his very manner changes in the moment. Suddenly his movements are even more pathetic as he sneaks around her presence while looking towards her with the same kind of distinct infatuation. Something that leads to a conversation between the two collaborators though of somewhat different natures. And this is quite bluntly where Montand shines in these moments as he shows the older César easing up on his indifference a little bit. As the two converse about Ugolin's desire for a wife where Auteuil speaks every word about his interest now like a little boy who has just discovered love for the first time. Contrasting that with César where Montand brings considerable warmth and joy in his reaction of seeing the potential for his family to live on. Montand is even sweet in the moment as he mentions his own relationships in the past in somewhat metaphorical terms however there is the appropriate sense of nostalgia but with complication that is just overpouring in Montand's delivery. The man is speaking to a time he holds dear but the complication of the time is abundantly clear as in particular he seems to allude to his ideal relationship not working out for some mysterious reason. 

We shift as Ugolin now dressed as a "rich man" tries to woo Manon who is instantly disgusted with him. Auteuil is so perfectly pathetic in the scene because of how he is bringing far too much intensity in his declarations of interest towards her, problematically reminding her of his past with her, and then just his whole physical manner is just so stilted as he walks along with an odd suit that he saw as showing his wealth. Auteuil portrays the man completely misguided in every moment though the intensity of the infatuation is evident in every moment of a man just lost in his lust to the point he ends up sewing a piece of Manon's hair into himself. An act that could seem ridiculous however Auteuil's performance gives an internal logic to this man so stunted in his life that he thinks this will in some way make himself closer to her. At the same time however Manon discovers that the whole town, along with César and Ugolin had conspired against her father, leaving her to find the source of all water for the town and purposefully blocking it. Leading now Ugolin to become the one losing it, although Auteuil's portrayal is very different from Depardieu instead of pulling you into his sadness, he makes you see just how much the man becomes more pathetic in his wretched state of becoming less cogent in any way. Eventually the situation leads to the town to accuse the two men directly of their faults, which unfortunately for Ugolin also coincides with him trying to declare his love for Manon. The scene is ideally painful because Auteuil's performance is as a man who truly doesn't know any better and his simple ability of processing the situation only diminishes more and more as the conversation goes on. Auteuil manages to get to the point it is hard not to feel sympathy because of just how completely lost he is in every reaction in his inability to fully understand his choices and eventually even rage against his uncle. The rage though isn't of a man figuring out he's made a mistake logically, rather wholly raw and irrational is a man falling apart in his core by his mistaken love and limited ability to have any sense of his life. He too becomes heartbreaking in showing a man too destroyed by his crime, though as always within Auteuil's performance purely as a man without the ability to comprehend his failures. Comparing that to Montand who is great as he becomes defensive for his choices bringing a suddenly prideful ferocity to his performance as he challenges the judgment of all. Montand though finally reveals his own break in the man who so confidently oversaw the ruin of another, losing some of that overt confidence to reveal an earnest vulnerability as his voice falters and that reserve of his expression finally falters. 

The last tragedy of the film begins as Ugolin takes his own life due to his guilt, and his insanity from his obsession, leaving César alone, no longer able to make use of all his mechanizations as his whole family line will end with him. Montand's performance remarkably manages to uncover sympathy for César despite his villainous actions throughout both films. Montand does so by just so honestly presenting the sorrow for his nephew bringing such a sense of weight in his voice, his face and his whole physical manner. Montand shows that César has become lost as he saunters around in his depressed state with his only activity being visiting a grave site to visit his seemingly entirely deceased family now. The final tragedy of the tale however comes as César converses with an elderly woman of the community that sheds light on his earlier failed romance. Montand's reactions are amazing throughout the scene as he begins with just kind of confusion to the woman's blame for not having answered a letter, being slightly more intrigued as she suggests it ended up a tragedy. Montand showing the wheels turning in the right way of César's slow realization that he in fact had been the father of Jean after all is tremendous work from him. Montand shows it less as overt horror, but rather understanded sorrow of someone seeing the truth as far too little too late, and just a solemn depression within the man as he realizes all his ill-deeds were against his own son. Montand finally is front and center within both films and doesn't waste this time. Montand delivers the years of waste in the final scenes of the film as we see such a crushing depression within every bit of himself, though with a difference from just the lonely man at the end of a family line, as we now see in his work the pain of hope. We see a moment of him trying to reach out to his granddaughter, who correctly blames him for her father's death, then on his deathbed write a letter with the truth lined out. Montand too manages to be heartbreaking, despite all that his character has done, by so honestly presenting that glint of tenderness in the man mixed in however with the state of a soul truly lost in his shame. All three performers deliver terrific performances in this duology, each crafting their own tragedies that manage to not be repetitive but find the individual power of how the destruction of each man is sewn. 
(Montand for Jean)
(Montand for Manon, Depardieu) 
(Auteuil)

Saturday, 2 May 2020

Alternate Best Actor 1983: Results

5. Oleg Yankovsky in Nostalgia - Although Yankovsky gives a fine performance with what it is that he has, his character is overshadowed by the approach surrounding his character. He is lost within the margins though he is fine within those margins.

Best Scene: The scene where he speaks.
4. Keith Gordon in Christine - Gordon gives an effective portrayal of a unique type of obsession that builds confidence yet slowly destroys himself.

Best Scene: Describing Christine.
3. Om Puri in Ardh Satya - Puri delivers an effective contrasting portrayal of the brutal cop he is in his professional life and the sensitive romantic he is in his personal.

Best Scene: Describing his past.
2. David Bowie in Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence - David Bowie delivers a great performance as only he could. This in granting an honest depiction of a defiant soldier, but also this enigmatic quality that is essential to the focal point relationship in the film.

Best Scene: The kiss.
1. Gerard Depardieu in Danton - Good predictions Luke, Tahmeed, Anonymous, Calvin GM and Omar. Depardieu delivers an outstanding performance in his portrayal of a charismatic and approachable leader, and in the end a passionate martyr for his beliefs.

Best Scene: Being brought to trial. 
Updated Overall

Next: 1983 Supporting

Saturday, 25 April 2020

Alternate Best Actor 1983: Gerard Depardieu & Wojciech Pszoniak in Danton

Gerard Depardieu did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Georges Danton nor did Wojciech Pszoniak for portraying Maximilien Robespierre in Danton.

Danton is a terrific film that details the downfall of Georges Danton, one of the key figures in the French Revolution.

Although named Danton the film is as interested in the role of the defacto leader of the French Revolution Maximilien Robespierre as it is the titular character, and though I did not time it, Wojciech Pszoniak may have more screentime than Depardieu. A great deal of the success of the film is creating this separation and detailing each man within essentially the downfall of the revolution. A clear separation of this is created as the cast of Robespierre supporters are all played by Polish actors while Danton and his supporters are all French actors. The only unfortunate thing about this is that in turn we get the Polish actors dubbed over, and although the dubbing is done quite well, I would rather hear their verbal performances even if we had dueling languages going on. This includes Pszoniak, therefore I can only base my opinion of his work on his physical performance, though judging by that, if I were to be able to hear the original audio, I doubt I'd be disappointed on that front. This as Pszoniak begins the film leaving an impression without even needing to say a word. His whole manner, the way he carries his expression, is this of this assumed greatness and intelligence in a way. This accentuation of reason seems evident from within him as his eyes carry an incisiveness alone, even as he gets prepared for the day, with all the pomp and circumstance of a "great thinker" and even greater "thinker". This though as in his interactions with others is not of camaraderie, but rather an omnipotent sort of distance. This as Pszoniak establishes Robespierre as potentially this powerful leader, but of a man who controls very much from above.

This is in contrast to French actor Gerard Depardieu. An actor I'll admit I've had for a long time been hearing of his greatness however coming short of finding it myself. Although not that what I saw him in were bad performances, but I didn't find the man, as this sort modern Jean Gabin that many seemed to tout him as. Well thankfully that all changed with Danton. This as we find Depardieu in portraying Georges Danton, as another great leader but of a completely different ilk from Robespierre. This in the earliest scenes where we see him engage with the local people. It is with this connection and pride. Depardieu wearing the expression of a man who truly wants to absorb what the people have to say for him, and take in what they can offer. Depardieu exuding so effectively this common touch with a grace and warmth just as he sees the crowds in front of him. His manner being wholly different in place, as one touch I particularly love in the film is the difference in which Pszoniak and Depardieu interact with their powered wig. This with Pszoniak rarely touching, wearing it with extreme reverence. This is against Depardieu who treats as but something to wear for on his head. Always playing around with it in one way or another, and never forcing it to really act as his hair. Depardieu accentuating through this a man who does not wish to be swallowed whole by pomp and circumstance. Finding above else a sense of humor regarding the idea of his position. This so well in portraying more so a man who carries the idea of leadership, not exactly as a burden, but by something that shouldn't be used to create armor for himself to protect himself from others. This rather just being part of the man he already is.

We then though see already though nuance within as the proceedings begin, with Pszoniak portraying Robespierre maneuvering how to deal with Danton's opposition to his committees that is being used to abuse power, against Danton attempting to have the powers removed from those committees. We then see the two men of the leaders of their factions and in this again we see two leadership styles. Both Depardieu and Pszoniak are fantastic in realizing each man attempt to wield their unique position. In Robespierre, who actually attempts to temper the rest of his men who want immediate death for Danton and his followers, Pszoniak excels in wearing the weight of the situation within his performance. In every word spoken Pszoniak's eyes say so much in reaction, where he grants the sense of a subdued regret over the situation. This as he does defend the man, and Pszoniak portrays well the sense of difficulty in approaching this issue. He shows within it this balance between a man who is very much considering the extreme action the others are speaking of, but shows that this is taken with a subtle anxiety that he wears within him. This is against Depardieu who again emphasizes a lighter touch as we see him speaking to his other men, as their newspaper is shut down, and it seems the powers that be are scheming against them. Depardieu manages to speak with authority, while also doing so with an ease of almost a friendship as he more than anything calms his men from too rash of action. This culminating in the first act of the film in the single, but essential meeting between Robespierre and Danton.

This being a particularly wonderful scene for both actors, as again we see each set the distinction. This with Pszoniak still emphasizing a power, but the power of the man just sitting with an adamant stare. This against Depardieu being terrific as the negotiator essentially, speaking a mile a minute with both a casual regard for the other man, but a slight dismissiveness within his negativity. Depardieu portraying Danton attempting to create his case by taking Robespierre down to earth a bit, and brings this to life through the down to earth way he speaks every word of his position. This starkly against Pszoniak who presents the man carefully analyzing every word spoken by Danton, even taking a moment to fix his powered wig after Danton tussled it, ironically with as much regal grace as one could muster in that situation. We see in the scene the fissure of the two effectively, though I do love that neither presents a direct animosity. In that while we don't see the men as likely fast friends in the past, they do grant the sense that the two once managed to successfully work together in their common cause. That being long gone though represented in the differences of the men, brilliantly accentuated by the performances, that leaves Robespierre determined to agree to his factions wish for Danton's arrest, and Danton to left to be arrested. Depardieu has two separate, but fantastic scenes briefly before Danton's arrest. The first being as he gives assurance to one of the men of their faction that they will be arrested, however does so with a cheery optimism as though there is hope in this. This however is against as we see Danton silently await his arrest, Depardieu's performance is outstanding as we see so much in his expression as he realizes the real sense of his own anxiety of his upcoming fate, as well as the sense of a burden of the responsibility of his position.

I love the scenes that come then when we see each men brandish their power in public forums, and we see two very different forms of it. The first is as Robespierre successfully denounces Danton despite opposition. Pszoniak is amazing in this scene, and I really wish I could hear his actual voice. This as nonetheless he wields such a profound command in this scene. This as Pszoniak portrays it almost as man conducting the crowd, this with sheer magnetism of a overlord of the people. This in his movements of this specific controlled passion, and almost as that of the most articulate puppet master. This again as this ruler from above wielding his power certainly with ease, but almost like a hypnotist commanding his audience to do his bidding. This is opposed to Danton, where Depardieu is equally amazing in portraying him less the refined composer manipulating his orchestra, and instead more akin to a proper face pro-wrestler building up the crowd. We see this in the intended show trial for Danton and his faction, which Danton purposefully tries to use to stop the path of the revolutionary government he sees on. We see this as Danton enters the room, and Depardieu carries himself as the most crowd loving celebrity you could imagine. This with his eyes glowing with affection, even trying to touch the hands of every adoring fan around him. Depardieu beams with a man who is a true lover of the people, and this only continues as the trial begins. This with Depardieu controlling the moment brilliantly as he shows Danton eagerly speaking to the crowd assembled, rather than his show trial jury. This delivering an aggressive yet endearing passion of a man trying to speak to his people, and attempt to derail the show trial by putting a true show within it. Robespierre on the other hand fittingly handles the trial from a distance, just trying to work his way to have it so Danton's verbal defense cannot be heard by the public.

 There is a scene I love in particular where Pszoniak is hearing of how the trial is going while having a portrait of himself done. A portrait far more representing that of royal decree than revolutionary hero. Pszoniak's manner in the scene is fantastic, as though again he still carries that regal air, it is undercut in the frustration that swells when hearing the news, but what I love most a little moment where he kind of looks at himself with the costuming for the portrait. Pszoniak delivers a marvelous silent moment as you can garner the sense of Robespierre for seeing the foolishness of the man basically becoming what he supposedly overthrew.  The manipulation though does leave Danton and his men sentenced to death. Depardieu is heartbreaking in his delivering of a cracked voice Danton, just still trying desperately within his literal last breaths to speak his truth. I love the moments within prison, where Depardieu finds such a poignancy in presenting the man reflecting in depression. A depression not for his upcoming demise but rather the country he fought for. He speaks his words somberly though with not self-pity, but rather a sorrow for others reflecting a selfless spirit for his cause while granting understanding to his choice for martyrdom. This is opposed to Pszoniak's final scene that is also outstanding, as his eyes piercing now, not with power, but an overflowing anxiety. That anxiety that he had seeded in his performance earlier, not to the forefront of a man in the grip of a madness by living into some bastardization of his dream. These are two great performances. This as both actors create portrait of complex leaders, each with their personal styles, and their own unique foundation of passion that each lead to a disparate, though in the end, mutual fate. 
(For Pszoniak)
(For Depardieu)

Monday, 20 April 2020

Alternate Best Actor 1983

And the Nominees Were Not:

Gerard Depardieu in Danton

Wojciech Pszoniak in Danton

Om Puri in Ardh Satya

Keith Gordon in Christine

Oleg Yankovsky in Nostalgia

David Bowie in Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence

Tom Conti in Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence

For Prediction Purposes:

Depardieu from Danton

Bowie from Lawrence

Thursday, 7 July 2011

Best Actor 1990: Results

5. Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves- Costner gives a dull ineffective performance.
4. Robert De Niro in Awakenings- De Niro has some okay moments when his character seems no longer harmed by his illness, but almost every other part of his performance is filled with far too much obvious acting throughout. 
3. Gerard Depardieu in Cyrano de Bergerac- Depardieu is not technically all that bad, but his method of underplaying Cyrano seems completely off for the character. Ferrer's Oscar winning performance as the same character completely outshines this performance.
2. Richard Harris in The Field- Harris is strong, and powerful in his role. He commands both an overwhelming presence in the film as well subtly indicating how his character came to be this way. He is only held back by the fact that whenever he interacts with the paper thin characters, his performance unfortunately becomes a tad disjointed.
1. Jeremy Irons in Reversal of Fortune- This is an easy winner, because Irons stands out as the best of year. His performance as Claus Von Bulow is entertaining as well fascinating to watch. It is incredible the way Irons manages to both create a great mystery about his character, but at the same time still give a completely satisfying character. Von Bulow is a great challenge as a character to get right, but Irons did it marvelously. 
Deserving Performances:
Ray Liotta in Goodfellas

Best Actor 1990: Gerard Depardieu in Cyrano De Bergerac

Gerard Depardieu received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying the titular character of Cyrano De Bergerac.

This is another adaptation of the play Cyrano de Bergerac about the long nosed poet, romantic, and swordsman. This time it is in its original french language.

Cyrano is one of the handful of characters to have more than one actor nominated for playing them. Cyrano was first played in a nominated and winning role by Jose Ferrer, who after seeing Depardieu's performance, I am starting to admire even more, and perhaps I am even thinking of changing by 1950 Actor vote to him. Comparing the two performances from Ferrer and Depardieu, shows some obvious problems with Depardieu's performance. In my review of Ferrer's performance I stated that being very theatrical was probably the best way to portray Cyrano, now I feel that I really did not need to write probably, since Jose's theatricality works far better than what Depardieu does with Cyrano.

Depardieu underplays the part which is all wrong for Cyrano. In his opening scene where he attacks the performer on the stage, Depardieu seems frankly far too quiet when he announces himself. He does not seem like the domineering person, that you can't help but pay attention to instead it is quite easy to ignore him if it were not for the fact that he was screaming. Depardieu's opening monologue and heroics pales in comparison to Ferrer's. Ferrer held the screen without question in that scene in the 1950 version, Depardieu on the other hand does not seem like a large than life romantic hero, but rather some jerk throwing a temper tantrum for some reason, which does not work at all.

I really felt Depardieu's whole performance had this problem. He just does not seem Cyrano material, he is not romantic enough, poetic enough, or heroic enough. In his romantic scenes with Roxanne he actually seems to suggest his love for her too much, but then in his scenes where he helps her suitor secretly woo her he does not seem nearly romantic enough. Cyrano needs to be larger than life with his dueling, poetry, and heroics. Depardieu never gets larger than life though, and his method of underplaying Cyrano just doesn't work well for the character. I appreciate that he tried a different approach than Ferrer, but unfortuantely his approach just doesn't work for the character. Depardieu's performance is not bad really, he technically is fine enough I suppose, just not impressive enough for Cyrano.

Monday, 4 July 2011

Best Actor 1990

And the Nominees Were:

Robert De Niro in Awakenings

Gerard Depardieu in Cyrano De Bergerac

Jeremy Irons in Reversal of Fortune

Kevin Costner in Dances with Wolves

Richard Harris in The Field