Best Scene: Speech.
Best Scene: Needing a new key.
Best Scene: Visiting his mother.
Best Scene: The shout.
Best Scene: Explaining his compromise.
Next Year: 1978 Supporting (found a lineup)
Showing posts with label Harvey Keitel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harvey Keitel. Show all posts
Monday, 13 April 2020
Alternate Best Actor 1978: Results
Best Scene: Speech.
Best Scene: Needing a new key.
Best Scene: Visiting his mother.
Best Scene: The shout.
Best Scene: Explaining his compromise.
Next Year: 1978 Supporting (found a lineup)
Monday, 6 April 2020
Alternate Best Actor 1978: Harvey Keitel in Fingers
Harvey Keitel did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Jimmy Fingers in Fingers.
Fingers is the original film about a man caught between a world of crime and musical aspirations.
I say original film, as I previously reviewed Romain Duris in The Beat That My Heart Skipped, the perhaps more artfully directed remake of the film from 2005. Both are good films though in their own right (though the sex scenes might tell you a little too much about its writer/director), and to inhabit slightly different experiences almost entirely realized within the central performance. Where Duris gave a strong portrayal of a normal guy caught up into a very difficult situation, Keitel doesn't something entirely different with the part. I'll admit when going into watching the film I thought I was more likely going to see a variation on Keitel's work in Mean Streets, which would've been closer to Duris's eventual approach, but Keitel genuinely surprised me. Where Duris portrayed a man who understood his situation in a sense, even though he was often powerless to deal with it, Keitel portrays a man who in unaware of it. This is fundamental in his approach to the part though which is that Jimmy might be a bit mentally ill, or at least mentally off from the duality of being raised by his criminal father and musician mother, who also appears to be a bit mentally off herself. Keitel's performance then is just not of this hood, or even conflicted hood. It is rather revealing of his Jimmy Fingers as a man wholly out of place in his existence in a way, though technically fashioned by that existence.
Keitel doesn't portray the character as having two sides, at least not exactly. We open the film as he is practicing Bach on the piano. Keitel portraying the uproarious passion of the man within it. This passion for music though doesn't stop once he stops playing. This as we instantly see him trying to entice a young woman while dragging along a radio that is constantly playing some his favorite music. Keitel excitedly speaks every word as Jimmy speaks about the music he loves so much. It is without hesitation that we see this passion from Keitel, where he emphasizes in a way that for Jimmy music is this essential part of him. He speaks of it as though others should just understand at as he does, and his eyes blaring with this rich sense of belief in every word of his. This in portraying Jimmy as just not a music lover, but also as this believer that everyone around him ought to love music as he does. Keitel's performance managing to find this natural, by in a way making it somewhat mentally off, in one way or another, in these moments. This isn't to say he undercuts the passion, quite the contrary, but rather he expresses a man who finds music as the truth of his life and life in general. This though with a lack of awareness that others do not share this same treatment, and showing essentially an anger when there are others who do respect the art as he does.
The scenes where Jimmy speaks to his father (Michael V. Gazzo) Keitel does not hide his excitement at the prospect of the audition, something this father is even generally supportive of. In this time though we also have his father give Jimmy two money collection jobs, as basically his muscle. This may seem at odds with the artistic man that is Jimmy in the opening scenes, however that would be misguided. Instead at the first money pick up job, it is with his radio that we're storming in. This where Keitel is beaming as he explains his love of the song coming from the radio, and just trying to inquire ways of how his radio can be supported. The man, who owes Jimmy's father money though doesn't relent to that, or Jimmy's initially gentle demands for the money. Jimmy in turn then violently accosts the man, and what is so unnerving in this is how natural Keitel makes it. It isn't a shift rather it is the same passion within the man, though now for different purpose where Keitel delivers the same intensity found in his love of music, now for violence. Keitel delivers on that menace but what makes it remarkable is how it segues in the moment with such ease as Keitel portrays Jimmy's as singular, despite the two interests seem at opposite ends of one another. This is made all the more clear when he gets into a violent argument with men questioning his radio, where Keitel's snap of threatening the man as this near instinct of a man who has this specific sensitivity.
The sensitivity that Keitel does not turn into making a "good" man but rather the man that he is. This as we see him in any instance, including his interactions with women. Keitel portrays this desperate need for some deeper show of affection, that is palatable and seething in these moments. There is a distress in his eyes of a man looking for some greater connection that he never finds. The same can be seen within when we see him playing piano, and now failing to do so for an audition. Again Keitel emphasizes the frustration in his passion that seem displaced, and in his failure to direct it in a away for others to understand. We find that though with his scenes with his father and his one important scene with his mother. His father who in general is more open, though prompting Jimmy to commit more violent acts, and his essential scene with his mother. In both there is a searing need in Keitel's eyes of a boy just looking for approval in his parents, with very differing expectations, and in turn grants sense to the man who thrusts himself so fiercely into a life of both art and violence. Keitel manages to create then this strange, yet convincing, extreme of the man who in a way becomes deranged by the oddness of the arithmetic that makes up his life. Keitel finding these emotional extremes then in the end believable fashion, as we see the man throwing himself still into song, but then just the same as we see his violent acts at the end of the film. Keitel defines Jimmy as a man defined by his passion, and does so powerfully whether it be through an elegant concerto or a brutal murder.
I say original film, as I previously reviewed Romain Duris in The Beat That My Heart Skipped, the perhaps more artfully directed remake of the film from 2005. Both are good films though in their own right (though the sex scenes might tell you a little too much about its writer/director), and to inhabit slightly different experiences almost entirely realized within the central performance. Where Duris gave a strong portrayal of a normal guy caught up into a very difficult situation, Keitel doesn't something entirely different with the part. I'll admit when going into watching the film I thought I was more likely going to see a variation on Keitel's work in Mean Streets, which would've been closer to Duris's eventual approach, but Keitel genuinely surprised me. Where Duris portrayed a man who understood his situation in a sense, even though he was often powerless to deal with it, Keitel portrays a man who in unaware of it. This is fundamental in his approach to the part though which is that Jimmy might be a bit mentally ill, or at least mentally off from the duality of being raised by his criminal father and musician mother, who also appears to be a bit mentally off herself. Keitel's performance then is just not of this hood, or even conflicted hood. It is rather revealing of his Jimmy Fingers as a man wholly out of place in his existence in a way, though technically fashioned by that existence.
Keitel doesn't portray the character as having two sides, at least not exactly. We open the film as he is practicing Bach on the piano. Keitel portraying the uproarious passion of the man within it. This passion for music though doesn't stop once he stops playing. This as we instantly see him trying to entice a young woman while dragging along a radio that is constantly playing some his favorite music. Keitel excitedly speaks every word as Jimmy speaks about the music he loves so much. It is without hesitation that we see this passion from Keitel, where he emphasizes in a way that for Jimmy music is this essential part of him. He speaks of it as though others should just understand at as he does, and his eyes blaring with this rich sense of belief in every word of his. This in portraying Jimmy as just not a music lover, but also as this believer that everyone around him ought to love music as he does. Keitel's performance managing to find this natural, by in a way making it somewhat mentally off, in one way or another, in these moments. This isn't to say he undercuts the passion, quite the contrary, but rather he expresses a man who finds music as the truth of his life and life in general. This though with a lack of awareness that others do not share this same treatment, and showing essentially an anger when there are others who do respect the art as he does.
The scenes where Jimmy speaks to his father (Michael V. Gazzo) Keitel does not hide his excitement at the prospect of the audition, something this father is even generally supportive of. In this time though we also have his father give Jimmy two money collection jobs, as basically his muscle. This may seem at odds with the artistic man that is Jimmy in the opening scenes, however that would be misguided. Instead at the first money pick up job, it is with his radio that we're storming in. This where Keitel is beaming as he explains his love of the song coming from the radio, and just trying to inquire ways of how his radio can be supported. The man, who owes Jimmy's father money though doesn't relent to that, or Jimmy's initially gentle demands for the money. Jimmy in turn then violently accosts the man, and what is so unnerving in this is how natural Keitel makes it. It isn't a shift rather it is the same passion within the man, though now for different purpose where Keitel delivers the same intensity found in his love of music, now for violence. Keitel delivers on that menace but what makes it remarkable is how it segues in the moment with such ease as Keitel portrays Jimmy's as singular, despite the two interests seem at opposite ends of one another. This is made all the more clear when he gets into a violent argument with men questioning his radio, where Keitel's snap of threatening the man as this near instinct of a man who has this specific sensitivity.
The sensitivity that Keitel does not turn into making a "good" man but rather the man that he is. This as we see him in any instance, including his interactions with women. Keitel portrays this desperate need for some deeper show of affection, that is palatable and seething in these moments. There is a distress in his eyes of a man looking for some greater connection that he never finds. The same can be seen within when we see him playing piano, and now failing to do so for an audition. Again Keitel emphasizes the frustration in his passion that seem displaced, and in his failure to direct it in a away for others to understand. We find that though with his scenes with his father and his one important scene with his mother. His father who in general is more open, though prompting Jimmy to commit more violent acts, and his essential scene with his mother. In both there is a searing need in Keitel's eyes of a boy just looking for approval in his parents, with very differing expectations, and in turn grants sense to the man who thrusts himself so fiercely into a life of both art and violence. Keitel manages to create then this strange, yet convincing, extreme of the man who in a way becomes deranged by the oddness of the arithmetic that makes up his life. Keitel finding these emotional extremes then in the end believable fashion, as we see the man throwing himself still into song, but then just the same as we see his violent acts at the end of the film. Keitel defines Jimmy as a man defined by his passion, and does so powerfully whether it be through an elegant concerto or a brutal murder.
Thursday, 2 April 2020
Alternate Best Actor 1978
Harvey Keitel in Fingers
Richard Pryor in Blue Collar
Alan Bates in The Shout
Elliott Gould in The Silent Partner
Steve McQueen in An Enemy of the People
Monday, 3 November 2014
Alternate Best Actor 1977: Results
Best Scene: Henry sees the "child's" insides
Best Scene: Roy sees the mother ship.
Best Scene: The final duel.
Best Scene: Giovanni sees the killer.
Best Scene: Ira gets the upper hand on the thug.
- Alberto Sordi in An Average Little Man
- John Gielgud in Providence
- Art Carney in The Late Show
- Bruno Ganz in The American Friend
- Boris Plotnikov in The Ascent
- James Coburn in Cross of Iron
- Keith Carradine in The Duellists
- John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever
- Marcello Mastroianni in A Special Day
- Richard Dreyfuss in The Goodbye Girl
- Vladimir Gostyukhin in The Ascent
- William Devane in Rolling Thunder
- Paul Newman in Slap Shot
- Robert Shaw in Black Sunday
- Bruce Dern in Black Sunday
- Roy Scheider in Sorcerer
- Sanjeev Kumar in The Chess Players
- Richard Dreyfuss in Close Encounters of the Third Kind
- Richard Burton in Equus
- Sam Neill in Sleeping Dogs
- Woody Allen in Annie Hall
- Kostas Kazakos in Iphigenia
- Bruno S. in Stroszek
- Jack Lemmon in Airport '77
- Gregory Peck in MacArthur
- Andrey Myagkov in Office Romance
- Fernando Rey in Elisa, Vida Mía
- Rutger Hauer in Soldier of Orange
- Jerzy Radziwiłowicz in Man of Marble
- Richard Chamberlain in The Last Wave
- Mark Hamill in Star Wars
- Robert Shaw in The Deep
- Vyacheslav Tikhonov in White Bim Black Ear
- David Carradine in The Serpent's Egg
- Jack Nance in Eraserhead
- Saverio Marconi in Padre Padrone
- Saeed Jaffrey in The Chess Players
- Samy Ben Youb in Madame Rosa
- George C. Scott in Island in the Streams
- Marcel Sabourin in J.A. Martin Photographer
- Fernando Rey in That Obscure Object of Desire
- Charles Denner in The Man Who Loved Women
- Peter Firth in Equus
- George Burns in Oh God!
- Bob Newhart in The Rescuers
- George Segal in Fun With Dick and Jane
- Burt Reynolds in Smokey and the Bandit
- Robert De Niro in New York, New York
- Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me
- Mel Brooks in High Anxiety
- Sean Marshall in Pete's Dragon
- Michael Palin in Jabberwocky
- Nick Nolte in The Deep
- Al Pacino in Bobby Deerfield
- Len Cariou in A Little Night Music
- John Denver in Oh God!
- Richard Burton in Exorcist II: The Heretic
- Henry Winkler in Heroes
- George Lauris in Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot
Sunday, 2 November 2014
Alternate Best Actor 1977: Harvey Keitel and Keith Carradine in The Duellists
Harvey Keitel did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Gabriel Feraud and Keith Carradine did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Armand d'Hubert in The Duellists.
The Duellists is a great film about two soldiers who continually fight duels with each other during the rise and fall of Napoleon.
The casting may seem odd with the decidedly American Harvey Keitel and Keith Carradine in the roles of two French men. Of course if they were two British actors, Michael York and Olivier Reed were apparently director Ridley Scott's first choice, no one would bat an eye even though that's hardly being French either. The casting though I think only seems odd before you actually watch the film and see how their performances actually work in context to the film. Anyway neither man puts on a French or even English accent in the film. They do both adjust their accents though which is a good thing since Keitel's natural accent is particularly strong. Keitel doesn't cover up his accent though but rather all he does is ease back on it, as does Carradine. Keitel just sorta takes away the sharper edges of his usual accent and actually is quite effective in overcoming his apparent miscasting.
The film opens as we Gabriel Feraud, an officer in Napoleon's army, as he is dueling Alec Guinness's son. Feraud seriously injures the man leaving him to be reprimanded for injuring the great actor's son like that. Unfortunately the man given the task as messenger of this reprimand is Carradine's Armand d'Hubert. Feraud is not a very reasonable man though viewing the messenger as giving the insult which begins their first duel. Keitel's actually makes himself appeared to be very well cast because he's someone who just has that natural volatility to his screen persona. This allows Keitel to be quite effective in the way he portrays Feraud's nature which is to duel first and to think of the possible consequences, well never actually. Keitel is not overt about this insistent quality, in that he doesn't really yell all that much, but rather there is just such an intensity in his eyes as Feraud demands an honorable fight.
Carradine's performance acts as a great counterpoint to Keitel's as he shows d'Hubert to be in many ways the opposite of Feraud, although they both believe fervently in their own personal sense of honor. Carradine makes himself kinda the straight man, and easily the more sympathetic of the two as he portrays d'Hubert as an easygoing guy who's rather charming a low key sort of way. Their initial face off when d'Hubert gives the message to him is quite memorable. Keitel's terrific in the basically foolish passion he portrays in Feraud as he demands a battle to the death immediately over the insult d'Hubert gave him, even though d'Hubert was only doing his job. Carradine does quite well by merely portraying d'Hubert's reaction as what any sensible man's reaction would be. Carradine's disbelief is perfect in basically setting up how d'Hubert whole association with Feraud is one of obnoxious obligation.
Keitel and Carradine were perhaps perfectly cast actually since the way they handle this feud works so well in context to the film. There is a certain comedic bent about their performances that never makes the proceedings seem stuffy in the least, as they might have with less interesting actors. I love how Keitel does not really portray Feraud as really even hating d'Hubert in anyway. In his scenes he has not really a death stare toward d'Hubert at any time but rather something much stranger. It never feels unnatural though as Keitel shows this almost insane, yet he is so proper about it in his gentlemanly way, devotion in Feraud to his code of honor. It is in this code where Feraud wants to apparently kill d'Hubert not for hate of d'Hubert as a man, but hate directly at the slight insult that d'Hubert once gave him. Keitel makes this drive in Feraud a force of nature and something that always seems perfectly sane for a man like Feraud.
Carradine on the other hand is equally good by portraying d'Hubert reactions to every duel in a far more normal fashion. He does also bring a passion in terms of the idea of honor, but Carradine makes it less vicious so to speak. Carradine is very good in portraying such a quietly growing desperation d'Hubert as he has to keep fighting Feraud despite trying his best to avoid him using various loopholes in the dueling guide such as not being able to fight in times of war or when the men aren't the same military rank. Carradine is very good by just playing it close to the chest and giving a pretty moving portrayal of a man forced by circumstance to keep risking his life. It isn't in big speeches where d'Hubert expresses this but rather just simple reactions. Carradine makes the most of these by just showing the honest fears of a man who has to fight to a possible death simply because he was the guy who had to deliver a message one day.
Both actors are fantastic in the actual dueling scenes. It is rather amazing just how good they are because they do more than you would expect in the scenes. On one end physically they are both incredibly believable in just displaying the physicality of each fight. Their middle fight of endurance is particularly good as both men show their characters are at complete exhaustion. The two are so good in giving tension to the fight in portraying such genuine reactions in the two with Carradine bringing a little more obvious concern and Keitel more ferociousness. What I love best perhaps though is that they do manage a certain lightheartedness within the tension. They both are so careful never to compromise the severity of the duels though. They are entertaining though by carrying themselves always with the reserve of a proper gentleman and soldier even though their lives are on the line.
Each actor realizes their character so well to make the ending rather remarkable. Carradine makes d'Hubert someone we can naturally root for and makes the happy ending feel completely appropriate. Keitel is equally good by never allowing Feraud to seem to be even a villain. It is rather his pride and duty which Keitel creates such a strong sense of in his character. This allows for his character's ending to be surprisingly moving as he shows a man basically looking into the void as he know is a man whose lost his purpose in life. Unlike Ryan O'Neal in Barry Lyndon, who also played a duelist, by the way here's two more guys who would've been better in that role, they completely overcome the fact that they seem miscast on paper. The main way they do this is by just giving a damn good performance. They make the duels more than just a series of physical clashes, but as well a consistently fascinating clash of personalities.
The casting may seem odd with the decidedly American Harvey Keitel and Keith Carradine in the roles of two French men. Of course if they were two British actors, Michael York and Olivier Reed were apparently director Ridley Scott's first choice, no one would bat an eye even though that's hardly being French either. The casting though I think only seems odd before you actually watch the film and see how their performances actually work in context to the film. Anyway neither man puts on a French or even English accent in the film. They do both adjust their accents though which is a good thing since Keitel's natural accent is particularly strong. Keitel doesn't cover up his accent though but rather all he does is ease back on it, as does Carradine. Keitel just sorta takes away the sharper edges of his usual accent and actually is quite effective in overcoming his apparent miscasting.
Carradine's performance acts as a great counterpoint to Keitel's as he shows d'Hubert to be in many ways the opposite of Feraud, although they both believe fervently in their own personal sense of honor. Carradine makes himself kinda the straight man, and easily the more sympathetic of the two as he portrays d'Hubert as an easygoing guy who's rather charming a low key sort of way. Their initial face off when d'Hubert gives the message to him is quite memorable. Keitel's terrific in the basically foolish passion he portrays in Feraud as he demands a battle to the death immediately over the insult d'Hubert gave him, even though d'Hubert was only doing his job. Carradine does quite well by merely portraying d'Hubert's reaction as what any sensible man's reaction would be. Carradine's disbelief is perfect in basically setting up how d'Hubert whole association with Feraud is one of obnoxious obligation.
Keitel and Carradine were perhaps perfectly cast actually since the way they handle this feud works so well in context to the film. There is a certain comedic bent about their performances that never makes the proceedings seem stuffy in the least, as they might have with less interesting actors. I love how Keitel does not really portray Feraud as really even hating d'Hubert in anyway. In his scenes he has not really a death stare toward d'Hubert at any time but rather something much stranger. It never feels unnatural though as Keitel shows this almost insane, yet he is so proper about it in his gentlemanly way, devotion in Feraud to his code of honor. It is in this code where Feraud wants to apparently kill d'Hubert not for hate of d'Hubert as a man, but hate directly at the slight insult that d'Hubert once gave him. Keitel makes this drive in Feraud a force of nature and something that always seems perfectly sane for a man like Feraud.
Carradine on the other hand is equally good by portraying d'Hubert reactions to every duel in a far more normal fashion. He does also bring a passion in terms of the idea of honor, but Carradine makes it less vicious so to speak. Carradine is very good in portraying such a quietly growing desperation d'Hubert as he has to keep fighting Feraud despite trying his best to avoid him using various loopholes in the dueling guide such as not being able to fight in times of war or when the men aren't the same military rank. Carradine is very good by just playing it close to the chest and giving a pretty moving portrayal of a man forced by circumstance to keep risking his life. It isn't in big speeches where d'Hubert expresses this but rather just simple reactions. Carradine makes the most of these by just showing the honest fears of a man who has to fight to a possible death simply because he was the guy who had to deliver a message one day.
Both actors are fantastic in the actual dueling scenes. It is rather amazing just how good they are because they do more than you would expect in the scenes. On one end physically they are both incredibly believable in just displaying the physicality of each fight. Their middle fight of endurance is particularly good as both men show their characters are at complete exhaustion. The two are so good in giving tension to the fight in portraying such genuine reactions in the two with Carradine bringing a little more obvious concern and Keitel more ferociousness. What I love best perhaps though is that they do manage a certain lightheartedness within the tension. They both are so careful never to compromise the severity of the duels though. They are entertaining though by carrying themselves always with the reserve of a proper gentleman and soldier even though their lives are on the line.
Each actor realizes their character so well to make the ending rather remarkable. Carradine makes d'Hubert someone we can naturally root for and makes the happy ending feel completely appropriate. Keitel is equally good by never allowing Feraud to seem to be even a villain. It is rather his pride and duty which Keitel creates such a strong sense of in his character. This allows for his character's ending to be surprisingly moving as he shows a man basically looking into the void as he know is a man whose lost his purpose in life. Unlike Ryan O'Neal in Barry Lyndon, who also played a duelist, by the way here's two more guys who would've been better in that role, they completely overcome the fact that they seem miscast on paper. The main way they do this is by just giving a damn good performance. They make the duels more than just a series of physical clashes, but as well a consistently fascinating clash of personalities.
(Keitel)
Monday, 27 October 2014
Alternate Best Actor 1977
Alberto Sordi in An Average Little Man
Jack Nance in Eraserhead
Richard Dreyfuss in Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Art Carney in The Late Show
Harvey Keitel in The Duellists
Friday, 24 August 2012
Alternate Best Actor 1992: Results
- Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven
- Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant
- Stephen Rea in The Crying Game
- Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross
- Robert Downey Jr. in Chaplin
- Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinny
- Willem Dafoe in Light Sleeper
- Peter Coyote in Bitter Moon
- Joe Pesci in The Public Eye
- Michael Caine in The Muppet Christmas Carol
- Russell Crowe in Romper Stomper
- Laurence Fishburne in Deep Cover
- Daniel Day-Lewis in The Last of the Mohicans
- Benoît Poelvoorde in Man Bites Dog
- Tony Leung Chiu-Wai in Hardboiled
- Chow Yun-Fat in Hardboiled
- Gary Oldman in Bram Stoker's Dracula
- Jeremy Irons in Damage
- Denzel Washington in Malcolm X
- Steve Buscemi in In the Soup
- Eric Stoltz in The Waterdance
- Tim Robbins in Bob Roberts
- Daniel Auteuil in A Heart in Winter
- Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men
- Woody Harrelson in White Men Can't Jump
- Wesley Snipes in White Men Can't Jump
- Tim Roth in Reservoir Dogs
- Harvey Keitel in Reservoir Dogs
- Gary Sinise in Of Mice and Men
- Anthony Hopkins in Howard's End
- Bill Paxton in One False Move
- Tim Robbins in The Player
- Ethan Hawke in A Midnight Clear
- Edward James Olmos in American Me
- Brendan Fraser in School Ties
- John Lithgow in Raising Cain
- Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman
- Harrison Ford in Patriot Games
- John Malkovich in Of Mice and Men
- Campbell Scott in Singles
- Bruce Campbell in Army of Darkness
- Daniel Pollock in Romper Stomper
- Mike Myers in Wayne's World
- Charles Grodin in Beethoven
- Robert Redford in Sneakers
- Michael Keaton in Batman Returns
- Brad Pitt in A River Runs Through It
- Val Kilmer in Thunderheart
- Timothy Balme in Dead Alive
- Michael Douglas in Basic Instinct
- Emilio Estevez in The Mighty Ducks
- Danny DeVito in Hoffa
- Bruce Willis in Death Becomes Her
- Matt Dillon in Singles
- Dennis Haysbert in Love Field
- Gerard Depardieu in 1492 Conquest of Paradise
- Tom Cruise in Far and Away
- Chris O'Donnell in Scent of a Woman
- Jack Nicholson in Hoffa
- Rick Moranis in Honey I Blew Up the Kid
- Kurt Russell in Captain Ron
- Sean Astin in Encino Man
- Martin Short in Captain Ron
- Jonathan Brandis in Sidekicks
- Scott Weinger in Aladdin
- Brendan Frasier in Encino Man
- Rodney Dangerfield in Ladybugs
- Luke Perry in Buffy the Vampire Slayer
- Craig Sheffer in A River Runs Through It
- Nick Nolte in Lorenzo's Oil
- Macaulay Culkin in Home Alone 2
- Hugh Grant in Bitter Moon
- Billy Crystal in Mr. Saturday Night
Alternate Best Actor 1992: Harvey Keitel in Reservoir Dogs
Harvey Keitel did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Larry Dimmick mainly known as Mr. White in Reservoir Dogs.
Reservoir Dogs is about a group of men performing a jewel heist that goes wrong due to an inside man. Reservoir Dogs like most of Quentin Tarantino films I like even though he can be self indulgent with his dialogue at times.
Harvey Kietel is not an actor known for his accents, or emphasis on any sort of mannerisms in his performances. He tends to be a rather straight to the point sort of actor, but that does not mean he can not create a variety of memorable characters. In 1992 he not only gave his absolutely incredible performance as the titular Bad Lieutenant, but as well gave this performance here as one of six criminals who do the heist that goes wrong. Mr. White seems to be one of the more experienced ones as well as one of the more professional.
Keitel is appropriately convincing in the role as the career criminal Mr. White. He portrays him as a clam headed man who knows exactly how to do what to do with a great deal of ease. Whether it it setting up the plan, spending some time with the other criminals, or killing a couple of police officers in a car moving on him, Kietel portrays it with the same cool method. He makes it obvious that Mr. White is without a doubt a career criminal who has participated in his fair share of jobs, and is able to do them efficiently without every losing his head during the situation when done right.
Kietel here is careful though in that he does not ever try to make Mr. White into some cold calculating killer or psychopath. Yes Mr. White does kill people in the film, but Kietel does always show this to be about his his survival rather than any sort of sadistic urge. This is the reason why Mr. White takes very little liking to Mr. Blond (Michael Madsen) who goes on a sadistic killing spree during the heist. Keitel is strong in his scenes because he always puts to the forefront that it is not only the lack of professionalism that offends him about Blond's reaction, but it is in fact underneath his moral code which is above murdering bystanders.
What really is the crux of his performance though is Mr. White's friendship with the younger heist member Mr. Orange (Tim Roth). Keitel is good in his scenes before and after the heist. Before he acts quite warmly as a mentor to him, just being once again very professional as he teaches the new man the ropes. Later on though after Mr. Orange is shot in the stomach, Keitel is effective in showing the guilt in Mr. White believing that he let the younger man down. Keitel makes Mr. White's eventual choice to stand by Mr. Orange almost to the end realizing White's warmth as a mentor toward Mr. Orange believably.
Keitel is strong throughout the film even though his role is some limited, as the film does try to spread out the time each character gets to shine, although the amount of time Mr. White and Orange are given would put them in lead. What he does have to work with though Keitel does make the most out of giving a believable portrait of this career criminal. His performance here never is even close to the power of his incredible performance in Bad Lieutenant, but this performance though still stands as a testament to Kietel's considerable strength as an actor.
Harvey Kietel is not an actor known for his accents, or emphasis on any sort of mannerisms in his performances. He tends to be a rather straight to the point sort of actor, but that does not mean he can not create a variety of memorable characters. In 1992 he not only gave his absolutely incredible performance as the titular Bad Lieutenant, but as well gave this performance here as one of six criminals who do the heist that goes wrong. Mr. White seems to be one of the more experienced ones as well as one of the more professional.
Keitel is appropriately convincing in the role as the career criminal Mr. White. He portrays him as a clam headed man who knows exactly how to do what to do with a great deal of ease. Whether it it setting up the plan, spending some time with the other criminals, or killing a couple of police officers in a car moving on him, Kietel portrays it with the same cool method. He makes it obvious that Mr. White is without a doubt a career criminal who has participated in his fair share of jobs, and is able to do them efficiently without every losing his head during the situation when done right.
Kietel here is careful though in that he does not ever try to make Mr. White into some cold calculating killer or psychopath. Yes Mr. White does kill people in the film, but Kietel does always show this to be about his his survival rather than any sort of sadistic urge. This is the reason why Mr. White takes very little liking to Mr. Blond (Michael Madsen) who goes on a sadistic killing spree during the heist. Keitel is strong in his scenes because he always puts to the forefront that it is not only the lack of professionalism that offends him about Blond's reaction, but it is in fact underneath his moral code which is above murdering bystanders.
What really is the crux of his performance though is Mr. White's friendship with the younger heist member Mr. Orange (Tim Roth). Keitel is good in his scenes before and after the heist. Before he acts quite warmly as a mentor to him, just being once again very professional as he teaches the new man the ropes. Later on though after Mr. Orange is shot in the stomach, Keitel is effective in showing the guilt in Mr. White believing that he let the younger man down. Keitel makes Mr. White's eventual choice to stand by Mr. Orange almost to the end realizing White's warmth as a mentor toward Mr. Orange believably.
Keitel is strong throughout the film even though his role is some limited, as the film does try to spread out the time each character gets to shine, although the amount of time Mr. White and Orange are given would put them in lead. What he does have to work with though Keitel does make the most out of giving a believable portrait of this career criminal. His performance here never is even close to the power of his incredible performance in Bad Lieutenant, but this performance though still stands as a testament to Kietel's considerable strength as an actor.
Saturday, 18 August 2012
Alternate Best Actor 1992: Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant
Harvey Kietel did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character in Bad Lieutenant.
Bad Lieutenant is a character study of a Catholic police Lieutenant who investigates the rape of a nun by two men.
Harvey Kietel was of course not nominated for this role as the bad Lieutenant despite receiving plenty of rave reviews for his performance. Well the most obvious reason for his snub was that his performance was in a NC-17 rated film, which is not a rating you want if you want an Oscar nomination. This is especially true for a man as the academy just does not seem to like men naked, so it is easy to see Kietel get snubbed as he is one actor in particular who does not mind showing everything he's got. The only time Kietel was nominated was his multilayer work in Bugsy, multilayer in clothes not in characterization, I think Michael Fassbender might need to take note of this if he ever wishes to obtain a nomination.
I think what really did not help is the nature of the bad Lieutenant as a character, and the uncompromising fashion in which Kietel portrays him. The bad before the Lieutenant is entirely required for the description of this cop. The Lieutenant is not at all good in his workaday life from the very opening scene where he is checking out an accident. Kietel approaches the role from this early scene without any special style to his performance. He is not like Denzel Washington in Training Day showboating his way through his role as a corrupt cop, instead Kietel is far more effective and realistic through how down to earth he portrays the part. In his scene here with nothing more than a glance Kietel portrays that the Lieutenant is only interested in checking out the deceased female victim of the crime scene, rather than having any concern for the actual crime.
Kietel never tries to portray the part as some cool man of the streets who knows just how to be a dirty cop. No instead Kietel shows there to be nothing special in what the Lieutenant does no matter what it does. When the Lieutenant is taking drugs constantly and very casually throughout the film, there is not a hint of pleasure in Kietel's performance. He rather just is doing it, since for the Lieutenant cynical morality he has no reason not to do it. There is no belief there it seems as Kietel moves from corrupt action to action. He doesn't play it up like an even knowing act of corruption he handles it all so naturally. Due to the fact that Kietel is so blunt in his portrayal it makes the scene have all the more of a punch to them, because it all seems such an average day for the Bad Lieutenant.
Kietel always portrays the Lieutenant as a man not even as even a special corrupt cop, just simply a corrupt cop. An interesting act though Kietel pulls off is that the Lieutenant to some degree pretends to be a whole lot more than he really is. When ever he calls the baseball game in the film with very large and foolish bets that always end up the opposite of the way he plans, Kietel though brings in a certain pompous quality with the Lieutenant. Kietel does not portray this as a pompousness in the way of say John Gielgud would, but in fact shows the Lieutenant trying to be the big man of the streets who can simply just sense things. The fact is he can't though and there is always a weakness shown by Kietel, and he always makes the point that as much as the Lieutenant wants to act like he knows the score, he knows nothing.
The Lieutenant's behavior though can become actually even more severe than his drug taking, money pilfering, prostitution soliciting, particularly in his scene where he forces two women to perform in front of him while he pleasures himself. Kietel in this scene is particularly effective in portraying just how blunt the Lieutenant is in his cruelty. Kietel is especially to the point in this scene in that the Lieutenant is simply going to get what he wants, and he is brutally intense in portraying the Lieutenant's depravity. Kietel does not makes excuses for the Lieutenant here just portraying the Lieutenant as a man constantly looking for quick satisfaction and using his power as a cop to do so.
The Lieutenant as depraved as he is, and as much as he doesn't at times, he does have a very hidden sense of morality that is strongly associated with his background as a Catholic. The crux of the film comes in the nun rape and a very important moments as he looks at the nun after the rape. Throughout the rest he breezed through every horrible act he committed, but here Kietel subtly suggests that this is something that deeply affects him. Although Kietel does portray this as something passing over him it continues as he continues with the case and listens in to the nun in a confessional who refuses to name the rapists and even says she forgives them. Kietel is absolutely amazing in portraying just how this throws of the Lieutenant's whole cyncial view of the world.
The very end of the film is simply one astonishing scene after another by Kietel as he first tries to convince the Nun the vengeance is a good thing. Kietel is brilliant, as he makes the Lieutenant pained to try to bring the woman to some sort of lower level of human emotion, since he simply cannot face the fact that everything is not as horrendous as he is. This is followed by the Lieutenant breaking down and seeming to see Jesus in the church asking for forgiveness. Even with all of what he has done before Kietel is absolutely heartbreaking as he brings to life just how this revelation in the Lieutenant has shattered him, and forced him to face the fact that he is a bad man. Kietel brings about the man that was always below all the depravity that cannot bear the fact of what he has become.
Soon afterwards though the Lieutenant is able to track down the two rapists, and the following is a truly set of bizarre circumstance. Kietel though is absolutely amazing the Lieutenant is constantly struggling with himself in what to do. He is able to truly convey the confusion in the man that knows that he is the worst. This is not a simple rejection of his past though as the Lieutenant still uses his drugs and still threatens to kill both the men at gun point. The difference though comes in his attitude. Before everything the Lieutenant did he took in basically stride from one moment to the next here though Kietel shows that the Lieutenant is absolutely devoted to the moment. It is simply a stunning scene by Kietel as he brings about the complete emotional breakdown. This is an incredible performance by Harvey Kietel unforgiving in any aspect of his portrayal making this final face down with morality an unforgettable ending to this uncompromising characterization.
Harvey Kietel was of course not nominated for this role as the bad Lieutenant despite receiving plenty of rave reviews for his performance. Well the most obvious reason for his snub was that his performance was in a NC-17 rated film, which is not a rating you want if you want an Oscar nomination. This is especially true for a man as the academy just does not seem to like men naked, so it is easy to see Kietel get snubbed as he is one actor in particular who does not mind showing everything he's got. The only time Kietel was nominated was his multilayer work in Bugsy, multilayer in clothes not in characterization, I think Michael Fassbender might need to take note of this if he ever wishes to obtain a nomination.
I think what really did not help is the nature of the bad Lieutenant as a character, and the uncompromising fashion in which Kietel portrays him. The bad before the Lieutenant is entirely required for the description of this cop. The Lieutenant is not at all good in his workaday life from the very opening scene where he is checking out an accident. Kietel approaches the role from this early scene without any special style to his performance. He is not like Denzel Washington in Training Day showboating his way through his role as a corrupt cop, instead Kietel is far more effective and realistic through how down to earth he portrays the part. In his scene here with nothing more than a glance Kietel portrays that the Lieutenant is only interested in checking out the deceased female victim of the crime scene, rather than having any concern for the actual crime.
Kietel never tries to portray the part as some cool man of the streets who knows just how to be a dirty cop. No instead Kietel shows there to be nothing special in what the Lieutenant does no matter what it does. When the Lieutenant is taking drugs constantly and very casually throughout the film, there is not a hint of pleasure in Kietel's performance. He rather just is doing it, since for the Lieutenant cynical morality he has no reason not to do it. There is no belief there it seems as Kietel moves from corrupt action to action. He doesn't play it up like an even knowing act of corruption he handles it all so naturally. Due to the fact that Kietel is so blunt in his portrayal it makes the scene have all the more of a punch to them, because it all seems such an average day for the Bad Lieutenant.
Kietel always portrays the Lieutenant as a man not even as even a special corrupt cop, just simply a corrupt cop. An interesting act though Kietel pulls off is that the Lieutenant to some degree pretends to be a whole lot more than he really is. When ever he calls the baseball game in the film with very large and foolish bets that always end up the opposite of the way he plans, Kietel though brings in a certain pompous quality with the Lieutenant. Kietel does not portray this as a pompousness in the way of say John Gielgud would, but in fact shows the Lieutenant trying to be the big man of the streets who can simply just sense things. The fact is he can't though and there is always a weakness shown by Kietel, and he always makes the point that as much as the Lieutenant wants to act like he knows the score, he knows nothing.
The Lieutenant's behavior though can become actually even more severe than his drug taking, money pilfering, prostitution soliciting, particularly in his scene where he forces two women to perform in front of him while he pleasures himself. Kietel in this scene is particularly effective in portraying just how blunt the Lieutenant is in his cruelty. Kietel is especially to the point in this scene in that the Lieutenant is simply going to get what he wants, and he is brutally intense in portraying the Lieutenant's depravity. Kietel does not makes excuses for the Lieutenant here just portraying the Lieutenant as a man constantly looking for quick satisfaction and using his power as a cop to do so.
The Lieutenant as depraved as he is, and as much as he doesn't at times, he does have a very hidden sense of morality that is strongly associated with his background as a Catholic. The crux of the film comes in the nun rape and a very important moments as he looks at the nun after the rape. Throughout the rest he breezed through every horrible act he committed, but here Kietel subtly suggests that this is something that deeply affects him. Although Kietel does portray this as something passing over him it continues as he continues with the case and listens in to the nun in a confessional who refuses to name the rapists and even says she forgives them. Kietel is absolutely amazing in portraying just how this throws of the Lieutenant's whole cyncial view of the world.
The very end of the film is simply one astonishing scene after another by Kietel as he first tries to convince the Nun the vengeance is a good thing. Kietel is brilliant, as he makes the Lieutenant pained to try to bring the woman to some sort of lower level of human emotion, since he simply cannot face the fact that everything is not as horrendous as he is. This is followed by the Lieutenant breaking down and seeming to see Jesus in the church asking for forgiveness. Even with all of what he has done before Kietel is absolutely heartbreaking as he brings to life just how this revelation in the Lieutenant has shattered him, and forced him to face the fact that he is a bad man. Kietel brings about the man that was always below all the depravity that cannot bear the fact of what he has become.
Soon afterwards though the Lieutenant is able to track down the two rapists, and the following is a truly set of bizarre circumstance. Kietel though is absolutely amazing the Lieutenant is constantly struggling with himself in what to do. He is able to truly convey the confusion in the man that knows that he is the worst. This is not a simple rejection of his past though as the Lieutenant still uses his drugs and still threatens to kill both the men at gun point. The difference though comes in his attitude. Before everything the Lieutenant did he took in basically stride from one moment to the next here though Kietel shows that the Lieutenant is absolutely devoted to the moment. It is simply a stunning scene by Kietel as he brings about the complete emotional breakdown. This is an incredible performance by Harvey Kietel unforgiving in any aspect of his portrayal making this final face down with morality an unforgettable ending to this uncompromising characterization.
Thursday, 16 August 2012
Alternate Best Actor 1992
Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant
Harvey Keitel in Reservoir Dogs
Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross
Gary Oldman in Bram Stoker's Dracula
Tim Robbins in The Player
Sunday, 18 December 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1991: Results
John Goodman in Barton Fink
Ted Levine in The Silence of the Lambs
Gary Oldman in JFK
Thursday, 15 December 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1991: Harvey Keitel in Bugsy
Harvey Keitel received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Mickey Cohen in Bugsy.
Harvey Keitel portrays gangster Mickey Cohen who is a bit of renegade gangster at first but eventually he comes to work for Bugsy Segal (Warren Beatty). This is another odd career nomination for Keitel that is his only nomination he has received so far but for very unsubstantial work. He does have an intensity in the role though in his first scene where he yells at Bugsy for awhile, but than he quiets down in his very next scene where he makes a deal with Bugsy and really quiets down for the rest of the film.
After his first scene he barely is on screen and when he is on screen he really is just in the background making the occasional comment that is in no way remarkable. Cohen as a character in this film just simply has little to no impact on the film. Aside from his first scene there is never a scene that even focuses on him for more than a few minor moments. This really is a character as written that it would have been impossible for any actor to make anything special out of it. Keitel though does really portray the part of Mickey Cohen as well as anyone could. He talks tough he has the right demeanor for the typical gangster. He really is just as he should be but the problem of course is the fact that Cohen is such an undemanding role that there just is nothing about Keitel's performance that comes across as memorable or even particularly interesting.
After his first scene he barely is on screen and when he is on screen he really is just in the background making the occasional comment that is in no way remarkable. Cohen as a character in this film just simply has little to no impact on the film. Aside from his first scene there is never a scene that even focuses on him for more than a few minor moments. This really is a character as written that it would have been impossible for any actor to make anything special out of it. Keitel though does really portray the part of Mickey Cohen as well as anyone could. He talks tough he has the right demeanor for the typical gangster. He really is just as he should be but the problem of course is the fact that Cohen is such an undemanding role that there just is nothing about Keitel's performance that comes across as memorable or even particularly interesting.
Wednesday, 14 December 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1991
Ben Kingsley in Bugsy
Harvey Keitel in Bugsy
Jack Palance in City Slickers
Michael Lerner in Barton Fink
Tommy Lee Jones in JFK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)