Fredric March in Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde
Wallace Beery in The Champ
Alfred Lunt in The Guardsman
Poor Alfred Lunt, that year it would have been faster to announce, and the loser is....
Thursday, 9 June 2011
Best Actor 1932
Fredric March in Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde
Wallace Beery in The Champ
Alfred Lunt in The Guardsman
Poor Alfred Lunt, that year it would have been faster to announce, and the loser is....
Best Actor 1995: Results
Morgan Freeman in Seven
Best Actor 1995: Nicolas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas
Nicolas Cage won his Oscar from his first nomination for portraying Ben Sanderson in Leaving Las Vegas.
Leaving Las Vegas is a well made, although rather depressing film about a suicidal alcoholic, and a prostitute who strike up a relationship in Las Vegas.
Cage is an actor who is quite strange to say the least, and I feel has a bit of a Burt Lancaster thing going on. Why Burt Lancaster, well because he seems to have two types of performances, rather manic ones, and ones of a more stiff spine sort of guy. Just like Lancaster Cage's more interesting, and better performances always tend to be the manic ones.
Leaving Las Vegas certainly falls in the first category of Cage performances, since he never really plays a single moment safe in this film, and is constantly going out on a limb in this performance. This quite necessary though as Cage is required to do a whole lot in his performance, and frankly the film never really gives him much of a break.
An important aspect of his performance which Cage continually works on is his slow degradation from drinking himself to death. Cage is effective in this, in that at first in the film it shows how he still is able to come back a little from complete physical annihilation, but Cage as the film goes on shows how Ben slowly becomes worse and worse, losing his speech, as well his physical abilities. Cage never really overplays these scenes and portrays this transition marvelously.
Cage's portrayal of an alcoholic, is quite well done. In that it shows how he despite drinking constantly he never becomes so truly drunk, rather is just in a constant state of semi inebriation. Cage is good because he shows that Ben really cannot get completely soused anymore because he simply has been drinking for such a long time, and with so much alcohol it just never can effect him as much as Ben probably wants it to.
It is interesting to note that Cage really technically does not have this great leap of change in this film, he wants to kill himself from the very beginning of the film. It never shows the Ben that lives before with a family and a job, instead it only shows him after his fall. Cage though does manage to suggest Ben's past, and how his drinking slowly ruined his life, by the way he shows he cannot live without drinking, even though it is killing him, because drinking is the only thing that can limit his pain he has suffered.
Cage throughout the film has basically scenes where he gets to show off a bit, they include when he is talking on his tape recorder about a woman, his whole opening scenes, or even the scene where he falls on the glass table and calls himself a prickly pear. Although the point of some of these scenes might be a little questionable, Cage still does a great job with them, because he still keeps them in the character of Ben, even if they are quite wild in nature, but he makes them work showing this wildness coming from basically his demise.
The most important aspect of his performance is Ben's relationship with the prostitute Sera (Elisabeth Shue). Their relationship is rather unique in each must accept each other's vices to be together, and it is fascinating how Shue and Cage develop an honest love relationship between the two without making seem forced. Cage though properly shows that Ben never truly gets over the fact that she is a prostitute which leads to their divide near the end of the film, since he really could not get over her being with others.
Shue and Cage work marvelously together and their final meeting at the end is made heartbreaking due to this fact. Cage in this last scene shows that Ben has changed in more ways than his physical disintegration over his time in Las Vegas. Cage in fact carefully shows that Ben's relationship with Sera did change him into a greater understanding of who he was, as well as a greater understanding of life, before his final end. Cage's performance is an effective work throughout the film. Cage really does succeed in this film with his complex and daring performance.
Cage is an actor who is quite strange to say the least, and I feel has a bit of a Burt Lancaster thing going on. Why Burt Lancaster, well because he seems to have two types of performances, rather manic ones, and ones of a more stiff spine sort of guy. Just like Lancaster Cage's more interesting, and better performances always tend to be the manic ones.
Leaving Las Vegas certainly falls in the first category of Cage performances, since he never really plays a single moment safe in this film, and is constantly going out on a limb in this performance. This quite necessary though as Cage is required to do a whole lot in his performance, and frankly the film never really gives him much of a break.
An important aspect of his performance which Cage continually works on is his slow degradation from drinking himself to death. Cage is effective in this, in that at first in the film it shows how he still is able to come back a little from complete physical annihilation, but Cage as the film goes on shows how Ben slowly becomes worse and worse, losing his speech, as well his physical abilities. Cage never really overplays these scenes and portrays this transition marvelously.
Cage's portrayal of an alcoholic, is quite well done. In that it shows how he despite drinking constantly he never becomes so truly drunk, rather is just in a constant state of semi inebriation. Cage is good because he shows that Ben really cannot get completely soused anymore because he simply has been drinking for such a long time, and with so much alcohol it just never can effect him as much as Ben probably wants it to.
It is interesting to note that Cage really technically does not have this great leap of change in this film, he wants to kill himself from the very beginning of the film. It never shows the Ben that lives before with a family and a job, instead it only shows him after his fall. Cage though does manage to suggest Ben's past, and how his drinking slowly ruined his life, by the way he shows he cannot live without drinking, even though it is killing him, because drinking is the only thing that can limit his pain he has suffered.
Cage throughout the film has basically scenes where he gets to show off a bit, they include when he is talking on his tape recorder about a woman, his whole opening scenes, or even the scene where he falls on the glass table and calls himself a prickly pear. Although the point of some of these scenes might be a little questionable, Cage still does a great job with them, because he still keeps them in the character of Ben, even if they are quite wild in nature, but he makes them work showing this wildness coming from basically his demise.
The most important aspect of his performance is Ben's relationship with the prostitute Sera (Elisabeth Shue). Their relationship is rather unique in each must accept each other's vices to be together, and it is fascinating how Shue and Cage develop an honest love relationship between the two without making seem forced. Cage though properly shows that Ben never truly gets over the fact that she is a prostitute which leads to their divide near the end of the film, since he really could not get over her being with others.
Shue and Cage work marvelously together and their final meeting at the end is made heartbreaking due to this fact. Cage in this last scene shows that Ben has changed in more ways than his physical disintegration over his time in Las Vegas. Cage in fact carefully shows that Ben's relationship with Sera did change him into a greater understanding of who he was, as well as a greater understanding of life, before his final end. Cage's performance is an effective work throughout the film. Cage really does succeed in this film with his complex and daring performance.
Wednesday, 8 June 2011
Best Actor 1995: Massimo Troisi in The Postman
Massimo Troisi received his only acting nomination, a posthumous one, for portraying Mario Ruoppolo in The Postman.
The Postman is not a bad film, but it is a not particularly interesting film about a postman who befriends exiled poet Pablo Neruda.
Massimo Troisi performance here is that of a rather simple man, who is of rather simple desires. He wants love, and thinks the poet Pablo Neruda can possibly give it to him so he befriends him in an attempt to find the secret of his poetry. He does befriend Neruda, and does find the love through a waitress in his village.
Troisi portrays his part in an exceedingly low key fashion, too low key, to tell you the truth. He is almost always this rather calm, soft spoken fellow throughout almost the whole film. This whole approach never became very interesting for me, and I always frankly wanted a little more energy in his performance, but he never gives it.
Troisi although never is precisely bad as Mario, but his performance just always feels a little too little to me. He never is particularly charming, the only charm that comes from him is the charm of extreme modesty, but for a film I find that charm is tad dull.
Troisi really never creates any interesting relationships with either his romance or Neruda. I never really felt a rush out of any scene that he is in, because he never stops being so overly low key in his performance. Now do not get me wrong, someone can be low key, but they need to suggest more about their character than Troisi ever does, if they are going to be this low key.
Troisi failed to ever really bring me into Mario's whole adventure with Neruda, or his romance, it all just seemed to be there because of how lightly Troisi treats the whole affair. It is true later on he becomes sad at times and such, but still it never really brings out an emotional force, like say another low key performance like Robert Duvall in Tender Mercies.
This performance honestly just sort of bores me. He never really created the right empathy for Mario, nor the right energy. It is just too much of the same for the entire performance, with only minute variations throughout, despite the fact that his character is suppose to change due to Neruda's influence. This is not an awful performance by any measure but it is an entirely uneventful one.
Massimo Troisi performance here is that of a rather simple man, who is of rather simple desires. He wants love, and thinks the poet Pablo Neruda can possibly give it to him so he befriends him in an attempt to find the secret of his poetry. He does befriend Neruda, and does find the love through a waitress in his village.
Troisi portrays his part in an exceedingly low key fashion, too low key, to tell you the truth. He is almost always this rather calm, soft spoken fellow throughout almost the whole film. This whole approach never became very interesting for me, and I always frankly wanted a little more energy in his performance, but he never gives it.
Troisi although never is precisely bad as Mario, but his performance just always feels a little too little to me. He never is particularly charming, the only charm that comes from him is the charm of extreme modesty, but for a film I find that charm is tad dull.
Troisi really never creates any interesting relationships with either his romance or Neruda. I never really felt a rush out of any scene that he is in, because he never stops being so overly low key in his performance. Now do not get me wrong, someone can be low key, but they need to suggest more about their character than Troisi ever does, if they are going to be this low key.
Troisi failed to ever really bring me into Mario's whole adventure with Neruda, or his romance, it all just seemed to be there because of how lightly Troisi treats the whole affair. It is true later on he becomes sad at times and such, but still it never really brings out an emotional force, like say another low key performance like Robert Duvall in Tender Mercies.
This performance honestly just sort of bores me. He never really created the right empathy for Mario, nor the right energy. It is just too much of the same for the entire performance, with only minute variations throughout, despite the fact that his character is suppose to change due to Neruda's influence. This is not an awful performance by any measure but it is an entirely uneventful one.
Best Actor 1995: Richard Dreyfuss in Mr. Holland's Opus
Richard Dreyfuss received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Glenn Holland in Mr. Holland's Opus.
Mr. Holland Opus is a rather cliched film, about an inspirational music teacher and the various people he inspires through his life, as well his relationship with his deaf son.
Richard Dreyfuss portrays Glenn Holland which is not exactly a most original character. He is a somewhat reluctant teacher at first, due to his inability to complete what he sees as his life work, a symphony. Dreyfuss is perfectly fine to tell the truth in his whole character's set up, he is believable in his reluctance, as well as his sense of ambition being held back by other circumstances.
Holland soon enough though begins to start liking his job, and begins to start to work hard with his students, no matter what the case. Dreyfuss is again completely believable in the role, he is properly inspirational in his careful dealings with each students, and has the right ease in the part to make the students' admiration for him certainly understandable enough.
There are multiple cases of students that need his help, and Dreyfuss is fine with each of them, since he handles each of the relationships naturally. This includes a semi romantic one with a talented singer in his musical, which could have seemed just wrong but it works well enough because Dreyfuss actually underplays the relationship always staying as a mentor, although still suggesting that Holland was tempted just a little bit.
Holland though still has troubles at home despite his incredible success at his work. He constantly has problems with his son, who is deaf, and Holland believes can never really understand what he does. Dreyfuss is again fine in this relationship. Holland slow growth of understanding with his son, is again honest enough, although I personally felt the overall product was a bit much, Dreyfuss' part of it was appropriately handled.
Dreyfuss' whole performance really is fine, I really can't say anything against. In each scene Dreyfuss is natural, and properly authentic. When he needs to be inspiring he is, when he needs to be passionate he is, when he needs to be anything he is. It is entirely fine performance, but still I never really became all that caught in it, and never really found there to be an amazing moment in the performance. Nonetheless the performance is an adequate effort from Dreyfuss.
Richard Dreyfuss portrays Glenn Holland which is not exactly a most original character. He is a somewhat reluctant teacher at first, due to his inability to complete what he sees as his life work, a symphony. Dreyfuss is perfectly fine to tell the truth in his whole character's set up, he is believable in his reluctance, as well as his sense of ambition being held back by other circumstances.
Holland soon enough though begins to start liking his job, and begins to start to work hard with his students, no matter what the case. Dreyfuss is again completely believable in the role, he is properly inspirational in his careful dealings with each students, and has the right ease in the part to make the students' admiration for him certainly understandable enough.
There are multiple cases of students that need his help, and Dreyfuss is fine with each of them, since he handles each of the relationships naturally. This includes a semi romantic one with a talented singer in his musical, which could have seemed just wrong but it works well enough because Dreyfuss actually underplays the relationship always staying as a mentor, although still suggesting that Holland was tempted just a little bit.
Holland though still has troubles at home despite his incredible success at his work. He constantly has problems with his son, who is deaf, and Holland believes can never really understand what he does. Dreyfuss is again fine in this relationship. Holland slow growth of understanding with his son, is again honest enough, although I personally felt the overall product was a bit much, Dreyfuss' part of it was appropriately handled.
Dreyfuss' whole performance really is fine, I really can't say anything against. In each scene Dreyfuss is natural, and properly authentic. When he needs to be inspiring he is, when he needs to be passionate he is, when he needs to be anything he is. It is entirely fine performance, but still I never really became all that caught in it, and never really found there to be an amazing moment in the performance. Nonetheless the performance is an adequate effort from Dreyfuss.
Best Actor 1995: Anthony Hopkins in Nixon
Anthony Hopkins received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Richard Nixon in Nixon.
Nixon is Oliver Stone' none too subtle film about Richard M. Nixon. Although it really is not very believable, and every point is hammered in far too much, it actually is watchable and moves along surprisingly well for a three hour film.
The really is not a single subtle thing about the whole film including say Stone's constant editing, his rather evil sounding soundtrack, or some of those scenes particularly the one with Mao Zedong as well as Anthony Hopkins' performance. Hopkins does not go for a subtle, underplaying portrayal of Nixon for a second in this film.
Nixon is portrayed rather oddly throughout the film, and not only by Hopkins himself. Hopkins is simply made up in such a fashion to make him simply bizarre with his hair, makeup, and sweat. Nixon certainly was not a standard looking chap, but he was not this odd looking. This is not helped by Hopkins either though.
The way Hopkins stands as Nixon is a complete characterture, his posture everything is basically a cartoonish portrait of Nixon that is rather hard to believe. Hopkins sort of does a Nixon voice as well, but not really a bold one ever. I'd say his accent actually is the least distracting part of his performance. It still is not Nixon's voice though, something many actors have a problem with for some reason.
Hopkins actually in this film never looked like Nixon, but even more than that, I felt he looked frankly like some sort of strange creature the whole time. Nixon always looks a little too out of place, yes he is suppose to be a perpetual outsider, but this is too much, he just does not look like a human which is very distracting. I think this is particularly not helped by his constant awkward mouth movements, and tongue movements which fails to suggest the actual Nixon properly.
Hopkins actual performance therefore is already not exactly going to be convincing unless he is extremely good, which he really isn't. Due to the fact that this is Oliver Stone, Hopkins always must portray Nixon is basically the same fashion throughout. Nixon is a paranoid mess from beginning to end, allowing for no real transition to occur.
Hopkins portrays Nixon as a socially inept man, too inept really to make believable that he ever was able to be a politician, he is frankly just too grotesque in his portrayal to be believed. I just never bought the characterization because it never made completely sense, Hopkins portrayed him as too much of an insane lunatic, without even a what seems a single logical notion in his head, which is exactly what Stone wanted I'm sure, but it does not exactly make a truly believable character.
I did not see how Nixon could accomplish a single thing he really did from really romancing Pat Nixon, or convincing to stay with him, or running his successful political campaign or having the ability to keep anyone with him. The problem is I think is Nixon almost always seems like an utter incompetent, with Hopkins even in scenes where he is suppose to be in control I just did not by it because Hopkins' method of portraying him.
Hopkins certainly has a moment or too I think such as when he reflects about his past with his brothers which is done well enough, as well as suggesting the sad state of his character, without overdoing it like the rest of his character. Hopkins handles quite well in fact in his way of showing how his parents deeply left a mark he was never able to be rid of.
The rest of his Nixon is just really too flawed for its own good, yes he could have been a complete evil doer, but I think frankly he should have seemed a little more charismatic, and able one to make this story actually believable. I will just say compare his addresses to the real footage of Nixon it just does not much up in far too many ways. This is not an entirely bad performance though, and I am sure it is the type the director wanted. The performance though still is always a bit too much.
The really is not a single subtle thing about the whole film including say Stone's constant editing, his rather evil sounding soundtrack, or some of those scenes particularly the one with Mao Zedong as well as Anthony Hopkins' performance. Hopkins does not go for a subtle, underplaying portrayal of Nixon for a second in this film.
Nixon is portrayed rather oddly throughout the film, and not only by Hopkins himself. Hopkins is simply made up in such a fashion to make him simply bizarre with his hair, makeup, and sweat. Nixon certainly was not a standard looking chap, but he was not this odd looking. This is not helped by Hopkins either though.
The way Hopkins stands as Nixon is a complete characterture, his posture everything is basically a cartoonish portrait of Nixon that is rather hard to believe. Hopkins sort of does a Nixon voice as well, but not really a bold one ever. I'd say his accent actually is the least distracting part of his performance. It still is not Nixon's voice though, something many actors have a problem with for some reason.
Hopkins actually in this film never looked like Nixon, but even more than that, I felt he looked frankly like some sort of strange creature the whole time. Nixon always looks a little too out of place, yes he is suppose to be a perpetual outsider, but this is too much, he just does not look like a human which is very distracting. I think this is particularly not helped by his constant awkward mouth movements, and tongue movements which fails to suggest the actual Nixon properly.
Hopkins actual performance therefore is already not exactly going to be convincing unless he is extremely good, which he really isn't. Due to the fact that this is Oliver Stone, Hopkins always must portray Nixon is basically the same fashion throughout. Nixon is a paranoid mess from beginning to end, allowing for no real transition to occur.
Hopkins portrays Nixon as a socially inept man, too inept really to make believable that he ever was able to be a politician, he is frankly just too grotesque in his portrayal to be believed. I just never bought the characterization because it never made completely sense, Hopkins portrayed him as too much of an insane lunatic, without even a what seems a single logical notion in his head, which is exactly what Stone wanted I'm sure, but it does not exactly make a truly believable character.
I did not see how Nixon could accomplish a single thing he really did from really romancing Pat Nixon, or convincing to stay with him, or running his successful political campaign or having the ability to keep anyone with him. The problem is I think is Nixon almost always seems like an utter incompetent, with Hopkins even in scenes where he is suppose to be in control I just did not by it because Hopkins' method of portraying him.
Hopkins certainly has a moment or too I think such as when he reflects about his past with his brothers which is done well enough, as well as suggesting the sad state of his character, without overdoing it like the rest of his character. Hopkins handles quite well in fact in his way of showing how his parents deeply left a mark he was never able to be rid of.
The rest of his Nixon is just really too flawed for its own good, yes he could have been a complete evil doer, but I think frankly he should have seemed a little more charismatic, and able one to make this story actually believable. I will just say compare his addresses to the real footage of Nixon it just does not much up in far too many ways. This is not an entirely bad performance though, and I am sure it is the type the director wanted. The performance though still is always a bit too much.
Monday, 6 June 2011
Best Actor 1995: Sean Penn in Dead Man Walking
Sean Penn received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Matthew Poncelet in Dead Man Walking.
Dead Man Walking is a very effective film, a message film that work extremely well because as well as getting its points across smoothly, it also never pains the opposition as one dimensional as a lesser film would have.
Sean Penn is an actor that has not done particularly well in my reviews so far. What I usually do not like of his performances is a tendency to overact, as well as to give what seem to be overly calculated performances that spend far too much time on mannerisms that get in the way of any actual characterization. These problems perhaps developed overtime because they will not be found in this performance.
Sean Penn's performance this is still certianly a very specific character. He uses an accent, as well as distinct way he stands and looks that suggests the upbringing as well as the past of his character. The reason they work in this film is because Penn is consist with them, and never puts an overt emphasis, rather simply having them there as part of the actual person that is Matthew Poncelet.
The other reason these mannerisms work in the performance is because he brings them in with a full characterization of the person, that is never just an an external attitude, but a person as a whole. Penn performance as Matthew Poncelet most certainly is careful and finely attuned but it still always remains natural, and his acting never becomes obvious as it does in some of his later performances.
Sean Penn's performance is quite interesting in how he shows the way Poncelet has almost developed himself into particular way from his life on death role. When the Sister Helen Prejean (Susan Sarandon) first comes to meet him, he attempts to act tougher than he really is. Penn is on the mark in creating a bit of a facade Matthew has, that he almost has to have, well still suggesting his actual more sensitive self.
I think something rather interesting that Penn does in this performance is the fact that he does not try to portray Poncelet as all that intelligent, but still not a simple man. Penn portrays his lack of intelligence actually in Poncelet's television interview where he makes several extreme remarks involving racism as well as terrorism.
Penn makes this seem as something Poncelet does not necessarily that he really at all believes it but rather he just again uses as some sort of attempt to show his anger over his condemnation. When questioned by the sister, Penn really shows just the complete lack of though Poncelet really has over the matter, Penn shows that Poncelet honestly is just not a smart man.
The most important part of his performance is of course Poncelet's whole relationship with the sister. Sarandon and Penn do wonders together, in creating the incredible unique relationship between the Nun and the death row inmate. It is fascinating because Sarandon portrays the sister always as warm, and loving, but still she pressures Matthew on his refusal to accept that he was at all guilty.
Penn though interestingly does not always show as much focus in the relationship until near the end, because Penn does a great job in showing that Matthew has a lot more on his mind all the time, and how his impending death, as well as his guilt is constantly eating away at him, making him more reluctant to try to always instantly accept the sister's method of try to save him.
Penn though eases in perfectly when they become more relaxed with one another, and begins to shed his facade of sorts, and really opens up to her, showing with Penn presenting Matthew's deep sadness and fear he deeply has inside himself. They eventually create a credible, very authentic relationship honestly based on very real platonic love for one another.
The most powerful moments of his performance are on his execution date. Every scene on his last day is made heartbreaking becuase through the entire ordeal Penn never strikes a single false note. From his last visit from his family, which is particularly effective because of how warm he is with his brother and his mother, as he tries to ignore the execution on his mind. To later nearer to it when he finally comes to grip completely with his situation and his guilt.
The final scenes are rather difficult to watch, because Penn really shows this being a human being killed, not some animal, but a man. A man with his honest fear of death, and finally his admittance of what he did. Penn never for a moment seems to be acting, he really becomes a man who is about to be killed, it is incredible as well as distressing to watch. This is simply a great performance by Penn that leaves an almost unforgettable impression.
Sean Penn is an actor that has not done particularly well in my reviews so far. What I usually do not like of his performances is a tendency to overact, as well as to give what seem to be overly calculated performances that spend far too much time on mannerisms that get in the way of any actual characterization. These problems perhaps developed overtime because they will not be found in this performance.
Sean Penn's performance this is still certianly a very specific character. He uses an accent, as well as distinct way he stands and looks that suggests the upbringing as well as the past of his character. The reason they work in this film is because Penn is consist with them, and never puts an overt emphasis, rather simply having them there as part of the actual person that is Matthew Poncelet.
The other reason these mannerisms work in the performance is because he brings them in with a full characterization of the person, that is never just an an external attitude, but a person as a whole. Penn performance as Matthew Poncelet most certainly is careful and finely attuned but it still always remains natural, and his acting never becomes obvious as it does in some of his later performances.
Sean Penn's performance is quite interesting in how he shows the way Poncelet has almost developed himself into particular way from his life on death role. When the Sister Helen Prejean (Susan Sarandon) first comes to meet him, he attempts to act tougher than he really is. Penn is on the mark in creating a bit of a facade Matthew has, that he almost has to have, well still suggesting his actual more sensitive self.
I think something rather interesting that Penn does in this performance is the fact that he does not try to portray Poncelet as all that intelligent, but still not a simple man. Penn portrays his lack of intelligence actually in Poncelet's television interview where he makes several extreme remarks involving racism as well as terrorism.
Penn makes this seem as something Poncelet does not necessarily that he really at all believes it but rather he just again uses as some sort of attempt to show his anger over his condemnation. When questioned by the sister, Penn really shows just the complete lack of though Poncelet really has over the matter, Penn shows that Poncelet honestly is just not a smart man.
The most important part of his performance is of course Poncelet's whole relationship with the sister. Sarandon and Penn do wonders together, in creating the incredible unique relationship between the Nun and the death row inmate. It is fascinating because Sarandon portrays the sister always as warm, and loving, but still she pressures Matthew on his refusal to accept that he was at all guilty.
Penn though interestingly does not always show as much focus in the relationship until near the end, because Penn does a great job in showing that Matthew has a lot more on his mind all the time, and how his impending death, as well as his guilt is constantly eating away at him, making him more reluctant to try to always instantly accept the sister's method of try to save him.
Penn though eases in perfectly when they become more relaxed with one another, and begins to shed his facade of sorts, and really opens up to her, showing with Penn presenting Matthew's deep sadness and fear he deeply has inside himself. They eventually create a credible, very authentic relationship honestly based on very real platonic love for one another.
The most powerful moments of his performance are on his execution date. Every scene on his last day is made heartbreaking becuase through the entire ordeal Penn never strikes a single false note. From his last visit from his family, which is particularly effective because of how warm he is with his brother and his mother, as he tries to ignore the execution on his mind. To later nearer to it when he finally comes to grip completely with his situation and his guilt.
The final scenes are rather difficult to watch, because Penn really shows this being a human being killed, not some animal, but a man. A man with his honest fear of death, and finally his admittance of what he did. Penn never for a moment seems to be acting, he really becomes a man who is about to be killed, it is incredible as well as distressing to watch. This is simply a great performance by Penn that leaves an almost unforgettable impression.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)