Ed Harris Received his fourth Oscar nomination for portraying Richard Brown in The Hours.
The Hours details three troubled episodes in the lives of three women from different time periods.
Ed Harris plays the aids stricken gay but former boyfriend now friend of the the now lesbian Clarissa (Meryl Streep). Ed Harris' performance is the type that just screams for an Oscar he is playing a gay dying character who is also crazed and even suicidal. Although I suppose a performance even when way to baity can still be good, but this is not the case of Ed Harris' performance, who wants to brilliantly play against type but instead plays the part way over the top.
Harris' performance is basically made up of just two scenes where he gets to act loudly toward the screen making sure the audience knows he playing a troubled dramatic suicidal man. He does this with so many dramatic line reading and even the way he sits and moves around suggests that he just wants to make sure everyone sees how much acting he is doing in the part.
Harris takes every moment of his performance to use an obvious voice to suggest that Richard is gay, poet and sick all at once. It far too much overacting from Harris who adds to his too calculated of a voice with some equally actory and over the top faces to add to his needlessly overblown performance. Harris could have toned down just a little any facet of his performance but always stays way far too over the top to be believable.
Harris wants to give an impassioned powerful performance that wants to be a heartbreaking portrait of this poet. For me though he fails completely because he insists on giving such a knowing performance. He never for a moment is able to bring an actual emotion because of his portrayal. His needlessly overdone performance becomes cringe worthy unfortunately. He never for a moment brings genuine emotion because of this despite how desperately he wants it to seem an emotional powerhouse of a performance.
Friday, 4 November 2011
Best Supporting Actor 2002: Paul Newman in Road to Perdition
Paul Newman received his ninth and final acting Oscar nomination for portraying John Rooney in Road to Perdition.
Road to Perdition details the attempt of a mob hitman Michael Sullivan Sr. and his son Jr. to get revenge on the gangster who murdered the rest of their family.
Paul Newman portrays Irish gangster John Rooney. Rooney is the gangster who Sullivan works for, and it is his son Connor (Daniel Craig) who kills Michael family after Michael's son saw Connor kill a man. Newman portrays Rooney as a rather quiet old gangster who certainly is past his time of being truly deadly and dangerous man. Newman at the beginning of his performance has a genuine fatherly and grandfatherly quality.
Newman's performance is genuinely a warm old man to Sullivan and his sons. Newman does not portray this as a facade, but that Rooney does honestly care for them. There is of course an undercurrent of the gangster he is in his performance but it is not an overriding facet of Rooney. What Newman more thoroughly suggests is a once brutal gangster who with age has aged past the stage in which he can be as cold as he really needs to be in his position.
The two pivotal aspects of Newman's performance and character comes from his fatherly relationships in the film his first with John's actual son Connor. Newman interestingly portrays this as he does have a love for his son, but a love he actually wants to shake. Newman is very convincing in his portrayal of this strange conflict that John has over his son. He frankly wants to let him die as Connor is not only a screw up but a backstabber, but his natural fatherly love prevents it.
His other one is with his adopted son Michael. Rooney faces the fact that to keep his actual son alive, and his position he must kill his adopted son. Here is where Newman shows the lack of the killer edge with Rooney who frankly does not heart to go through with the murders. Newman portrays a deep sadness in Rooney showing that he is far too old for who he is, and what he must do. Rooney simply is a gangster who has lived too long
Newman is heartbreaking in his final moments where he shows Rooney reflect all he as done, and eventually accepting his fate that he knows he deserves. This is an appropriate swan song feature film performance from Newman which manages to bring a tragic human element to a character who perhaps could have been only a villain. Rooney is a bad man and Newman shows him as such but creates an honest insight into a bad man who understands exactly who he is.
Road to Perdition details the attempt of a mob hitman Michael Sullivan Sr. and his son Jr. to get revenge on the gangster who murdered the rest of their family.
Paul Newman portrays Irish gangster John Rooney. Rooney is the gangster who Sullivan works for, and it is his son Connor (Daniel Craig) who kills Michael family after Michael's son saw Connor kill a man. Newman portrays Rooney as a rather quiet old gangster who certainly is past his time of being truly deadly and dangerous man. Newman at the beginning of his performance has a genuine fatherly and grandfatherly quality.
Newman's performance is genuinely a warm old man to Sullivan and his sons. Newman does not portray this as a facade, but that Rooney does honestly care for them. There is of course an undercurrent of the gangster he is in his performance but it is not an overriding facet of Rooney. What Newman more thoroughly suggests is a once brutal gangster who with age has aged past the stage in which he can be as cold as he really needs to be in his position.
The two pivotal aspects of Newman's performance and character comes from his fatherly relationships in the film his first with John's actual son Connor. Newman interestingly portrays this as he does have a love for his son, but a love he actually wants to shake. Newman is very convincing in his portrayal of this strange conflict that John has over his son. He frankly wants to let him die as Connor is not only a screw up but a backstabber, but his natural fatherly love prevents it.
His other one is with his adopted son Michael. Rooney faces the fact that to keep his actual son alive, and his position he must kill his adopted son. Here is where Newman shows the lack of the killer edge with Rooney who frankly does not heart to go through with the murders. Newman portrays a deep sadness in Rooney showing that he is far too old for who he is, and what he must do. Rooney simply is a gangster who has lived too long
Newman is heartbreaking in his final moments where he shows Rooney reflect all he as done, and eventually accepting his fate that he knows he deserves. This is an appropriate swan song feature film performance from Newman which manages to bring a tragic human element to a character who perhaps could have been only a villain. Rooney is a bad man and Newman shows him as such but creates an honest insight into a bad man who understands exactly who he is.
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Best Supporting Actor 2002
And the Nominees Were:
John C. Reilly in Chicago
Christopher Walken in Catch Me If You Can
Chris Cooper in Adaptation
Paul Newman in Road to Perdition
Ed Harris in The Hours
John C. Reilly in Chicago
Christopher Walken in Catch Me If You Can
Chris Cooper in Adaptation
Paul Newman in Road to Perdition
Ed Harris in The Hours
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Results
5. Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger- Gilford is never bad being effective more levelheaded to Jack Lemmon, but he is always the sidekick never more.
4. John Houseman in The Paper Chase- Houseman certainly is pompous enough but frankly he could have brought more humor to the part than he does.
3. Randy Quaid in The Last Detail- Quaid does a good job of showing how sad and pathetic his character is but after that he just does not do much but quietly react to Jack Nicholson's more interesting performance.
2. Vincent Gardenia in Bang the Drum Slowly- Gardenia's performance is just as it should be realizing his
character as well as he really could be.
1. Jason Miller in The Exorcist- This is one of the easiest wins I have ever given, but that should not at all say Miller's performance is not great though, as he could have easily won in a stronger year as well. Miller gives an amazing performance that develops a human portrait of a man that is essential to the horror film he is in. Miller meets all the challenges of his role giving a very powerful performance.
Deserving Performances:
Robert Shaw in The Sting
Max Von Sydow in The Exorcist
4. John Houseman in The Paper Chase- Houseman certainly is pompous enough but frankly he could have brought more humor to the part than he does.
3. Randy Quaid in The Last Detail- Quaid does a good job of showing how sad and pathetic his character is but after that he just does not do much but quietly react to Jack Nicholson's more interesting performance.
2. Vincent Gardenia in Bang the Drum Slowly- Gardenia's performance is just as it should be realizing his
character as well as he really could be.
1. Jason Miller in The Exorcist- This is one of the easiest wins I have ever given, but that should not at all say Miller's performance is not great though, as he could have easily won in a stronger year as well. Miller gives an amazing performance that develops a human portrait of a man that is essential to the horror film he is in. Miller meets all the challenges of his role giving a very powerful performance.
Deserving Performances:
Robert Shaw in The Sting
Max Von Sydow in The Exorcist
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Vincent Gardenia in Bang the Drum Slowly
Vincent Gardenia received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Dutch Schnell in Bang the Drum Slowly.
Bang the Drum Slowly depicts a star pitcher on a baseball team who tries hard to help his friend simple catcher who has a terminal disease.
Vincent Gardenia portrays the team manager Dutch who is unaware why the star pitches Henry (Michael Moriarty) wants the simple catcher Bruce (Robert De Niro) to catch for him, but he intends to find out. The exasperated sports team manager certainly is not the most original of character and Gardenia never tries to portray this type of character in an particularly unusual fashion.
Gardenia though does manage to play Dutch just as he should be as well. Dutch is a tough manager who wants to handle his team his way, and does not much care for being told he won't have control over his lineup. Gardenia gets the constantly frustrated style of Dutch down just right. He also handles the frustrations of Dutch just wanting to figure what the deal is with Henry and Bruce is exactly well as well.
Gardenia mostly is simply consistent in his performance through the film but he does have a single big scene when he finds out what really is wrong with Bruce. He has a nice heartfelt scene where he shows that Dutch maybe is a bit of a softie at heart. Gardenia is appropriate earnest in this scene and does not seem fake either being honestly saddened by a member of his team dying that does not override the rest of his performance, but more of suggests his toughness toward his team is simply the way he has to do it.
Gardenia's performance is never an amazing one, but he does seem to get the most out of Dutch as a character. He does not take a completely unorthodox approach to the role, but Gardenia is effective in all of his scenes, and adds a nice presence to the film. I can't say it is ever all that much, or even especially memorable but it is a good performance.
Bang the Drum Slowly depicts a star pitcher on a baseball team who tries hard to help his friend simple catcher who has a terminal disease.
Vincent Gardenia portrays the team manager Dutch who is unaware why the star pitches Henry (Michael Moriarty) wants the simple catcher Bruce (Robert De Niro) to catch for him, but he intends to find out. The exasperated sports team manager certainly is not the most original of character and Gardenia never tries to portray this type of character in an particularly unusual fashion.
Gardenia though does manage to play Dutch just as he should be as well. Dutch is a tough manager who wants to handle his team his way, and does not much care for being told he won't have control over his lineup. Gardenia gets the constantly frustrated style of Dutch down just right. He also handles the frustrations of Dutch just wanting to figure what the deal is with Henry and Bruce is exactly well as well.
Gardenia mostly is simply consistent in his performance through the film but he does have a single big scene when he finds out what really is wrong with Bruce. He has a nice heartfelt scene where he shows that Dutch maybe is a bit of a softie at heart. Gardenia is appropriate earnest in this scene and does not seem fake either being honestly saddened by a member of his team dying that does not override the rest of his performance, but more of suggests his toughness toward his team is simply the way he has to do it.
Gardenia's performance is never an amazing one, but he does seem to get the most out of Dutch as a character. He does not take a completely unorthodox approach to the role, but Gardenia is effective in all of his scenes, and adds a nice presence to the film. I can't say it is ever all that much, or even especially memorable but it is a good performance.
Best Supporting Actor 1973: John Houseman in The Paper Chase
John Houseman won his Oscar from his only acting Oscar nomination for portraying Professor Charles W. Kingsfield Jr.
The Paper Chase depicts the troubles and the success of a first year Harvard Law student.
John Houseman was better known as a film producer than a film actor before his performance here. He was only in a single feature length film before this one in a rather small role. Here though it is no surprise that Houseman was nominated and won since the Oscars do seem to like it when people act even if that person is better known for something else and the role of Professor Kingsfield is an incredibly showy role.
Kingsfield rules over his room with absolute control with his loud distinct voice, and commonly humiliates those who do not meet the requirements of his questions during the class. After this there is little to say actually about Kingsfield you learn very little of him outside the class, what you do learn is never portrayed by Houseman's performance instead they are merely said by others. When you do see him outside the classroom he acts just as he does inside the classroom with the same superior attitude.
Houseman is calm cool collected as well as commanding in the role I can't say he is all that much more than that. He always gives the same smug glances the same piercing looks in every scene there is no change in behavior ever nor should there be as that exactly how Professor Kingsfield is written to be. That does not mean he is amazing at all, I always felt he was just fine, but this never became that entertaining or interesting performance as relatively simple performances like this can be sometimes. I do frankly think though many scenes he could have brought out an appropriate degree of humor in his performance something that someone like John Gielgud probably could have done with ease. He is most certianly never bad, but I just never really found him to be worthy of acting awards good either.
The Paper Chase depicts the troubles and the success of a first year Harvard Law student.
John Houseman was better known as a film producer than a film actor before his performance here. He was only in a single feature length film before this one in a rather small role. Here though it is no surprise that Houseman was nominated and won since the Oscars do seem to like it when people act even if that person is better known for something else and the role of Professor Kingsfield is an incredibly showy role.
Kingsfield rules over his room with absolute control with his loud distinct voice, and commonly humiliates those who do not meet the requirements of his questions during the class. After this there is little to say actually about Kingsfield you learn very little of him outside the class, what you do learn is never portrayed by Houseman's performance instead they are merely said by others. When you do see him outside the classroom he acts just as he does inside the classroom with the same superior attitude.
Houseman is calm cool collected as well as commanding in the role I can't say he is all that much more than that. He always gives the same smug glances the same piercing looks in every scene there is no change in behavior ever nor should there be as that exactly how Professor Kingsfield is written to be. That does not mean he is amazing at all, I always felt he was just fine, but this never became that entertaining or interesting performance as relatively simple performances like this can be sometimes. I do frankly think though many scenes he could have brought out an appropriate degree of humor in his performance something that someone like John Gielgud probably could have done with ease. He is most certianly never bad, but I just never really found him to be worthy of acting awards good either.
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Randy Quaid in The Last Detail
Randy Quaid received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Larry Meadows in The Last Detail.
Randy Quaid plays the arrested Seaman who "Bad Ass" Buddusky (Jack Nicholson) and "Mule" Mulhall (Otis Young) have to bring to the brig. Larry Meadows is a young wet behind the ears kleptomaniac. Quaid is absolutely quiet for a good amount of time during the film. Quaid just shows Larry to be a very sad, very modest fellow, who just steals things basically just to steal them there is barely a purposeful criminal intent, he just does not know any better.
With this Quaid creates an appropriate sympathy for Larry because Larry is such a pathetic guy. He never makes Larry's problems seem at all malicious nor does he make his inexperience seem unrealistic or annoying. There is a genuine naivety to Quaid's performance that works well for the film, and makes the sympathy Badass and Mule gain for him properly believable. I particularly liked when he goes to his home where no one is that just shows the sad state of Larry that Quaid has shown it to be something he has pretty much accepted.
After setting up this characterization though Quaid really has very little to do. Most of the time he just reacts with a very modest and sad response to the behavior of Badass. He has a few moments where he freaks out an makes some impulsive escape attempt, which Quaid shows exactly what it is, but other than that there really is not anything that special about his reactions. Quaid is as he is, he really does not show change or growth nor should he the experiences Badass give to him are not the sort that would make him a new man. Its a good performance that serves its purpose, it is also a limited one though just by the nature of it, and just like Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger Quaid never takes a scene away from Jack Nicholson.
Randy Quaid plays the arrested Seaman who "Bad Ass" Buddusky (Jack Nicholson) and "Mule" Mulhall (Otis Young) have to bring to the brig. Larry Meadows is a young wet behind the ears kleptomaniac. Quaid is absolutely quiet for a good amount of time during the film. Quaid just shows Larry to be a very sad, very modest fellow, who just steals things basically just to steal them there is barely a purposeful criminal intent, he just does not know any better.
With this Quaid creates an appropriate sympathy for Larry because Larry is such a pathetic guy. He never makes Larry's problems seem at all malicious nor does he make his inexperience seem unrealistic or annoying. There is a genuine naivety to Quaid's performance that works well for the film, and makes the sympathy Badass and Mule gain for him properly believable. I particularly liked when he goes to his home where no one is that just shows the sad state of Larry that Quaid has shown it to be something he has pretty much accepted.
After setting up this characterization though Quaid really has very little to do. Most of the time he just reacts with a very modest and sad response to the behavior of Badass. He has a few moments where he freaks out an makes some impulsive escape attempt, which Quaid shows exactly what it is, but other than that there really is not anything that special about his reactions. Quaid is as he is, he really does not show change or growth nor should he the experiences Badass give to him are not the sort that would make him a new man. Its a good performance that serves its purpose, it is also a limited one though just by the nature of it, and just like Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger Quaid never takes a scene away from Jack Nicholson.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









