Letters to the Editor
-
Some good choices here
Stephanie has made some good suggestions here. I, too, was hoping that Mickey Rourke's turn as might somehow get nominated for Best Supporting Actor. (For that matter, "Sin City," itself was ridiculously overlooked. From the opening gambit to closing it was surely the freshest and most original film of the year, even if it was also throughly violent, corrupt and disgustingly sick - not that there's anything wrong with that!)
In the same category, one of the most heart-wrenching moments that I experienced at the movies last year was in "North Country" when Richard Jenkins, as Charlize Theron's father, finally stands up for her at the union meeting. I could almost literally see him move whole glaciers of stoicism out of the way in order to do so; and when he expresses his disgust at the language he's seen and heard used, it is so genuine and true that I felt kind of ashamed for what would normally be my mocking condescension of someone who gets all outraged over a few fucking words.
Also, Naomi Watts was, indeed, superb as Ann Darrow. Throughout the film, there were scenes between her and Kong in which there are some remarkably subtle things going on between them as their relationship changes. A look here, a shift of body language there, but remember: she's playing almost all of it against a special effects stand in!
-
Miss Scarlet, I don't know nothing about rating no movies!
Scarlet Johansson? Are you kidding me? Seriously? No, I mean it. You have to be having me on, putting one over on me, pulling my leg, taking the piss, and so forth. She is quite possibly the closest thing to a female Keneau Reeves that there is. Did you see Match Point or did you, in order to render its atrociousness painless, escape to that wonderful fairy world where Ms. Johansson can act and Mr. Allen can write?
For shame, Ms. Zacharek, for shame.
-
Crass Promotion
This is a difficult game to play, applying an aesthetic criteria to the crass commercial promotion of the Hollywood film industry. There was a time, possibly, when the handing out of the statuettes was akin to a coronation but nowadays (and certainly for a long time now), they are more of a curse than a blessing.
I'll tune in to see what Jon Stewart makes of events and try to derive some pleasure from what is typically a long, boring and butt-clinchingly embarrassing, stilted presentation but I certainly wouldn't consider The Academy to be any kind of taste-making body. They're not specifically interested in film excellence, they're just interested in industry. I don't tune in with favourites, I just pray for upsets.
-
Body of Work...
I think its pretty obvious that Academy voters have a tendency to look at a body of work when nominating an actor, especially if they have done contrasting work in the same year. I would bet the farm that the reason Jim Boradbent won Best Supporting Actor for Iris, was that 7 months earlier he was tearing the screen up as Zidler in Moulin Rouge. Similarly, I think Catherine Keener was nominated for her shaded, subtle work in Capote in part because she was so blissfully warm and romantic in the 40 Year Old Virgin. Taking this into account, Cillian Murphy and Rachel McAdams should have been given some recognition for outstanding, break out years. Murphy was creepy as hell in different ways in Batman Begins and Red Eye, and then utterly charming and funny in Breakfast on Pluto. McAdams shows intelligence, warmth, steel eyed determination and a gift for comedy in Red Eye, The Wedding Crashers and The Family Stone (and fabulous taste by walking out of the naked photo shoot for that silly Vanity Fair Hollywood edition).
Other random actors that deserve recognition;
Ginnifer Goodwin (Walk the Line) - a role and performance that was sniffly dismissed by most critics as just 'the whining wife' but I found incredibly sympathetic thanks to Goodwin's portrayal.
Ralph Fiennes (The Constant Gardener) - Rachel Weisz is indeed dazzling, but Fiennes best performance since Schindler's List deserves attention for the quiet pain and desperation he brings to it.
Michael Pena (Crash) - the only actor I would nominate from Crash, purely for his delivery of the 'magic cloak' speech to his daughter. Taking a silly speech and making it truly affecting and touching is the mark of a great talent.
Gromit & Kong (Wallace and Gromit/King Kong) - neither of these animated characters were ever going to be nominated, but each gives a sterling performance that mixes comedy and pathos to perfection. Is there room for an animated performance in these categories? Or even for Helena Bonham Carter’s hilariously dippy vocal work as Lady Tottington?
Johnny Depp (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) - I thought this version trumped the tired original in virtually every way, not least in Depp's portrayal of Wonka. Precise, meticulous character work that never feels stuffy and often had me doubled up with laughter.
Angelina Jolie (Mr and Mrs Smith) - I don't think much of the film, but is there another actress like Joli who could move through this rubbish with such animal grace and still make you believe in her cartoon character?
-
And on the subject of Depp...
I wasn't holding my breath, but I would have liked to see Johnny Depp recognized for his mesmerizing performance in The Libertine.
-
hmm
You know how you look around for a movie critic you connect with? Read a few reviews, give them the benefit of the doubt for a film or two? Maybe try the Times, or the Tribune, or hey somewhere online? I have to say Salon is a big whiff on this score for me. Charles Taylor was execrable. I mean, he would write things that to me read like "Food is not good to eat" and "For breathing, try methane". Andrew is so far off in indie land that I look at my Netflix queue and blush with shame.
Stephanie I just kinda don't get. Scarlett Jo -- I'm with the poster below in saying "what?". Sharon Stone, yeah, that was a good turn. Nothing beats a throwaway role isn't thrown away.
But "Red Eye"? Rachel McAdams? Hey, let's give her two Oscars, cause she was SO affecting in Wedding Crashers (for which VV should in fact win something -- probably a car or a Senate seat).