“Yes, I know I've played these women, but I'm not really conniving at all.”

Because Katharine Hepburn is my favourite actor, I tend to think of all other female actors that I like in terms of her. Helena Bonham Carter has her frankness; Cate Blanchett has her perfectionist nature; Emma Thompson has her charm, and Annette Bening has her strong screen presence. A few months ago Nick Davis (of Nick’s Flick’s Picks) wrote a brilliant send-up to the Bening, but I couldn’t let her birthday past without making note of her worth to me.
      
I first “met” Bening via Sydney Ellen Wade (of The American President) and I’d forever consider her harsher characterisations against this smart, yet still idiosyncratic lobbyist. Annette is a bit indistinguishable from Kate in the sense that each of her performances retains a strong sense of Annette while still being diverse performances. The difference, though, is that I’ve never seen any film make use of her warmth as much as they make use of her more prickly sides. It’s so that she’s come to be categorised as the de facto ball-buster and the less attentive of audience members are willing to categorise Deidre Burroughs, Carolyn Burnham, Julia Lambert and Nic as extensions of the same self. They are extensions of the same in that they’re all from Annette but the thing about her is that her harsher tones are so loud the quieter moments where she elevates her characters are often missed. But, in the grander scheme of things I cannot say that I mind - more Bening for me.

Jean Harris in Mrs. Harris (2005)

 

“I realize that you are just a secretary and weren't as fortunate as I in graduating magna cum laude from Smith, but surely any well-read 10-year-old knows the meaning of the word bizarre.”

           

Nic Algood in The Kids Are All Right (2010)

“Well I need your observations like I need a dick in my ass!”

Deirdre Burroughs in Running with Scissors (2006)

“Augusten. Don't smoke my cigarettes. You have a pack of your own.”

Carolyn Burnham in American Beauty (1999)

“There happens to be a lot about me that you don't know, Mr. Smarty Man. There's plenty of joy in my life.”

        
Julia Lambert in Being Julia (2004)

 

“B-E-N. Ben!”

          

Pick one.

Oscar Talk: Because I Can (Final Oscar Predictions)

I didn't even realise that I went this crazy with talking Oscar this past season (all entries), it implicitly suggests that I was invested in the season - which I wasn't, but ah well. I do feel the slightest bit saddened that the season is over. Oscar's like one of those friends you can't stand to talk to often, but you'd implode if they died. So, ahoy - final final predictions.

       

Picture: The King’s Speech

Director: David Fincher for The Social Network

To tell you the truth, I wish I had the guts to predict The King’s Speech for both honours – but I’m hoping me not predict it will somehow make it not happen. Not because I’d mind Hooper winning that much (I won’t) – but I could only fathom the uproar that will occur if he does win the Oscar. And, I like the guy – don’t want him mauled. Either way, though, I’m fine. Both films and directors would appear somewhere in my top 10 – so I don’t mind what happens either way. (I’m still hoping for a delicious upset via The Kids Are All Right, but yeah, I’m fine either way.)

          

Actor: Colin Firth in The King’s Speech (alternate Javier Bardem in Biutiful)

Actress: Natalie Portman in Black Swan (Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right

So, Colin and Natalie? Je ne sais pas. It’s a tossup (in my head at least) for the acting race – but I’m willing expect my favourite to lose. Now that I look at it, though, I want Annette to win even more (apparently it IS possible). Remember she and Colin were in Valmont way back when. Wouldn’t it be nice to see them win Oscars together?

Supporting Actor: Christian Bale in The Fighter (Geoffrey Rush in The King’s Speech)

Supporting Actress: Helena Bonham Carter in The King’s Speech (Alternate: Melissa Leo in The Fighter)

So, will HBC finally reach the podium 18 – or is it 13 – years after she deserved to? It depends on who you’re talking to pinpoint the precise year she deserved it, but she has before. Not for her Queen Mother, but do I care? No. I could be wrong, perhaps me wanting it means it won’t happen, but I’m sticking to that prediction. And, I suppose a Bale win is inevitable – which is fine. That pipedream for Ruffalo died long ago (though, I’ll admit I’m still pretending he’s winning in my head).

Original Screenplay: David Seidler for The King’s Speech (Alternate: Christopher Nolan for Inception)

Adapted Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin for The Social Network (Alternate: Michael Arndt, Jon Lasseter et al for Toy Story III

People are still predicting an Inception upset – which I swear would make me so infuriated I’m actually worried it’ll happen now. Look, fine I’m not a big Inception fan – but there’s such a colossal difference between originality and writing. The award seems skewed because it says “original writing” and not “screenplay from material previously unpublished”. Ah well, we’ll see what happens... I say it’ll be the two frontrunners for the Picture category with Sorkin and Seidler triumphing. And, since Cholodenko has no luck – I’m fine with these two choices.

Art Direction: The King’s Speech (Alternate: Inception)

Makeup: Barney’s Version (Alternate: The Wolfman)

Costume Design: Colleen Atwood for Alice in Wonderland (Alternate: Jenny Beavan for The King’s Speech

Now that I think of it, Art Direction could be a huge toss-up. Sure, The King’s Speech and Inception seem like the frontrunners – but there’s no telling how voters will respond to the obtrusiveness of Alice in Wonderland, and I sort of don’t see True Grit going home empty handed either. Aaargh, then there’s makeup which I’m really just guessing about – and them, Costume Design where I want Colleen to win because she’s the best and I want her to get her third statue, and then there’s Beavan who was snubbed for such great work in the 90s and did such good work on The King’s Speech which I’m not-so-secretly hoping will sweep the ceremony just for the fun of it. Decisions, decisions....

Sound Editing: Inception

Sound Mixing: Inception (The King's Speech)

I decided to go two for two with Inception here, because the sound branch seemed sort of insular in choosing The Hurt Locker last year. And, though, it’s possible they just thought it deserved both – and though Inception is nowhere near frontrunner status – it’s a possibility that seems logical. Now, The King’s Speech (or more realistically True Grit) could upset in the mixing category – but I’ll say no.

Cinematography: Danny Cohen for The King’s Speech (Alternate: Wally Pfister for Inception)

Editing: Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall for The Social Network (Tariq Anwar for The King’s Speech)

Visual Effects: Inception (Alternate: Alice in Wonderland)

Okay, I think this is the point where I’m getting ridiculous. Honestly, I can really see Cohen upsetting for photography in the same way that something like The Golden Compass upset for visuals or The Bourne Supremacy upset for sound. And, then I could see the obvious happening and Deakins winning or Pfister winning. Ugh, this is only a conundrum because I’m over-thinking it all – and I know I’m over-thinking it, but I can’t help over-thinking. This reminds me why I opted to show no interest in Oscar last year. I think the editing prize is assured, though. No? And the visual prize seems assured, but I think I’ll laugh if Alice in Wonderland (undeservedly, I’d admit) wins.

Original Score: Alexandre Desplat for The King’s Speech

Original Song: Alan Menken for “I See the Light” from Tangled

We all know how surprising the music branch can go when it comes to choosing winners (case in point: 2005, an exercise in strangeness). Will Desplat and Menken – the deserving – win? Will Zimmer and Rahman – the loud and the obvious – triumph. Will we go even crazier and reward the laidback ones like Reznor and Newman? I’m sticking with the first options.

Foreign Language Feature: Incendies (Alternate: In A Better World)

Documentary Feature: Inside Job (Alternate: Waste Land)

Animated Feature: Toy Story III (Alternate: How to Train Your Dragon)

I have a feeling Incendies is going to win, if only because most people who’ve seen the films admit that it’s terribly mawkish. I have that sort of little faith in the voters, although you’d think them having to watch the films in succession mean the best will win. I can’t be certain, Incendies just seems like a typical choice even if I want to say In A Better World. I’d sort of love Dogtooth to win, just because this guy here loves it – and it’ll probably make him happy. I’m sticking with Inside Job for documentary – just because.

Short Film (Animated): Day & Night (Alternate: Let’s Pollute)

Short Film (Documentary): Killing in the Name (Alternate: The Warriors of Qiugang)

Short Film (Live Action): The Confession (Alternate: God of Love)

I’m honestly stabbing in the dark here, and I sort of love it. I always do zero research for these categories and just choose based on name of film and directors. It’s always fun, but don’t take me seriously here. I have absolutely no authority.

                        

Well, Oscars are in about 18 hours or so. How was the season for you?

Oscar Talk: Actor and Actress

I often wonder why the actor and actress categories are considered superior to the supporters, but judging by the nominees this year I’d actually support that theory. The nominees for the leading categories significantly outweigh the supporting players.

            

ACTOR

Who’d have thought that Colin Firth would be the thespian to reach here before his contemporaries like Neeson, Branagh and Fiennes – but, that’s Oscar for you. He gets an immediate second shot at gold over last year’s loss, and he’s not likely to lose.

NOMINEES: Javier Bardem in Biutiful / Jeff Bridges in True Grit / Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network / Colin Firth in The King’s Speech / James Franco in 127 Hours Prediction: Colin Firth Alternate Javier Bardem

I should probably qualify that alternate prediction by saying that of all the feature film categories this is the one where I believe an upset is likely. Still, at this rate, if any upset were to occur it would be one of catastrophic proportions – and who better than the man who turned into (somewhat) of an upset nominee. Analysing the field, on performances, I’d say that the prize is between Eisenberg and Firth so I don’t mind that Firth has sort of swept through the season, even if some deserving men got no love (my ballot). I never actually considered Sean Penn’s Milk to be an upset, the last real “surprise” this category saw was Adrien Brodey, but parallels between he and Eisenberg are tenuous at best. It’s Colin’s race.

         

ACTRESS

Logically, I shouldn’t be getting any sort of headache with the prediction for this category because Natalie has sort of swept through the season, well the majors anyway – but I’m still not absolutely certain that she’s the indisputable winner. Hell, it’s possible that I’ll see her on stage with the winning statuette and still doubt the veracity of her frontrunner status – I’m sort of ridiculous like that. I was depending on the BAFTA to give Annette the statue, and prove my theory whereby the Annette/Natalie race would turn into a converse version of the Marion/Julie race (both win Globes, one wins SAG and the other wins BAFTA) – but alas, I was wrong. Logically, if Annette had any hope you’d expect her to take at least one major from Natalie – but other than the surprise British Critics' win (which isn’t exactly a major) she's got nothing. And she still lost the BAFTA, so there’s no proof that she has the British voting bloc behind her.

           

NOMINEES: Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right Nicole Kidman in Rabbit Hole / Jennifer Lawrence in Winter’s Bone / Natalie Portman in Black Swan / Michelle Williams in Blue Valentine

Prediction: Natalie Portman Alternate: Annette Bening

So, I’m predicting Natalie – which makes me feel a little bit like a Judas because I still think that Annette can win this. I’ve never been one to have ridiculous Oscar hopes (I gave up on Cate winning for I’m Not There even before Tilda t urned into the frontrunner) but I’m just getting a feeling, heaven knows what it is. (Really, though, how ironic is it that a win for Annette would be an upset – mindboggling, some.) So, Natalie’s my prediction with Annette as my alternate. You all know what I’m hoping for, though....(my picks)

         

How ridiculous are my great expectations of an Annette win? Who wants an upset in the Actor category?

Oscar Talk: Dream Duos

I always like watching the road to the Oscars because it’s always cool seeing the nominees fraternising with each other; a bit like watching animals in their natural habitat or whatnot. Last year, I’d have given anything to see an eventual pair-up between Gabourey Sidibe and Carey Mulligan (they always seemed so chummy at events) or Helen Mirren and Meryl Streep. So, I made my own list – using the 20 nominees for the 2010 here are the five duos I’d most love to see.

          

Mark Ruffalo and Jeremy Renner

I’ve always wanted to see Mark Ruffalo play an ultimately badass (though it is fun watching him play the ultimate stoner). And, with Renner being in good form throughout The Town playing the aggressive role for all its worth, I’d be much interested in seeing them battle it out as criminals at war. My limited imagination is seeing too much of The Departed playing out, which probably wouldn’t work as well. But, they’re such opposing technical forces it’d be interesting watching them battle it out.

Jennifer Lawrence and James Franco

I hate to sound superficial, but Jennifer Lawrence is so pretty I want to see her actually use that beauty (for good or ill) in a movie. And who better to pair her opposite than James Franco? That’s a whole lot of hotness. I don’t know why, though, but I’m now immediately flashing back to Bright Star (I swear, I can’t get that movie out of my head since we started studying Keats this semester). I’m not sure if either has a good British accent, but I wouldn’t be averse to seeing them in a period piece, but – really – I’m not that picky. Their aestheticism may distract me...

        

Amy Adams and Natalie Portman

Perhaps it’s the red hair that I’ve seen them each sport before, but don’t they seem like an obvious duo to play a sister/sister pair. One reason I hate the Oscars’ is because in cheering on our favourites there’s that tendency to end up (ostensibly at least) disliking the competition, but though I’m not backing her I do like Natalie Portman. I find her general nature quite charming, and I’m even fonder of Amy Adams. I can’t see how any casting director could go wrong pairing the two women opposite each other in a nice drama.

          

Annette Bening and Geoffrey Rush

Both Annette and Geoffrey have a stringent theatrical nature to them that’s often mistaken for histrionics (see Quills, Being Julia) and they’re both actors who work well opposite their respective scene partners. This makes me keenly interested in the idea of seeing them play opposite each other in something decidedly theatrical. Honest truth, the first idea that popped into my head was seeing them play opposite each other in Macbeth, but even something deliberately whimsical or anachronistic like a play within a play (a la Shakespeare in Love, or once again – Being Julia). Just think of the glorious shouting matches the two would have.

                

Helena Bonham Carter and Nicole Kidman

I have no idea what I’d want them to star in together, but it’s possible that this much brilliance in one film could make me combust. They’re at such opposite sides of the spectrum as actors it would be especially interesting to see what they’d be like in close proximity to each other – Kidman could be a younger stand-in for the Margaret Schlegel type in Howards End, even if I’m not in love with her British accent. But, really, I can’t be the only one who’d like to see them play against each other – they both have underrated (albeit brilliant) comedic performances. Perhaps, frenemies at war?

        

Of the twenty nominees, which pairing would you like to see come to fruition? How about adding one of the five director nominees to each of my would-be films?

With A Link In My Heart

 My favourite post of the week is a no-contest, the fact that Nick gives Annette Bening such a great send-up means I can rest happy. I still think that the best actress race is undecided (mirroring a Cotillard vs Christie) race, and I'm still maintaining hope for the Bening. Sigh, me and my dreams.

So, apparently Jose loves The Social Network, which means we're back to being on the same page which makes me very happy. He's busy with grad school and whatnot, so I'm going on easy on him for the sporadic posting.

Luke is into his top ten films and takes a look at an Ang Lee one. My favourite Lee film is actually Sense & Sensibility, but the man is masterful. Enough said.

Walter is going on a rampage with recasting classics and decides on re-doing The Ten Commandments and Elmer Gantry. He replaces the delicious Anne Baxter with the delicious Salma Hayek in the former, which is a downgrade in performance but worthy, and then he replaces Burt Lancaster with Joaquin Phoenix in the latter which is a HUGE upgrade. I approve.

Paolo has some nice screencaps - oh, look Maggie the Cat, then Tracy Lords. Ah, movies...

Tom gives a lovely writeup on Shirley Booth in Come Back Little Sheba, I love William Inge's work but I've never seen this one. 

Univarn asks us to live out our favourite screen moments (that picture right below is mine, aaah Katherine Clifton). I don't know why everyone's avoiding the reality - you know you'd use that opportunity to have sex with the stars....hmmm, sounds like a reality show. Sexin'  with the Stars...

Robert is looking at his favourites of the past year and I love his nominees for Art Direction and Costume, both so personal (the way it should be), if somewhat surprising - the Colleen Atwood snub is hurtful, but I digress. Speaking of year-end love, Ryan counts down his top ten films. #1 is amazing, so I approve this list.

Encore Awards: Actresses

I’m a bit unexcited about the showing of actresses this year, which is weird because I’m willing to admit that collectively it’s been quite a good year. Communally there’s a wealth of performances in comparison to last year when my top 5 (Mulligan, Cornish, Pfeiffer, Ronan, Wright Penn) was easily decided. I don’t know if, perhaps, the ensemble nature of the films this year accounts for an effusive lack of enthusiasm, even though I’m fond of each member of the top 5. And even the Oscar nominees are collectively good, easily one of the better line-ups in recent memories. Ah well, let’s see what I chose.

     

THE NOMINEES

Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right (as Nic)

& Annette Bening in Mother & Child (as Karen)

The term banner year seems so splotchy, implicitly suggesting that all previous years hold little worth – but it’s been a banner year for Bening for me. I sort of thought her one-two punch in 2006 (Running With Scissors, Mrs. Harris) was unbeatable but watching her play Karen and Nic almost like extensions of the same person – but then at times completely opposite makes me even more impressed by her talent. It seems like way too much of a disservice to Bening’s talent to lump Nic – or Karen – together with all the strong women she’s played (Julia, Deidre, Carolyn). Their strength doesn’t make them identical, and it’s strange – both women have trouble being emotive, but Annette decides to establish them by decidedly different character tics. Karen develops in uneven bursts goaded by her insecurities whereas Nic’s security becomes her crutch as she finds that it’s not as impenetrable as it seems. Even the manner in which they break is not identical, Karen for all her faux-coldness yearns for the ability to be completely emotive and when she cries it’s with complete surrender. Nic is uncomfortable with that loss of control, and even her tears exist as a sort of reluctant emotion. True, I do prefer her work as Nic (if only because the character is so much richer), but it’s a double helping of brilliance that I think is laudable. (Highlight: “So Blue” and Breakdown with Sofia)

Nicole Kidman in Rabbit Hole (as Becca)

I’ve always thought of Nicole in the same way that I think of Cate Blanchett – actors most discernable because of the emotion they put into their voice, but Becca is significant not because of the line readings but because of all the expressions that she has. She reacts to everything that happens on screen – her eye-rolls, her steely gazes, her silent scoffs – she’s never “off” and Nicole never loses sight of that always reacting, however subtly, to everything occurring around her. It’s difficult to play favourites and hold up someone as her best scene partner – she’s so go$od with them all. The understated tension opposite Aaron, the filial spats with Tammy, the brilliant chemistry with Wiest and her tentativeness opposite Teller is lovely to watch. She gives as much as she gets and though her career is so littered with goodies I can’t decide if it’s my favourite or not, its goodness is undeniable. (Highlight: Bowling Alley Birthday)

Julianne Moore in The Kids Are All Right (as Jules)

Every actor has precepts that work for them, and though Jules is nowhere near as morose as the prototypical Jules character her constant interest in pronounced facial expressions is the ultimate reason why I’m so impressed with her here. I hate judging her against Annette since the performances are ultimately so symbiotic and sometimes even in tandem with the other. They play well off each other, but more than Annette Julianne plays well off actual scenes. Because Nic is so controlled Annette isn’t always given the opportunity to respond immediately (facially) to situations – so Julianne must, and that sort of naked physicality is something she delivers with and because Jules and Nic are so affected by each other these expressions are most pronounced when Nic is at the forefront of the scene. Thus, when she’s actually presented with the opportunity to “lead” a scene – her twitchiness is manifested, it’s not necessarily a twitchiness borne of being discomfited but one of being disaccustomed. (Highlight: “Marriage is hard.”)

Rachel Weisz in Agora (as Hypatia)

The role of Hypatia seems to be the sort of exemplary woman that seems perfect for Rachel Weisz. Weisz plays Hypatia with a consistent disregard for her personal appearance, as beautiful as she is – and there’s that subtle hint that perhaps that plays a role in her power over everyone – she never plays Hypatia as a “beautiful” woman. Moreover, she brings that sort of resonance to the dialogue where you’re moved to think that her every word is something seismic. Amenabar is fortunate that she plays the role so effectively, because it’s her devotion to the character that allows (with the slightest of physical inclinations) us to believe that things like ellipses are capable of being as astonishing as Hypatia believes. (Highlight: sketchy...each time she speaks, perhaps?)

FINALISTS: Halle Berry is tasked with a conventionally baity role of three persons in one in Frankie & Alice but at her best she’s always able to bring the right touch of compassion to her work that’s put to good use here; Patricia Clarkson is luminous in Cairo Time balancing Juliet's vague dissatisfaction with life against the wealth of experiences she experiences on holiday and always – ALWAYS – so entrancing even with the slightest of movements; Kerry Washington is all aglimmer (is that even a word?) in Night Catches Us. I’ve rarely seen her so mature, and it’s the sort of role that while fitting her perfectly isn’t too deliberate in its; Michelle Williams dives into the difficult persona she plays in Blue Valentine – ensuring that the tenets that comprise her character do not become murky as she develops, and moreover ascertaining that even when we don’t understand the “why” we understand the “how”.

     

SEMI-FINALISTS: the way that Kirsten Dunst lights up the screen whenever she appears in All Good Things make me even sadder about her absence from the screen. It’s more than her doing the best work in the film, her constant attention to detail with a character that’s quite vague is admirable; Dakota Fanning has always seemed much too mannered for me to take her seriously, but in The Runaways despite her occasional off-putting tics she’s so resolute in carving Cherry’s inclinations that she manages to give the best performance of her career – thus far; Greta Gerwig’s congenial way in Greenberg might be easy to ignore, which is unfortunate because she has a more difficult task than Stiller. She’s playing this affable woman who’s difficult to understand but not at all mysterious – even if her inclinations seem ridiculous and she does it all with aplomb and that cheery winsome nature to her that’s irresistible; Jennifer Lawrence must carry the entirety of Winter’s Bone, and Granik is lucky enough that she’s able to take that kind of weight on her shoulders , she's good at playing the tough as nails country girl, but she's just as capable of establishing the girlish innocence in Ree, too which is the real treat; there are some times when Carey Mulligan seems a little too literal in Never Let Me Go, though that’s as much the fault of the film itself. When the film is at its weakest in that final act, though, she provides the stability realising how important it is that the audience identifies with Cathy managing to produce a seemingly full character in the wake of what really is just nothingness; I’ll probably always prefer Natalie Portman in small doses, or better yet in specific modes. I’m still wowed by that phone call she makes to her mother Black Swan even if she impresses, but doesn’t wow me in other scenes. Most importantly, though, she’s thoroughly aware of how essential her inflections are to the plot and delivers on that even if I’m not completely sold on it at all times.

                   

Which leading lady ruled the year for you?

Encore Awards: Body of Work

Though she didn’t end up with any love from the top awards’ bodies last year was all about Marion Cotillard for me. Her general brilliance turned Public Enemies into something much better than it could have been, and her brilliantly performed Luisa Contini was a beacon in the already good cast of Nine (she made my supporting actress shortlist for both performances). Anyone can star in a slew of performances in a given year, but it’s something better when an actor can deliver two (or more) performances in a year that have something good to see in them and assume different sensibilities*.

THE NOMINEES

Annette Bening (in The Kids Are All Right; Mother & Child)

It might be easy to mistake them for extensions of the same character, but whereas Nic quietness is indicative of the uncertainty she wishes to hide, Karen’s quietness is more of a conscious decision to observe those around her. Both performances stand somewhere at the top half of her career, making her one of those indelible proofs of actresses getting better as they age.

               

Helena Bonham Carter (in Alice in Wonderland; Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows; The King’s Speech)

In a way, it annoys me that she’s turned into a sort of ultimate supporting actor implying that her natural personality is best taken in small doses and even though she supports in a period piece in The King’s Speech it’s neither reminiscent of her early Merchant Ivory work nor suggestive of her recent kooky characters. Each character she played this way, in their own way, is a woman before her time but she doesn’t make that define them. There is a palpable sense that she’s being served up too little on each occasion, but it’s the sort of acting from the sidelines that does not define the picture but still augments it significantly.

             

Patricia Clarkson (in Cairo Time; Easy A; Shutter Island)

Her supporting turn in Shutter Island is a bit of a blink and you’ll miss it one – and yet, along with Williams and DiCaprio, she leaves the biggest impact on you. You rarely ever seeing Patty being loud and obnoxious, always opting for a quiet sincerity which is her ace-in-hole when it comes to Cairo Time which she makes so much more important than you expect her to be. And then opposite Tucci she offers up one of the best screen-mothers of the year in Easy A. Truly, a great body of work.

                

Aaron Johnson (in The Greatest; Kick-Ass; Nowhere Boy)

It’s been a while since I had this much interest in watching a young male star’s star rise. It’s been a stratospheric year for Johnson and more than turning out three performances this year, it’s impressive how the running thread between them is so thin. There’s little to find that’s palpably similar between his Lennon, his  John and his Dave. True, acting doesn’t necessarily mean mastering accents, but I’ll give him credit for pulling off the American one so well, nonetheless.

Kerry Washington (in For Colored Girls; Night Catches Us; Mother & Child)

I don’t know – the fact that each film has landed with almost no sound makes me rethink the sentiment – but, perhaps, Kerry is on her way to stardom, opting for the slower path. She pulls out three performances that rests on internalising grief and pain and performs each brilliant. Sure, she thrives best in Mother & Child, but even in the huge cast of For Colored Girls with the storyline that seems least important she carves something special. (And story issues aside she and Mackie are beautiful to watch in Night Catches Us.)

               

FINALISTS: Michelle Williams for offering up a brilliant supporting turn in Shutter Island and a haunting lead performance in Blue Valentine; Andrew Garfield for offering up two good (if similar) turns in The Social Network and Never Let Me Go and James Franco for being a beacon in two lead roles in Howl and 127 Hours.

                 

Which actor ruled 2010 with their ability to jump from performance to performance?

* Just in case you're wondering, Johnny Depp would win the alternative award here. He's easily the worst thing in The Tourist and Alice in Wonderland (yep, even worse than the Wasikowska's bland work in the latter.) He sinks Angelina's attempts to be at least interesting in the former, and other than a glimmer of goodness opposite HBC he's terribly vile in the latter. I hope it's not the beginning of a trend for him...

Oscar Talk: Actually Talking About Oscar, and its value

The terrible thing about the Oscar race – okay, scratch that; let me restart. One of the terrible things about the Oscar race is how every singular – and sometimes insular – decision they make gets blown out of proportion. It’s something that anyone who takes any interest in Oscar seems guilty of. True, by the very act of “predicting” the awards we’re suggesting that there’s an ultimate master plan behind their decisions. At the moment we have what looks like a two horse race in the Best Actress category, and you just know that if (for example) Bening wins it won’t be evidence of the Academy liking her performance but evidence that they’re receptive of her “overdue” status and are not in favour of the more “daring” Black Swan. However, the more significant potential fallout from the Academy this year will be the war of the Pictures – The King’s Speech vs The Social Network. As I write this I’ve finally, FINALLY, seen The King’s Speech (I’m keeping mum for now) and it looks as if The Social Network is poised to rule the Oscars. What does this mean?

                                  

Personally, I don’t think it’s means anything other than the fact that voters and viewers elsewhere seem enamoured with The Social Network which is something that I’m not inclined to cry foul at. I’m a little flustered by the emphasis that’s being placed on this apparent “shift” in the Academy’s taste. A part of me is still hoping for an upset via The King’s Speech – exclusive of personal tastes – just because I’d love to see the headlines that we’d get the next day if the Oscars’ do decide to go traditionalist and choose the Briton piece. See what I just did there? I managed to subtly imply that there’s WAY more credence behind something like an Oscar for Best Picture – and that’s just a little silly. Perhaps, in my naiveté I’m willing to give the AMPAS the benefit of the doubt – but we as viewers don’t look at movies for their overarching implications – so when we prefer (hypothetically) An Education to Precious it doesn’t mean that what we’re REALLY saying is that pretty British things are more valuable than the harsh realities of Harlem. At least, I don’t think so....

                         

Then, why are we so intent on placing that much weight upon the Academy’s decision. Over and over (and over) the AMPAS gets held up for scrutiny, which is theoretically sound because they’re not supposed to be insular – they’re the most respected (I’d wager) film awards’ ceremony in the world, or at the very least the most overtly popular. Their decisions are important – yes. But, the Academy has no responsibility in terms of keeping abreast with current politics or even social norms. True, we expect the film community (producers and directors) to keep up with the times. But if something like The King’s Speech – almost like a pastiche in the way that it’s evocative of eras gone by – trumps something like The Social Network – something that’s ostensibly innovative, hip and whatnot (ironic, too, because the basic themes of The Social Network are quite old) that’s not evidence of them living in the past. Maybe they honestly believe that the “old” one is the one that’s better made – but it doesn’t mean that all “old things” are better. Its decisions should be about film quality, they shouldn’t be held accountable for ensuring that what they choose is indicative of the changing times – at least, I don’t think.

One of my biggest gripes this past year has been the rumblings here and there about how terrible it is that nary a potential Oscar nominee is a minority. It’s unfortunate, I suppose, but I’m sort of nonplussed as to how that’s an issue for voters. So, there aren’t many roles for black women – that’s an issue for producers and casters. Are the AMPAS obligated to ensure that someone, say Halle Berry, is nominated just to “save face” and ensure that the ceremony isn’t whitewashed in the 21st century? (I actually heard someone say that.) Wouldn’t that just end up being subversive? I sure as hell wouldn’t mind if her name is called as the “fifth-nominee”, but if her name isn’t called it doesn’t indicate anything about Oscar’s reprehensibility. Look, I’m as wont to criticise the Academy for their stupid decisions as much as the next prognosticator – I can’t help it. But, sometimes I think we get caught up in just how much they’re responsible for.

                    

What do you think? Any rebuttals? Do you agree?

“Where Is the Link That Late I Read?”

Is it wrong that my post of the week is something the writer himself calls shallow, sexist  and dumb? Ah, well. Head on over to Paolo’s immediately and tell him which of these badass cinematic females you thought ruled 2010. My vote was fairly simple – Bellatrix, duh – but he has a wide foray of options. Get on that. 

Gentleman's Agreement and Rain Man - two Oscar Best Picture winners that aren't held in high estimation. I'm generally apathetic towards the former (a rarity for me and a Kazan flick) and I loathe the latter. Nathaniel, Mike and Nick discuss their demerits.

Almost everyone is offering up their "best-of" list for 2010. Kurt tells us what the Oscars would look like if her ran it. Sure he knocks Alan Arkin in Little Miss Sunshine, but other than the list is quite good.

You know I'm obssessed with Katharine Hepburn, same goes for Helena Bonham Carter and the third part of the trimester is Annette Bening who I think is awesome. John doesn't think the same. Sure, I'm backing Annette's bid for Oscar this year - but not because I think she's overdue, I'm backing her because I think she's deserving. This is quite a thought provoking piece, though. What do you think? Should Annette have been Oscar-ed by now? While we're on the topic, though, I love this somewhat old review of The Kids Are All Right - it considers so many facets I didn't before.

Will I be able to see The Way Back before I compile my list of year-end awards? It looks doubtful. Will the Academy deign to consider The Way Back for any awards? Even more doubtful. Ah well, Ben (of Runs Like A Gay) offers up a review. God knows, I want to see it terribly. 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand, look see Nicholas reviews Scott Pilgrim vs the World. It's so weird, every time I hear that movie name I get a goofy smile on my face. I'm in lesbians with it.

Reflections on Mother & Child

For ninety minutes Mother & Child, and what disappoints me is that the trapping of the stories prevent the brilliance of the performances from being adequately highlighted, because Annette Bening, Kerry Washington and Naomi Watts give three of the most eclectic performances I’ve seen all year.

If Garcia’s screenplay holds any worth as a paradigm for other writers, it stands as proof that a good screenplay does not comprise good lines only. It’s strange, few lines in Mother & Child emerge as disingenuous until you're met with an unlikely soliloquy here or there that seems like it's from a completely different film; moreover his  story-structure is so lacking the film feels awkwardly truncated at times. Rodrigo Garcia’s creation seems especially unimaginative at times, which is stressed because in theory the playing field he has available is wide. But, I’m appreciative of his attempts for in all its occasional banality Mother & Child has searing moments, and Garcia is a much more astute director than he is a writer. I’ve reached the point where I’m well aware of the “injustices” of awards’ season, but it still seems ridiculous that comments on the Oscar “race” continue and nary a performance from the three protagonists of this drama are being tossed around. It only puts the harsh reality of these laurels into perspective.

Kerry Washington was the biggest surprise because I’ve been waiting so long for her to get a role worthy of her obvious potential and she brings such poignancy to her expectant mother it’s such a please to know that the promise of talent she’s been showing for so long has been made good on (even if no one cares to notice), and Naomi Watts pulls off a character that in theory shouldn’t work, especially for her. And, of course, Annette... Bening will always be striking for her ability to get in touch with abrasive characters and Karen’s outward prickliness is measured beautifully against her internal securities. I am smitten with her, but there are moments where it’s especially impressive watching her inhibit the character. I almost feel as if she and her co-stars do the film more justice than it deserves, because when it ends I have that palpable feeling that I’ve been played. 

It Mother & Child is emotionally manipulative, but it’s worth the manipulation if only to see performances – from the trimester of ladies all the way to Jimmy Smitts and Samuel L. Jackson. Jackson is so easily represent of the BAMF it's something satisfying to see him reign it all in and deliver a perfectly controlled performance. And it's so interesting how Cherry Jones' nun, forever on the outlines manages to carve a chracter that seems decidedly three-dimensional. Garcia might not be the wisest storyteller, but his ability to find the right way to bring out the good in his actors is something worth praising – even if it’s grudgingly.

                

B-

Oscar Talk: “I Love Lesbians”

Before their romantic liaison in The Kids Are All Right Julianne Moore and Annette Bening were already women that you thought of (at least tangentially) similar. They’re both from the same age bracket, both Oscar-less but celebrated and both with that certain tenacity that’s made them able to be just as luminous at fifty as they were at thirty. I don’t think anyone can be blamed for hoping that The Kids Are All Right would signal Oscar glory for at least one of the two because even if I’m aware of the general unimportance of Oscar today I’ll admit that I love it when someone I care for wins. The Oscar race is always one bit of strangeness after another now and they’re really no telling if either of the two could hope for success come February.

There’s the most obvious issue of category placement, I’m a bit too quick to think of The Kids Are All Right in the same way that I do think of Thelma & Louise. They’re the same in the sense of having two leading ladies, but The Kids Are All Right and its ensemble nature makes the division more difficult to make and Julianne Moore is probably going to end up being tossed back and forth between the supporting and leading category ultimately ending up with no nomination (a la Leonardo DiCaprio in The Departed). Obviously she should be in the leading category, but though I do love Julianne there’s not that sense of urgency when we consider her quest for Oscar. Julianne has lost the prize four times, and the last two times she was nominated the eventual winners were worthy. I’m not going to enter the Swank/Bening argument again – but there’s the distinct sense that Bening should have been feted by now (let’s not even think of the terrible snub in 2006).

Julianne and Annette have both made it onto the list of Golden Satellites nominees, but that doesn’t say much when they’ve nominated in excess of 15 women in their two Actress categories. Annette's up for a Spirit Award , Julianne freakishly is not. I like the NBR, even though I don’t put much credence in them as far as Oscar prognostics go. I still respect them for giving Bening their actress award in 2004 and HBC in 1997. I haven’t seen Another Year yet, so I can’t comment on Lesley Manville’s win but it’s weird that The Kids Are All Right didn’t even the top ten. There really is no telling at this point what the Actress race will end up looking like. Thus far Annette and Julianne are would be somewhere at the top for me. It’s difficult to think of them as individual performances because Nic and Jules work so well as a single unit, I’ve no idea if Oscar is going to remember them as a duo or split them up. I’m wondering now if they’ll even give The Kids Are All Right any of the love it deserves...we’ll see, I suppose.

        

Does either trump the other? Who do you hope gets nominated?

The Kids Are All Right (or is it The Kids Are Alright?

I’m neurotic, you know that already. So it’s only natural that I spend an unwieldy amount of time pondering on the name of Lisa Cholodenko’s latest feature. Somewhere during the loss of translation the title’s been qualified to The Kids Are Alright which suggests something all together different from the actual All Right. It’s not unwarranted to assume that Josh Hutcherson and Mia Wasikowska aren’t the only “kids” it refers, but it’s more of a stretch to consider just what the so-called kids are right about. Laser and Joni are the two children of Nic and Jules – a lesbian couple. The two have both been artificially inseminated, Laser is Jules and Joni is Nic and to make their unconventional a little more tightly knit they used the same sperm donor. Laser seems to be the epitome of the antsy teenager which is not so much an indicator of Cholodenko conforming to stereotype as it is her smart attempt at showing just how “normal” this family is. In the typical sense antsy Laser convinces Joni – bound for college – to contact their donor, enter Paul our donor – and the beginning of the film, but not quite.

The Kids Are All Right is not really about Paul and it might even be overreaching to say that it’s about the family dealing with him. Cholodenko is meticulous in the way she decides to frame the story that no one comes off as the star even if we’d inadvertently consider Nic and Jules as the leads. The Kids Are All Right is the sort of fleeting glimpse into the lives of a suburban family that’s almost bordering on voyeurism because it’s not the big moments like their first meeting with Mark or Jules and Nic’s argument about a particular liaison that matter most. It’s the smaller things like arguments over something like a new truck or Nic’s performance of a Joni Mitchell song that reveal the most about the characters. Cholodenko isn’t satisfied with staying in suburbia and she expands her palette with surprisingly accurate results. Yaya DaCosta as an on-and-off lover of Paul with hair from the eighties manages to deliver a surprisingly delicate performance. Cholodenko’s agenda – if we can call it that – is simple. She’s interested in examining the chink in the armour of normalcy that each of these characters has around them.

That’s what’s makes the performances – all of them – that much more interesting to watch. I don’t think I’m alone when I say that the first thing that got me interested in seeing The Kids Are All Right was the promise of seeing two brilliant actors – Annette Bening and Julianne Moore – opposite each other. And they are acting even though it seems they’re just existing in tandem. It seems to be an obvious direction from Cholodenko who frames the entire film in this manner of existing that makes it that much more real. It’s because Cholodenko decides to submerge the narrative in this very normalcy of life that the film’s conclusion seems discordant in its mundanity. She’s not inventing the wheel, it’s been done before but there only seems to be a standard plot movement. In actuality, though a certain revelation seems to function as a climax it’s not really and Laser’s final words aren’t really a conclusion. When the credits roll there’s a strident sense of something more to come, and that seems to be precisely what Cholodenko seems to be going for. The kids aren’t alright, but they’re all right – whatever they do. Superficially the way that Paul exits the film makes him look like a monster, but though she falters a bit in the execution Cholodenko is never setting him – or anyone – up to be the villain. I wonder if an alternate title couldn’t have been “Whatever Works”. They’re all going about their lives bumping into each other, and they’re probably going about it all wrong but their all doing what’s working for them. So, despite their differing perspectives perhaps the kids – all of them – are all right, even if they’re...wrong. Right?

A-

“When I was your age we lived in a Duplex!”

Too lazy for an actualy Scene on A Sunday today, so a few shots of Mrs. Warren Beatty will suffice.

 

“Why Did We Get Married?”

f there’s one thing the cinema can do, it’s make an impression on you – and one thing that’s they’ve done constantly is make marriage seem like a sick-twisted game. Some couples do it for fun, and some do it because they’re incompatible. It’s a bit crazy when you think of it because if they’re irreconcilable why get married in the first place? Hence the title… (click on the links for thoughts on the films)

                 

Rhett: Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!

Rhett and Scarlet from Gone with the Wind (1939)

Of course they’d make the list…they made the other one too. What makes them smarter than the others it that at least they ended their marriage. They realised that this thing was heading nowhere. I still find Clark Gable a bit too audacious at times (am I the only one getting the Clooney vibe…whom I am not fond of) but the paring with the brash Scarlet works lovely even if they end up tearing their heads off in the end.

Reason #5 – don’t get married [The wife will be lusting for another man and the husband just will not give a damn.]

Reason #5 – get married [The wife will never go hungry again…but still the husband doesn’t give a damn…yikes]

         

Brick: How in hell on earth can you imagine you're gonna have a child with a man who can't stand you?

Brick and Maggie (the Cat) from Cat on A Hot Tin Roof (1958)

It’s a bit too different from the play, but I still love it so. I suppose that Elizabeth Taylor is the only one able to completely embody the iconic Maggie the Cat (I often wonder what Catherine Zeta Jones could do with the role). It’s a bit annoying that they pair her clad in a sensation white dress with Paul Newman and they don’t…you know, get it on. But, of course, that’s the entire conflict of the play.

Reason #4 – don’t get married [The husband will withhold sex and the wife will hate your in-laws.]

Reason #4 – get married [Maybe the husband will look like Paul Newman and maybe, just maybe, the wife be hot like Lizze, you can dream.]

Eleanor: I could peel you like a pear and God himself would call it justice.

Henry and Eleanor from The Lion in Winter (1968)

Really, they’re twisted. They move from whispering sweet nothing importants in each others’ ears to pulling out all the stops to make the other cringe. Just when you think they do love each other they turn around and are spitting venom. It’s all very confusing…and then they’re children too, self destructive but oh so lovely to watch…

Reason #3 – don’t get married [The children will hate the parents, the wife will try to conquer her husband’s territory – he’ll jail her and he will pick up with his son’s fiancée and threaten to annul his marriage.]

Reason #3 – get married [The wife will look good even when she’s near sixty, and they both will have a knack for brilliant line readings.]

           

Carolyn: Oh, you don't complain? Then please, excuse me, I must be psychotic, then! If you don't complain, what is this?          

Lester and Carolyn from American Beauty (1999)

Hmmm, they’re just all around toxic. It’s so hard to imagine when they’ve ever had better days. She’s just too neurotic and he’s just too…well, he’s just not interested. It’s a pity, though. Their scenes together are so lovely.

Reason #2 – don’t get married [The child will feel alienated and pick up with dope fiend, the husband will smash plates and lust after teens and the wife will hate him and have an affair.]

Reason #2 – get married [“I will sell this house today”, well that’s what the wife thinks and thus husband will look good naked, or so he hopes.]

               

Martha: If you existed I'd divorce you.

George and Martha from Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf (1966)

How could they not be on the list? They’re so twisted and the reason they’re at the top of the list is because they seem to enjoy it so much. It’s like all this violence is some twisted bit of foreplay that they cannot do without out, and it is so brilliant (and brilliant I mean scary and by scary I mean excellent) that I cannot look away.

Reason #1 – don’t get married [They both will be drunks and he especially will despise his father in law.]

Reason #1 – get married [Did you see this movie…? The upside is you die

               

Take your pick. Which spousal argument is your favourite? My favourite is #3, the most dastardly is #1.