Where is Gene Hackman's AFI Lifetime Achievement Award?

Is there anyone else who's the perfect fusion of character acting and star quality like Gene Hackman? He is the only actor in a Wes Anderson movie that managed to get away without sounding inert or cartoonish in some way. As much as I love Paltrow in RT or Jason Schwartzman in Rushmore, you must admit there's a kind of monotonous, 2D quality to their characters that, while appropriate for the Andersonverse, would be totally unsuited to ours. Gene Hackman walks a fine line between these two worlds, endowing Royal with all the trademarks of a Wes Anderson movie (social incompetency and eccentricity), yet making him an all-too-familiar person to the audience. And that's Gene Hackman's genius. He wears the shoes of his characters' impeccably, so that he belongs to the movie. He plays each of them like he's been playing them all his life, so that he belongs to us.

And Hackman in "Scarecrow", my god. For all the tenderness, anger, and shifty discomfort he brings to the role, he manages to make Depp's Scissorhands and Ledger's Ennis Del Mark look like wild overacting. And yet you never fail to recognize this man's soul right away. My god, what a fine actor.

Just gasping from bits on the AV Club from people far more articulate and aware than I'll ever be....

Ones I agreed with/loved:


"Now well into adulthood, I recently re-read Catcher and found to my surprise that Salinger is actually pretty merciless about Holden's jackassery. I think Sailnger mocks Holden's inability to adapt while also making him pitiable because of the massive trauma caused by the death of a sibling."
- (True dat. Over the years, my impression of Holden has grown with me. During our first encounter, I found him insufferable, without a single redeeming quality at first. I just think of him now as a disaffected, frightened, nostalgic boy. I never found him heroic, and I always found it somewhat disturbing that others would.)

- "i still want to know where the ducks go when the lake in central park freezes over.
- "In my sandwich, motherfucker."

Published about eight times to random comments under the username of Holden Caulfield:
"^what a phony"


Beautiful, beautiful link:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/new_terminator_movie_brings_j_d

"I like the part where Holden jumps out of the skyscraper as it explodes and grabs hold of the bottom of the helicopter. Then he turns around and pithily says "bunch of phonies"." - in response to a pitch to a Michael Bay adaptation of Catcher in the Rye

"all the great novels and short stories he's been writing in secret...they are being edited as we speak by Harper Lee."


"Catcher in the Rye is a great novel if only for how ell it prefigured the hipster douche bag archetype. But then, Hamlet was sorta one of them, too, and he was 30."


"I mentioned it above, but I was a whiny teenage boy when I read it and all I could do was whine about how fucking whiny Holden Caulfield was."


"I'll always wonder why the infinitely superior Glass stories weren't the ones studied in English class. " (Personally, I found it depressing that Catcher in the Rye resonated with so many more people than the grating, hopeful "Franny and Zooey".)

"I'll tell you a terrible secret — Are you listening to me? There isn't anyone out there who isn't Seymour's Fat Lady."

Today, the author of my favorite book "Franny and Zooey", passed away. I once fantasized of striking up a letter correspondence with him. It's very hard to let go of a 90+ year old man when he is and forever will be, immortalized as the _______ youth (it's very hard to describe Holden with justice - youth always seemed to be Salinger's most treasured attribute - I always thought that he was kind of the Scott Fitzgerald/JM Barrie of his time) who resonated with so many generations of petulant, idealistic iconoclasts. (If you think of it, wasn't Holden the predecessor to everything, from Travis Bickle to Igby? Maybe that's a little too egotistic). I know this is rambling, but this is.....well, this is JD Salinger. 

Most upsettingly, none of my friends seem to give a fuck, other than an "aww...that's horrible." S has found my depression a tad bit confusing. 

 

"You're being such a non-pillow right now!"

An Actorphile's Lament

*our last hope?*

There is such a dearth of good, young American actors with potential right now. And don't give me any of that "Jesse Eisenberg-Emile Hirsch" crap. Both of them are good and try hard, but I'm talking about star-of-our-generation potential. An Edward Norton Jr with unparalleled instinct, and who craps effortless magnificance, only with the actual balls to stay in the game.

Which is why I decided to forgo my previous, inexplicable dislike of Joseph Gordon Levitt (ok, ok, it did piss me off tremendously when everyone was saying that he was the new Heath Ledger and HL had only been gone for about three months). He's extremely talented, instinctive, intelligent, and has the physique and looks to become "big" (sorry, Jesse Eisenberg. But you'll look twelve forever. Until one day you become overweight and forty overnight, kind of like Anthony Michael Hall). By the way, is JGL really Caucasian? I could have sworn my left ear that he was half-Asian at the very most. I guess these things just happen.

And according to this article, Gosling hasn't the gumption to stay in film. To me, this is reminiscent of Hayden Christansen's claim a few years ago that Hollywood "no longer interested him and he was looking into architecture" or some other pussyfooting nonsense. And I'm not too worried about JGL's love for filmmaking - sooner or later, all great actors stray behind the camera anyway. Just hope he can retain his passion for both.

And this article mentioned this Michael Pitt. I've never heard of him, but I do hope this new "Boardwalk Empire" show with Steve Buscemi will do his career good. (By the way, the upcoming series looks *awesome*. There's also Michael Shannon as part of the cast. Hope it's kickass. Can't wait. )

And other good, young American actors? I heard Ben Foster kicks ass. He's 29...and good looking to boot. Cast him in bigger pictures, people! Take a risk! Movie producers are such assholes. Big marquee names don't mean SHIT anymore. Actually, they never really did. "Nine", anybody? "The Graduate?"

A Defense of Vera Farmiga in "UITA"

I feel like there's been a lot of internet backlash lately against Vera Farmiga's performance against Up in the Air. (Mostly by Laurent fanboys) Apparently the main argument of the opposition is that it isn't a "difficult role", and that she's "riding off the popularity of the film/basking in the glow of Clooney's charisma". 

So here's my defense for the lovely Vera.

1. Difficult role? Psh. Yes, it's not a typical Oscar-baity role with a crying jag scene, or even any exceptionally emotional scenes. On page, she's just a sexy woman who has a fling with Clooney's Ryan Bingham. Which makes it harder for her to make the role stand out. And she did.****

2. Basking in his glow? Psh. They have tantalizing chemistry, but Clooney never dominated any of their scenes. Were your eyes, in any of Farmiga's scenes, distracted from her face to stare at the much more famous movie star next to her? Clooney met his match in this one. Farmiga out-charmed him, out-sexied him. She was so confident and daring, that you felt like she was setting up the trap for him, the Lady outsmarting the Ladies' man. And if Clooney deserves accolades for being himself, Farmiga deserves it for being more than his equal as a female counterpart.

3. Her performance ultimately made the movie work. If the movie's message is that "life is better with company", then it hardly would have been effective if it weren't for Farmiga's interaction with Clooney. I'm thinking about the wedding scene, where her playful intimacy made the couple so endearing, so magical-yet-grounded, that everyone thought, "hell, why wouldn't you get married if your partner's Vera Farmiga/Alex?" It was clear to the audience in that moment that she was more or less Ryan Bingham's soulmate, which gives the character twist all the more devastating an impact. Put any lesser, replaceable-pretty actress in the part, and you just have a schmaltzy movie that ends up with you thinking, "can't Clooney just hook up with someone else?" instead of embarking a quest to find your own Alex (minus the married cheat part). 

Bottom line: She's pitch-perfect in every scene, she brings the character to full, sexy life without relying on either scene-chewing or "stare lifelessly and be mistaken as enigmatically beautiful and thoughtful" trick that is often mistaken for good acting. She's low-key, commanding, effortless and just totally, 100% Oscar-worthy.  ***2

She's looking at him, but are you? Probably not. 

**** One way I like to evaluate performances is by thinking, "what if someone else had played the role? Would it still be more or less the same? I picked Julia Roberts, who surely had the second-best chemistry with Clooney in the Ocean franchise. And UGH. I just winced a little at the idea. I don't see any of the same coy, slyly-stealing-scene mysteriousness coming across. So there you go.

***2: Thinking again about how most actresses either need some overly dramatic, hysterical scene, or soulful (but for me, yawn-inducing) staring that allows the viewer to think "damn, she's so beautiful" a la Melanie Laurent long enough to forget that she isn't doing anything special, in order to gain attention. Jennifer Connelly is often a victim of this method. So many actresses need something out-of-the-world. That just makes me so mad, and makes me love Vera's ordinary-extraordinary performance all the more.  

Discovering Poetry...Or Not

We're into Romanticism in my British Lit class, and it's right up my alley. I used to be a staunch anti-poetry kind of girl - like Jess from Gilmore Girls would complain, "just say it already!" I've always found poetry too fussy and convoluted for my taste. Of course, there were occasional snippets of poetry I found pleasing - Robert Frost's "Nothing Gold Can Stay", for example - unforgettable in its simplistic power. Proof? I can still recite it from heart, even though I haven't read it in about five years.

*************************

Nature's first green is gold

Its hardest hue to hold

Its early leaf a flower

But only so an hour

So leaf subsides to leaf

So Eden sank to grief

So dawn goes down to day

Nothing gold can stay.

************************

Again, powerful stuff, eh? (Alright, it's only eight lines, but considering that I don't remember what we did in one of my AP classes last week, it's pretty freaking remarkable. Also, not sure if the poem was in that format, but I like space between couplets. It just creates more dramatic tension in between). I did love Whitman in sophomore year though - exuberant and spontaneous, like he was half-choking in his eagerness to get all his feelings out. That's what I'm talking about. 

Then I saw Bright Star, and of course, it had me muttering the titular poem for a full week, and ever since seeing the movie and pondering/pontificating endlessly over it, I've gained a newfound interest and appreciation for poetry. Not any poetry, however, just Romanticism. So far. I sure ain't pickin' up any TS Elliot anytime soon. 

My new theory is that unlike books or plays, reading poetry cannot teach anything new to the reader. Reading a story can expose you to new perspectives and theories, disturbing ideals and rich trivia - but poetry can only internalize what you already know. You either get it or you don't. That's the basis of expressing the inexpressible - it boils down to the same moments as when you struggle to explain something to a friend, and can only end with "you - you know what I mean?" and the friend will know exactly what you mean, or shake their heads slowly. So why does Romanticism appeal to me? Oh, the whole nature-emotions shebang - pretty appropriate for a girl who spent half of her childhood reading books, and the other half staring at plants, dirt, and skies for hours on end. Literally. 

And really, to put it crudely, what is Romantic poetry but a bunch of guys dreaming and feeling as they stare at pretty scenery? So yeah. I'm pretty tight with these guys.

On Wordsworth right now, and I just adored "The World Is Too Much With Us" and "As I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud". The first one is extremely applicable to the modern world - it's Wordsworth's lament about how everyone is too caught up in the dirty business of living, and not pausing enough to take time and reflect, meditate, and smell the roses. I can only nod empathetically. This may be a betrayal of my generation, but sometimes I just want to rip the cell phones away from my peers - for fuck's sake, is "having dinner. u?" really conversation worthy? Reticence can be truly enjoyable, people. Really. I text rarely, but I've read the text-conversation of other people, and it's truly mind-boggling how useless and just fucking, fucking mundane they are. It's like, WHY BOTHER?

Anyhoo, "As I Wandered" is just so....delightful. It's just so sweet and wholly redeeming. If it doesn't make you smile, you should probably go help out a homeless shelter or jump off a cliff.

I wandered lonely as a cloud That floats on high o'er vales and hills, When all at once I saw a crowd, A host, of golden daffodils; Beside the lake, beneath the trees, Fluttering and dancing in the breeze. Continuous as the stars that shine And twinkle on the milky way, They stretched in never-ending line Along the margin of a bay: Ten thousand saw I at a glance, Tossing their heads in sprightly dance. The waves beside them danced; but they Out-did the sparkling waves in glee: A poet could not but be gay, In such a jocund company: I gazed---and gazed---but little thought What wealth the show to me had brought: For oft, when on my couch I lie In vacant or in pensive mood, They flash upon that inward eye Which is the bliss of solitude; And then my heart with pleasure fills, And dances with the daffodils.

Dancing daffodils in the breeze! It's just precious beyond words. And I mean that without a drop of cynicism.

Can't wait for Keats. I'm anticipating sharing Bright Star's audio-orchestral version at the end credits of Whishaw's recitation of "Ode to a Nightingale" with my teacher. The orchestral music alone is just devastating, but combined with Whishaw's voice (not sure how to describe it - it's velvety and haunting and tender all at once), it just sets up to be an epic win. 

My Dissertation On Love, Sex, and Marriage

My conclusion on love and sexuality. # of Woody Allen movies seen = 2

As Woody Allen would probably say, I think whatever works is best. This is what I came after seeing "Vicky Cristina Barcelona" - afterwards I read a few reviews that criticized what they saw as WA's apparent anti-monogamy stance. But the character of Scarlet Johannsen's Vicky just completely smashes that criticism to bits. She's presented as the free minded liberal that's completely open about sex and standards, but she's not riding off into the sunset, either. As Javier Bardem's character tells Maria Elena, "when she finds the right one - not you or me - she will settle." People are just so different. I'm not sure we were all meant to be bound to one set of standards. You can't say that just because a traditional marriage worked for you, means it's going to work for me. Or an arranged marriage is inherently doomed (heck, statistics show that arranged marriages are actually more likely to succeed than most). You find out what works for you - polygamy, open marriage, traditional, unmarried, friendly - and deal with it.

Same with sexuality. Again, taking a cue from Vicky's character - "I see no need to label everyone else." I think people can choose for themselves. My theory is that individual sexuality is like thin steel. It can bend, stay, whatever - but it's overall flexible. Some people may be firmly attracted to one gender for the entirety of their lives, down to a specified set of traits - creamy skin, gray eyes, thin lips, whatever. After hearing all these stories about people who knew they were gay from the time they could walk (David Sedaris) or people who discovered a changing preference in their teens (my friend) - sexuality is be anything, man. It doesn't have to be set in stone. Would it be too crude to compare it to a preference for sandwiches? Some people can eat a ham-and-cheese sandwich, every day, for eighty years. Some people need variety. Some people prefer the bologna instead, and some people discover, to their amazement, that they want to switch after twenty years on the ham, or switch to bologna after the ham runs out (that was a prison reference). It's all good. 

In the end, it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. What matters is that you find at least someone, or some people, to love and take care of. And that's as simple as it gets. 

Fight Club Afterbirth and QT on Strangulation

Advantage of having the whole world on your side, a la Conan O'Brien? A kickass roster of interviewees who are actually interesting in addition to being famous. The past week alone saw Jeff Bridges, Ricky Gervais, Martin Scorsese, Colin Firth, Joel McHale of "The Soup" fame, and Adam Sandler (why is it that comedians are so much funnier than the movies they star in? It's like they forget the beauty of improvisation the moment they step on set). And the interviews were rich fodder for useless-trivia geeks like me. Apparently, Jeff Bridges talks to dolphins and Martin Scorsese is a near agoraphobic. You know what they say about geniuses..

One of the best interviews was Tarantino, who at one point reduced Conan into a minute of stunned, nervous chuckles, and I was in the same state. One of the most violent mainstream directors of all time, talking about his great skill with little kids? Tarantino-colored glasses can be quite frightening to peep into. 

(Kenneth the Page sees the world in muppets and Jack Donaghy sees the world in dollar signs. Wonder how QT sees the world? I'd rather not stray into that territory)

But thankfully, Conan actually seemed to be interested in the man's skill, not just his perverse social perspective, and so we got a nice little insight into QT's work. BTW, Tarantino just *has* to be on Inside the Actor's Studio someday. Think about it - James Lipton's meticulously researched, analytical probing + QT's enthusiastic, personal insights = cinematic bliss. 

I cringed when they veered into the topic of strangulation, but QT's take on it turned out to be oddly fascinating. I love how immersed he is into every psychological detail of a physical act. In this video review of "There Will Be Blood", he talks about the opening scene where Plainview breaks his legs, and about the implications of the unseen aftermath on the character. Here on Conan, he talked about how strangulation is unique to humans alone (opposable thumbs), and how the face-to-face intimacy is precisely what makes it such an inhumane and shockingly violent act. 

 =  ??? Cracked.com article on "6 Insane Fan Theories That Actually Make Movies Better". I don't mind analysis and parallels; some of these are actually pretty good, especially the Ferris Bueller-Fight Club allegory. Overanalysis can be fun, as long as it stays within the realm of casual conversation, and not insistence on the fan's part that his theory was the director's "original intent all along". 

Is Inglourious Basterds a Jewish Revenge?

Movie Thought of the Day:

Inglourious Basterds is *not* a Jewish movie. Simply because it features revenge from a Jewish face's POV (Shoshanna) does not make it the same as if Tarantino wrote it with Jewish motives. Is there underlying sympathy towards the Jews? Duh. Does any WWII movie not? 

QT answers the question in the movie itself.

"So my character is American.....and that's controversial."

"No, it's not controversial at all. The nationality of the author has nothing to do with the nationality of the character. The character is the character. Hamlet was not British. He is Danish. So yes, this character was born in America."

See, Diane Kruger gets it.

Things I Learned Watching Avatar

1) James Cameron has a diabolical gift that makes the audience love his movies, overlooking dozens of plot holes, conveniences, predictability, cheesy cliches, and even a deux ex machina. All because he manages to bring out our inner child and/or romantic, the one who can't help root for the star-crossed lovers (though the love scene was a bit too much for me. I can't help it that I'm not intuned to the sexiness of blue-cat-people making out), and for the heroes. And I was totally engrossed even though I knew exactly was going to happen, like Grace getting shot, or Wes Studi's character dying, etc. Though "Take....my.....bow" did try my patience. 

2) My friend can be an unbelievable pain in the ass, when she sees imaginary clothes on naked people. She's an academic sort, hasn't watched that many movies, and today told me, in an impressive sort of manner, that she could see why Cameron spent ten years on such a complex and original script as Avatar, on the basis of his immensely sophisticated "energy flow" theme, and the hundreds of cultures he supposedly drew the rest of the themes from. 

3) Movies - storytelling, to be exact - come in different forms. I can enjoy the tightly wound, claustrophobic feel of 12 Angry Men, and I can enjoy the magical, flying-alongside-the-characters feel of Avatar at the same time. One's not necessarily better than the other. This might seem obvious, but I just wanted to reply to the rigid movie purists who claim that the lack of great dialogue/plot originality automatically disqualifies it from being a "great" movie. Cameron can't write dialogue for shit, but he doesn't need to because he's a genius at visual storytelling. I connected more with the characters during that single taming of the banshees scene, than I would with most angsty characters in a 3 hour drama.  

4) It's probably in my top five of the year. Shit, I totally sound like an IMDB'er now. 

5) People who get post-Avatar depression should probably go throw themselves off the earth and return that waste of a living organism to the earth. Flow of energy, right? 

You really don't deserve to live if you think Pandora is somehow worth appreciating and loving more than this:

I Need a Life

I'm just....kind of waiting until the Golden Globes. Crazy, right? I have homework, I have Avatar tonight, I have a Lit. Club meeting tomorrow, and I have to write an introduction for my EarthWatch presentation next week. But only the GG is on my mind.

I will just not rest until awards season is over, when I've downloaded the entire Oscars 2010 off Youtube for future rewatches. This is getting to be an all-consuming obsession....the more movies I watch every year, the more excited I get about Oscars (to be more precise, to indulge in my fetish for movie montages.) Last night during the Critics Choice Awards, which btw was shitty and unfunny as hell, I literally clapped when my favorite winners were announced, which were pretty much everyone except the Best Actress/Supporting Actress race, (I have no interest in this year - Monique has it tied up, and I don't care who wins for Best Actress as long as it's not Carey Mulligan) I spent the rest of the night rewatching Inglourious Basterds and Googling Christoph Waltz, which is awkward and adorable as shit in real life.




Obligatory picture. I never have any funny subtitles to add. I just feel like it would be too boring without a nice few pics.


May I add, my love for QT has increased tenfold in the past week, while I was watching IG-related media press. His generosity towards his actors, his sheer flamboyance (btw, this man will never get married. He's too out-of-this-world for anyone, period), but most of all, his puttin' on the movies at Cannes. I swear, if I ever see QT one day, I'll scream girlishly like a Twilighter.




Love.

Yay

Feeling good lately, as I've been on a roll of really wonderful movies. Sometimes I'll go through a drought, of "people-call-this-great?" disappointment, but I just loved everything I got my hands on lately. Plus some of my friends saw The Godfather for a class recently (God praise schools) and they both loved it as well, and one of them couldn't stop gushing over how insanely compelling and sexy Al Pacino was in it. Win. 

Reservoir Dogs - The most psychological and intense of the Tarantino movies I've seen so far - loved it, loved it. Never got the cult of Steve Buscemi until now. "You're acting like a first-year thief. I'm acting like a professional!"

Badass with a (relative) conscience - Harvey Keitel 

Almost Famous - A bit wandering at times, I feel, but nevertheless it's one of these passion movies that makes you want to step inside the protagonists' shoes for awhile. For a few minutes afterwards, I vaguely wondered why I had never considered the profession of rock journalist before; it was clearly the most exciting and viable option out there, before I remembered that I didn't know shit about rock and roll. Nada on the acting, though,

The Ballad of Jack and Rose - newest addition to my Day-Lewis spree, and even if it's not a particularly well-made movie, a fascinating foray that centered around an Electra-complex-like relationship between Jack (Day-Lewis) and his daughter, intertwined around the themes like misguided intentions and the power of parental influence. I liked the look of the hippie communes in it, and it was a reminder that I should see different movies more often - not just those with tons of critical praise. The most interesting movies aren't always the better-crafted ones. Jack and Rose, for all its faults, was definitely unforgettable. 

Those to look forward to - I've been spreadin' the joy (Reservoir Dogs) to my friends, so meanwhile I checked out a few from the library -

Raging Bull (this is part of my backwards-chronological journey into Scorsese. Mean Streets is thankfully in my Netflix queue - I need more Harvey Keitel)

Moulin Rouge - I only saw the end, and it all seemed preposterous, but it is one of these movies that people genuinely love, and it has endured over time, so I gotta check this out. 

Netflix - Boogie Nights and Sid and Nancy. (First one for my mandatory Paul Thomas Anderson education). 

Can't wait for all four. 

FBMIF #3 The Virgin Suicides

"It didn't matter in the end how old they had been, or that they were girls, but only that we had loved them, and that they hadn't heard us calling....still do not hear us calling them out of those rooms, where they went to be alone for all time."

COME BACK, METHOD ACTING

Today's actors annoy the shit out of me. Dicaprio is probably the primary example. All they give a crap about is affecting some kind of annoying accent and little mannerisms, but they can't play normal people for shit. Dicaprio in Blood Diamond and The Departed - "ooh, look at his little South African accent! His Boston accent! So cute!" 

But good ol'fashioned line delivery and screen presence - wtf happened to that? Daniel Day Lewis remains one of the truly great actors, because in addition to pulling off all that exaggerated character shit, his acting is fresh and vital. Someone once mentioned on the AV Club that when you watch a grandiose performance twice and find it tiring, then it isn't great acting. They were referring to DDL's "There Will Be Blood" performance, because they were still impressed by him upon reviewings - that's because he has killer delivery "as for you, Mr. Tamany-Fucking-Hall, you come down the Five Points again, and you'll be dispatched by mine own hand" (rewatched GONY on a spree the other day and replayed the line over and over again) and subtle nuances in addition to rip-roaring rages. Dicaprio's straining performances in "Blood Diamond" and "The Aviator" on the other hand, makes me exhausted just thinking about it. 

But Deniro and Hoffman - in addition to absolutely tearing everyone down when they were going to the extremes (i.e. Raging Bull and Rain Man) - they were just as good, probably better, when they were playing normal people. "Kramer vs. Kramer" was a revelation for me, just because I never knew how outstanding two actors could be playing normal people without huge Oscar scenes - Hoffman and Streep's tussle at the beginning in the movie is just heartwrenching, impossible to take your eyes off, and restrained. Good lord, what a concept. You think future actors will ever learn any restraint? It's all about extremes. It's either all about "going retard" or dead-eyed monotonous "subtlety", without a flicker of life. 

I watched a 2008 interview at an Oscar roundtable when nearly all the actors dismissed the need for rehearsal, which nearly broke my heart, because I had seen all these "Inside the Actors Studio" episodes where Pacino talked about rehearsing for two weeks straight on Dog Day Afternoon, where Jodie Foster told of how Deniro took her out for lunch and rehearsed their scenes everyday, again and again and again and again until one day, they broke through the mold and began improvising in addition to the script lines. 

Even my beloved DDL dismissed rehearsing, but it's fine because DDL is a genius and whatever works for geniuses. But George Clooney, who said that rehearsals don't help at all - just shut the fuck up. I laughed when Ellen Page, Marion Cotillard, and DDL at the oscar roundtable talked about how sad it was to leave their characters behind at the end of shooting a film, and Clooney and Angelina Jolie remained silent, because they've never played another fucking character! They've only played themselves. What losers. 

But oh, lord. Christopher Walken and Harvey Keitel's brilliant, brilliant line deliveries in Pulp Fiction (*watch* monologue, and "So pretty please. With a cherry on top. Clean the fuckin' car.") As an actorphile, those lines and movies like Glengarry Glen Ross are such turn-ons. And after salivating over these, I am forced to think back to all the winners of the acting Oscars of the 2000's, and pull my hair out. Let's take a look back:

2000 - Kevin Spacey - Spacey's a child of the old-fashioned formal training, "delivery and presence come first" acting school, and American Beauty's just a gorgeous example of that.

2001  - Russell Crowe - ditto. His quiet moments in Gladiator are just as intense as the bombastic ones. 

2002 - Denzel Washington - Yay, naturalism. And Crowe was the runner-up which is also fucking brilliant.

2003 - Adrien Brody - beginning example of the "accent" orgy.

2004 - Penn at his Oscar-whoring worst. I'm not even talking about "IS THAT MY DAUGHTER?" The part where he's shaking violently in the quieter scenes is just not subtle at all. 

2005 - Jamie Foxx - *groan* I mean, does anyone even like Ray or Jamie Foxx in Ray anymore? Loved Depp in Finding Neverland, on the other hand - I barely noticed the accent after awhile, and what shone through was his tenderness and presence. 

2006 - Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Capote - bletch. Heath Ledger was also guilty of the overacting, though he redeemed himself - today, no one talks about Ledger's distracting mumble, but rather, his near-silent, exquisite moment at the end of BBM. Silence, people, SILENCE! One of my favorite things about great actors is that they're supremely gifted at communicating through inarticulacy - not just the loud, bombastic moments. Don't modern actors KNOW why Robert Deniro's mirror scene in Taxi Driver is so iconic? Not for a lengthy monologue or jerking limbs, that's for sure. 

2007 - Forest Whitaker - I have nothing to add. It was charismatic, sure, but points off for prolonging the actor addiction to foreign accents. Ben Stiller, we need more of your satire.

2008 - Daniel Day Lewis - it's deservedly great, but again it worries me about how many knockoff performances this is going to produce. Actors should realize that very, very few can actually pull off a Daniel Plainview-ish character like DDL.

2009 - Sean Penn - Again - the Oscar preference for affectation over Mickey Rourke's dazzling, natural role. I'm admittedly fond of Penn in Milk, just because of how sweet he is in it - but again, the accent, the accent! Fuck accents!

 

2010 -?? 

The race is shaping up to be

Jeff Bridges

George Clooney

Colin Firth

Morgan Freeman

Jeremy Renner

God has mercy, after all. Except for the obligatory "character accent" nomination for Morgan Freeman (for chrissakes, please nominate Damon in The Informant, haven't seen it, but all the praise for how well Damon pulled off a nonshowy, enigmatic character is just gratifying). Fuck Clooney, but whatever. And I've swelled with pride to hear the love for Jeremy Renner in THL (note to Dicaprio, watch the shower scene. THAT's how you pull off a difficult moment. No need for face-wrenching and girly screaming). Of course, none of the five nominees, in my opinion, even matches the average Harvey Keitel performance, but ah well. Accent backlash is welcome for the rest of the century. 

FBMIF #2: Mother, Now I Know Where You Live

An appropriate two-parter to The Last of the Mohicans. After watching both movies back-to-back, I want to take a cross-country trip. For me, these movies have highlighted the return - slowly, but surely - of a nationalistic love and pride for my country in me. During the Bush administration I nearly downright despised the US, and would silently agree with all the Europeans who claimed that Americans were boorish, flashy, etc. etc. Even American cinema took a downturn, as the Oscars in recent years became increasingly populated with superior foreign movies. As previously mentioned, the resuscitation of creativity in American filmmaking in 2009 restored my faith. And I won't turn away again.

The New World (2006)

Vorspiel scene on Youtube

FBMIF #1

Jodhi May, Last of the Mohicans (1992)