Johnny Simmons

You sort of want to expect an upset to occur in some acting category, but you also don’t to circulate ridiculous predictions.

 In all honesty, I’d love for some upset to happen in the supporting actor category (granted that upset comes in the form of Mark Ruffalo). Not because I don’t think Bale is fine, but I’m on Ruffalo’s side all the way. In fact, I wouldn’t mind an upset for Rush either, he and Bale go toe to toe for me.

NOMINEES: Christian Bale in The Fighter / John Hawkes in Winter’s Bone / Jeremy Renner in The Town / Mark Ruffalo in The Kids Are All Right / Geoffrey Rush in The King’s Speech Prediction: Christian Bale Alternate: Geoffrey Rush

I don’t see Bale losing this, though. Were there an upset, you’d sort of expect it to be Rush if only because he has the most likeable character of the five, and there’s nothing like goodwill behind a film. Add that to the fact that he was instrumental in bringing The King’s Speech to fruition and you have to anticipate some love...but I don’t see the upset happening here.

I can’t be too certain that this is where the upset is happening either. That being said, though, I think any of four persons could take this prize and I wouldn’t be surprised. There’s a bit of irony that the best performance of the lot (i.e. Ms. Weaver) has 0 chance of winning, and more and more persons seem to have an inkling that the least of the five (i.e. Steinfeld) could take the prize. It’s not that I think she’s awful, she’s more than serviceable – but I still find her nomination – in any category – somewhat vexing. I digress, though.

NOMINEES: Amy Adams in The Fighter / Helena Bonham Carter in The King’s Speech / Melissa Leo in The Fighter / Hailee Steinfeld in True Grit / Jacki Weaver in Animal Kingdom Prediction: Helena Bonham Carter Alternate: Melissa Leo

Am I crazy for predicting HBC? I don’t know, I just can’t see Melissa Leo winning the Oscar – I’d even be more willing to predict Amy – not only because I think she’s better, but I’m just not seeing it. I’m thinking back to instances of dual supporting nominees, and they rarely win. Didn’t Helen Mirren pick up more than a few nods (including the SAG) before losing to supporting wife Jennifer Connelly (who was horribly trite in A Beautiful Mind). I’d wager that not only is Helena much better than Jennifer, she’s also more in need of a nod – and Melissa is no Helen either, but I’m alone on that because almost everyone seems smitten with her Alice. It’s a tough game to decide what the voters would go for, and it would probably be more prudent to predict Melissa. I could see this prediction panning out, and then I could see it not. I’m going on a gut, here. Maybe, I’ll change my mind before Sunday....

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.

          

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.

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...

        

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.

          

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.

                

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?

        

The first acting category...last year this category was overflowing with brilliance, and truth be told my five nominees from last year would probably knock every single nominee of this year out, Schneider's work in Bright Star is sooooooo good (not better than Whishaw, of course, but still great). Still, the supporting men were good this year and I like each of these performances. They didn't all get that Oscar love I wish they could have, but that doesn't negate the goodness of their work.

(click on the pictures for reviews)

Bale avoids the most obvious of pitfalls and avoids turning Dickie into one of those usual walking powder-keg drug addicts. Sure, he gets the physicality of a user down excellently – with every bodily twitch, but the performance has much more to offer. As riveting as he is in those moments, it’s the emotional bits where he shines. As good as he is with Mark his best moments are opposite Melissa Leo (a dynamic I’d have loved to see more of) and despite his overt lack of restraint his devotion to his family rings throughout the drama. (Highlight: “I Started A Joke”)

I hate that his obvious “actor” scenes are the ones that people keep remembering because the reasons I like this performance so much comes to the smaller bits. He knows Mark is an asshole, but he also knows they’re both similar in that desire for kinship (even though Mark is adamantly against social contact). He responds to every action from Mark, but he doesn’t really respond to Mark – and I’m not sure if its Fincher’s direction or his sensibilities but with every wince (blink and you’ll miss them) or slight intake of breath he’s making Eduardo more than the just token wronged friend and into a real person, which sounds sort of clichéd but is true nonetheless. (Highlight: The Chicken incident, at the deposition and at Harvard)

I think I tweeted sometime towards the end of last year that Paul is probably the most sympathetic character in the narrative. They’re all moving in their way, but this bathetic man child becomes the most stirring because Ruffalo is doing so much with it. It’s not that he gives my favourite performance of the film (he doesn’t) but it’s a classic example of script and actor finding a perfect match. He doesn’t even seem aware of Paul’s insecurities because Paul isn’t even aware of his insecurities, and those lingering glances and bits of stilted conversation only underscore the sort of wandering soul he is. And he does it all without EVER going over-the-top with it. (Highlight: First Meeting with Moms)

Rush avoids his usual theatricality (which I’m actually fond of) for a surprisingly tender portrayal of Logue here. Even though a significant portion of the narrative examines his relationship with the King, Seidler doesn’t explain his arc fully which leaves Logue as something of an enigma at times and Rush has no problem doing that. Sometimes it seems as if he’s usual tricks but that soft empathy with which he approaches Bertie is significant allowing him to dig deeper. One of the lasting things about the film is that you get the feeling there’s more to the man – but neither he (nor the film) is interested in going there. He’s willing to step aside.

(Highlight: First Meeting with “Mrs. Johnson”)

He has the sort of “open” face that makes it distressing to watch him, especially when you take into consideration how much he underplays the addiction arc – saving all that pent-up desperation only to completely destroy you when he unhinges in that final scene – well more than he was before. He’s already unhinged, not in the same manner as Mendehlson’s Pope, but just as much. His entire final scene played on a loop after coming out of the movie and it’s startling how with the absence of dialogue and even without the very overt facial tics that you’d expect, he manages to convey that nadir of despair that’s responsible for thrusting the narrative in a new destroy. (Highlight: his death)

                           

FINALISTS: Joel Edgerton leaves Animal Kingdom early on but that doesn’t prevent his Baz from having a lasting effect. ; Rhys Ifans gives a performance to rival the already good cast in Greenberg; Miles Teller functions as well as Eckhart, Wiest and Blanchard as a scene partner for Kidman in Rabbit Hole. He’s fortunate because Becca’s breakthrough moments come opposite him, and he plays excellently off her offering up a not clichéd example of how more than the grieving parties are victims of accidents.

SEMI-FINALISTS: Don Cheadle plays on the angry policemen in Brooklyn’s Finest to excellent results, showing again why he’s one of the best underrated actors at the moment; Kieran Culkin ends up stealing the show from everyone in Scott Pilgrim vs the World because even if his acerbic sidekick is a stereotype his line readings are hilarious; Andrew Garfield in Never Let Me Go; with just a few scenes to work with in The King’s Speech I finally get what people are talking about with Guy Pearce. He’s the right amount of EVERYTHING in the film and works so perfectly against Firth; Jonathan Tucker’s introverted psychiatric patient is one of the saving graces of Veronika Decides to Die. It’s more than his remarkable chemistry with Gellar – his attention to detail (which the script demands in those scenes where he has no dialogue) is impressive.

        

True to form, after the general summer appreciation for The Kids Are All Right passed Mark Ruffalo’s performance has failed to “stick its landing”. After hearing a tetchy commenter accuse him of playing the same hackneyed stoner in all his films I realised just how much of a pipedream it was for me to consider him a contender for the Supporting Actor trophy six months ago. It’s probably a tad supercilious of me because I like the performance, but everything that works for Ruffalo’s Paul depends on keen perusal something that’s not explicitly needed to appreciate the performance of the current frontrunner in the race – Christian Bale’s scenery-chewing brother in The Fighter. Reserving judgement on the veritable worth of either performance, one can appreciate how Bale’s Dicky has an edge. The Fighter is altogether more interested in forwarding Dicky’s agenda than Choledenko and Blumberg are with establishing Paul as any sort of fallen hero. And though Ruffalo, like Bale, is the type of actor yet to earn a nomination but constantly turning in films Bale’s is more peppered with the obvious and easily recognisable (which is not inherently bad). In theory Ruffalo is the only potential nominee I can see winning the statue, but for the fact its low-key nature makes it an unlikely contender.

                                                       

If The King’s Speech were still holding onto its former frontrunner status I’d have entertained the idea of a Rush upset. There’s no one who has seen The King’s Speech that doesn’t seem to appreciate his charismatic turn. But it’s not the sort of fussy supporting turn that demands attention and Rush already has a statue. If The Town were a better film, or if more were smitten with it, Renner could have emerged as another candidate for an upset. He’s fresh off a best picture winner, he’s still at that age where he’s finally getting his dues but still young enough to be considered fresh and he’s easily the best thing in his film. But, even though The Town may be heading to a Picture nomination with a ten-wide field that isn’t that much of an accolade and maybe I’m underestimating the ability but I still don’t see it being indiscriminately embraced by all. Considering the year he had Andrew Garfield seems like someone to keep your eyes on – but I think not. A number have praised him effusively, and he is excellent in The Social Network but that one seems to be all Eisenberg’s show. And I don’t know if it’s mob psychology and all voters do it, but there’s a tendency for supporting actor front runners to be less “supporting” and more of a type of a stealth co-lead. That makes Bale resurface as the obvious one to beat here, and the critics seem to agree. Those five actors seem like a good bet for the eventual nominees, although I have an inkling feeling that there could be an upset nomination here. Perhaps John Hawkes who made an appearace at the SAG – I don’t know. I’m predicting these five, though.

Christian Bale in The Fighter

Andrew Garfield in The Social Network

Jeremy Renner in The Town

Mark Ruffalo in The Kids Are All Right

Geoffrey Rush in The King’s Speech

                                              

All things considered it doesn’t seem like a particularly bad roundup of nominees – especially considering the clunkers that often get nominated here. But, like with most things this season I’m particularly enthused. I can immediately think of three performances that I’d have loved seeing considered but the entire male ensemble of Animal Kingdom have gotten no love, and the same goes for everyone but Nicole Kidman in Rabbit Hole – so Miles Teller’s name has gotten no consideration. It's one of the things that you can count on - especially in this category. This is always the category where I'm nonplussed about the decisions that all the usual precursors go running with, but even though there are some contenders I could get behind that are getting no love, I’ll still maintain that the four performances of the lot I’ve seen are worthy of consideration – and Rush is always golden, so I’ll put my faith in that. It's a better batch of potential nominees than years gone by.

                            

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?

Late in the film when Clementine and Joel meet (for the first time chronologically) we get the feeling that we’re experiencing some strange time of déjà vu. It’s a different time and yet our protagonists are exactly the same. Sure, her hair isn’t the same colour, and sure they’re not on a bus alone but Joel’s good-natured blandness is the same and Clementine’s almost sadistic cheer is still there. In what’s arguably one of the most poignant moments in the film Joel and Clementine watch as Clementine and Joel break into a house. Disconcerted by this unusual woman Joel leaves. As they look on Clementine turns to him and says, “What if you stayed this time?” That, right there, is the core of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Of course it’s decidedly difficult to recreate what you’ve already forgotten but as Joel resists the erasure procedure and as the film reaches its dénouement that piece that is the human in us all realises our love of second tries…or even the third. After all Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is about repetition

I’ve often heard Eternal Sunshine referred to as a romantic comedy, but I’m never that sure that it’s a romance. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind works because it’s completely aware of one thing – its characters. It’s not exactly a character study in the most stringent sense of the word, but from Winslet’s tumultuous Clementine to Dunst’s almost pathetic Mary. There’s no one in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind that falsified and with a plot that focuses on erasure of memories, it can’t be. With his pervasive script Kaufman takes a look at the minds of us all and even more, he looks at the relation we have to fate. Erasing a single thing, even thoroughly, can’t particularly prevent us from our own inclinations as humans. The saying goes; the heart wants what the heart wants – even when the mind doesn’t have a clue. And yet, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind doesn’t exactly hit us over the head with its message, if you can call it that.

                   

Whenever I think of the film my mind returns, almost immediately, to that train ride to Montauk. It’s tied to that scene in the erasure as Clementine wanly whispers to Joel, “Meet me in Montauk.” Of course, neither of the two is aware of their past predilection for each other, but the two click, with each other even when they don’t. It’s the sort of chemistry that seems strange, but works. Jim Carey and Kate Winslet don’t exactly cross the mind as a typical couple, but it’s their unusualness that makes them work so well – and the very fact that it’s Joel and Clementine we’re watching on film, not Jim or Kate. It’s the complete self-awareness of Clementine even as she’s self deprecating – “I apply my personality in a paste” – she says, almost as if for reaffirmation. Or, Joel’s very dour opening monologues that Carey plays just right.

            

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is not a film I can extract the best scenes and write a logical analysis of, it doesn’t really work like that. It’s all the odd, idiosyncratic bits and pieces together that make for the excellence that it is. It’s a true gem, and oddly, unlike most excellent films, it’s actually remembered for its goodness. Only yesterday Luke listed it as his 33rd favourite film. It lays just a notch lower at #34 on my own list.

So after Parts One, Two and Three I'm finally read to unveil the ten films I'm anticipating the most for 2010. I suppose many weren't all too pleased with 2009. I've not decided as yet, though they were not the decade's worst. But with a new decade beginning I hope 2010 impresses more than it disappoints. These are the ten films that have had be salivating for quite some time.

                               

I’ll admit that I’m not the biggest Nolan fan although the sheer bravura of The Prestige, as imperfect as it was, left me convinced that he could do great things. Sure this has Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard [in what's probably a small role]; but I'm not certain if this is going to be that film that makes me love him. I really don't know much about this film, other than it's scientifically charged plotwise, and involves a ton of blackmail. That's not much to go on, but I'll see how it goes.

                

Julianne Moore and Annette Bening star as lesbian lovers with two children. When the sperm donor father enters the picture, drama ensues, naturally. Seeing Julianne and Annette play off each other could be something especial. I’ve been wanting Mark Ruffalo to get some love for some time now. After his eclectic turn in You Can Count On Me he’s showed up doing underrated work in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Zodiac and Reservation Road. Hopefully this doesn’t become too generic. I have high hopes.

                                    

Carey Mulligan and Keira Knightley [two of the Bennett sisters] star is this supernatural drama, based on a somewhat acclaimed novel. The story centres on a group of English friends who find out that the exclusive private school which they attend is simply a front for harvesting organs. It does sound a bit like The Island, but I'm still expecting this to be good. It will be nice to see Keira and Carey team up again with Sally Hawkins in a small role.

                          

Here it is, another Annette Bening piece. Naomi Watts, Kerry Washington and Samuel Jackson. The drama surrounds a woman [Bening] searching for the daughter she gave up for adoptions decades ago. Washington co-stars as a woman searching for a child to adopt. This was screened to good reviews last year and though I don’t want to jinx her [again] notices predicted an Oscar showing for Ms. Warren Beatty herself. I’ll see what happens. Still, regardless of whether or not Oscar recognises this. I’m keeping my eye on it.

                       

This is pure fanboy. I tried to adjust and adjust, but it ends up in my top ten because regardless of the quality I am dying to see this. I’ve read the book so much that my hardcover copy is becoming tattered. I mean, I hate to sound like a nerd, but I’m just way too excited for this. I hope that they finally give Rupert Grint something notable to do than just act as some sort of inane form of comic relief.

               

Alice in Wonderland is one of the most original, entreating but simultaneously thought provoking. I have to admit that the previous live action version was a guilty pleasure, and with all his broodiness and his macabre self I can’t resist Tim Burton. Sure, I love him more when he’s toned down [Big Fish] but I love him any way. Helena Bonham Carter as The Red Queen is the type of wonderful casting that’s just scintillating. This looks like it’s going to be the most entertaining movie experience of the year to come.

          

Cate Blanchett and Russell Crow are a duo I would pay good money to see. The Aussies. Ridley Scott is an underrated director who has yet to win an Oscar. I warrant it won’t be for this, but I’m all ready to see a new incarnation of Robin Hood. It’s anyone’s guess if it’ll be able to combat with Errol Flynn/Olivia de Havilland, but visually thus far it look satisfying and my anticipating will remain untempered until I see it.

          

This film is important because it marks the return of Nicole Kidman to cinema. Not that Nine wasn’t cinema, but it wasn’t a lead role. Aaron Eckhart and Nicole Kidman star as a husband and wife who cope with the death of her child. Perhaps, that alone sounds generic – but adapted from a Award winning play [which earned Cynthia Nixon a Tony]: I don't think so. Diane Wiest costars as her mother with Sandra Oh and Tammy Blanchard in supporting roles.

                 

This was actually coasting along as my number one for some time until…My reasons for anticipating this are multitudinous. Scorsese and DiCaprio have impressed me three times in the last decade, add that to Michelle Williams – whom I like, though I didn’t like her Brokeback turn, Emily Mortimer [underrated in Match Point], Mark Ruffalo [underrated in everything he does], the wonderful Patricia Clarkson and Ben Kingsley and you have what looks like one hell of cast. Scorsese is one of those directors that just work for me, and the chances are that I’m going to like what he does. I’m just not sure if I’m going to love it or worship it.

       

Helena Bonham Carter and Colin Firth star as the parents of Queen Elizabeth II, Michael Gambon, Geoffrey Rush, Timothy Spall and Guy Pearce costar. The film centres on George VI, who in the 1940’s has developed a nervous stutter. With the help of unorthodox speech therapist [Rush] who helps to work on the “king’s speech’, George eventually loses the stutter leading his country through the horrid 1940s. It’s a weird premise, duly noted. But the film’s cast is top notch – Helena Bonham Carter in particular needs a good role. And the director Tom Hooper won an Emmy for his adaptation of the first Elizabeth’s life. It’s being distributed by the Weinstein Company who are probably hoping for Oscar love, which I am too actually. I suppose it’s a weird choice for my number one, but I have really high hopes for this – obviously.