Johnny Simmons

I’ve been hearing about Fish Tank for months. More often than not, it was through the words of an enthusiastic reviewer of the film. In fact, a number of important people (important to me, at least) were generally positive about it  like Jose, Hatter, Tim, Nick. I’ve seen Fish Tank for some time now, but nothing’s coming. What is Fish Tank about? A sixteen year old girl, and would-be dancer, meanders through life culminating in a crush on her mother’s latest boyfriend. I can’t write about Fish Tank, or rather my issue with it without revealing plot details so SPOILERS ABOUND. Be warned.

I also can’t talk of Fish Tank without thinking about An Education – I film I fell for last year. Both films are directed by women, both focus on a sixteen year old Briton, both girls fall for older married men and both girls believe in the infallibleness of their brains. Of course, they differ in styles – completely. An Education sedateness (often mistook for unoriginality) differs starkly when measured againt Fish Tank’s shaky camera and general penchant to impose itself on us, almost like a real person. I don’t have an issue with the style, but truthfully I’m confused as to why Arnold’s choice of shooting in “real time” makes her such a wonder. To be certain, she is skilled equally as a writer and director, but she’s far from flawless on both counts. During the film, I was often moved to doubt the validity of these characters. It’s ironic, really, Fish Tank prides itself on being as authentic as can be but I often felt it to be just as pretentious, at times. Incidentally, it’s an issue I had with Precious - sometimes in her predilection for showing the harsh reality Arnold comes off (to me) as someone intent on shocking us and failing to attach it to any narrative progression. Furthermore, a particular scene in the marshes though ostensibly thrilling does nothing that makes it particularly necessary to the narrative as far as I see.

It’s crass to focus the entire review on finding fault with Fish Tank since it’s not wholly without accomplishments. Jose was quite enamoured with Fassbender’s performance, and he is good. But my issues with the narrative prevent me from being particularly moved by him. It’s to his credit, though, of the entire cast he’s the one who’s able to portray the most while saying the least. He has a knack for adroit facial expressions which few actors could profess to. We know what he’s up to even before he makes any noteworthy decision to do it. Moreover, he manages to prevent himself from becoming a villain just as Sarsgaard before him. In the same way, can we help but compare Katie Jarvis to Carey Mulligan? I suppose, you can assume where I stand on that issue – you’d be right. Jarvis does fine, though I never believe that she’s really interested in dancing – or Connor for that matter. Perhaps it’s an inclination of her character, but she seems unmoved by everything around her, a pivotal moment of tears towards the end leaves me more confused than moved. Incidentally, it’s Kierston Wareing who emerges as the cast’s strongpoint for me – even as she’s given little do, and all in broad strokes - trumping another similarly psycho mother. She’s not a caricature and underneath her pedestrian behaviour (in more ways than one) Wareing is carving a real character – just look at her final scene.

               

It’s weird, after Hatter’s review I said that despite all the good I’d heard I didn’t think I would like Fish Tank, but I couldn’t say why. I still can’t put my finger precisely on what doesn’t work for me, though I’ve tried. But despite my issue, it’s still a fairly good venture from those involved. I wonder how you’ll feel when you see it…

             

         

I like to rethink my favourite parts of films as the year ends. Of course it’s a work in progress. Quite often a favourite does not mean that said film is my favourite and sometimes it does. It’s the moment of the film you remember most, the scene that makes you shed a tear or makes you laugh…the scene that brings my nostalgic memories or worry for the future. It’s the power of films as such. So I’m unveiling my 25 scenes of 2009. I did not include openings or endings because they often serve a completely different purpose, maybe I’ll recap my favourite of each later, perhaps. I can’t say. I tried as much to prevent repeats, but I couldn’t. The fifteen runners up will be listed in alphabetical order and then the top ten by favouritism. It’s purely subjective though, so bear with me.

   

     

I know quite a few were bowled over by this, and I suppose there were many more obviously funny or romantic scenes that I could have chosen – the greeting card moments come to mind, but this is the single moment of 500 Days of Summer that I carried in my memory after seeing it. The preamble of it begins at a club as a persistent patron asks to buy Summer a drink. Tom gallantly gets into a fist fight and he is nonplussed when Summer is miffed on their return home. She grimly responds that they’re just friends when Levitt gives his best scene. His response is so real and so emotional as he leaves – it’s the most poignant part of the film.

     

MaGuire’s breakdown as the end was a contender but the film finest scene occurs with the ensemble present as they all gather for Maggie’s birthday. Sam is already on edge and the tension is palpable.Isabelle opens the door to see her Uncle there with his new date, and she’s already upset. Grace can feel something is amiss and Izzie just keeps pushing it further and further. Sam keeps telling her to stop playing with the balloon with leads to her (fraudulent) claim – you’re just mad because Mom would rather sleep with Uncle Tommy than you. It’s piercing, it’s surprising and it’s incredibly memorable. I love Jake’s reaction as he looks down, as if disappointed and Natalie’s Grace is not so much aghast as saddened and of course Tobey and his perpetual look of bewilderment. A wonderfully directed scene.

    

Duplicity thrives on the mystery, and that ridiculous hair growth scheme. My favourite part occurs when Julia’s Claire must find the blueprints and fax it to her allies in the dead of night. The fine editing is in place and Julia, Clive and the rest of the ensemble do fine work – considering that many of them are already lying to begin. Gilroy knows how to up the adrenaline and he does it here, pulling out all the stops.

     

This scene is just a tidbit, but it stands out. The tale of “Mr. Rochester” has travelled to The Head Mistress, whose office Jenny is called to. It’s a monologue really, and Emma sells it completely – “There may well have been the odd sixth form girl who has lost an important part of herself – perhaps the best part – while under our supervision. These things happen, regrettably. If however we are made aware of this loss, then of course the young lady in question would have to continue her studies elsewhere, if she still has any use for A-Levels. Is that clear?” It is perfection.

    

It’s one of the most chilling parts of the novel and it translates well to screen. Gambon and even Radcliffe sell the emotional weight of the scene and it is sooooo beautiful to look at. The mosaic image is palpable; the cinemotgraphy is enchanting the visual effects are always subtle but never underwhelming. The finest part of an already good film.

   

The scenes don’t seem to have a specific beginning or end, though I did appreciate the cameo of the always wonderful Ralph Fiennes, but the film makes it point in when a suicide bomber enters the picture. Jeremy Renner’s guilt as he’s unable to defuse the bomb is potent and the tension is built up so heavily. It’s a powerful scene.

     

This another film with continuous pieces of brilliance, the one that stands out is the first press conference as a self conscious Tom Hollander all but sinks his career. It’s the first time we see the wonderful Mimi Kennedy (who I cannot stop singing praises to) and the diffidence of Hollander and the obvious humour of the situation cannot be ignored. Such an uncomfortable moment for the characters, such a lovely moment for the audiene.

       

I didn’t expect this to be my favourite of the film, but weeks after it’s the one that I remember vividly. Susie’s sister enters Harvey’s house to find important evidence. The screen is taut with tension and shot by shot Jackson keeps up hooked. It’s also a strong moment for Tucci who sells his character without words. What thrill ride.

     

Need I go on? It's more than the hook being catch, because it's not my favourite song. But the choreography is sensational, the imagery is lovely, the sand in the tambourines, the dancing whores. It's a number that completely satisfies.

    

Precious soars highest when it comes down to the simple things, like Each One, Teach One. The chemistry of the girls is lovely to watch and Paula Patton oversees it all with such candour. I love Jo Ann’s colour choice – fluorescent beige and I love Gabourey’s delivery here – so blunt, and yet a little shy – I can cook. If only the entire film could have felt so sure of itself.

     

It’s the token “I want” solo number [Part of this World, Belle, Reflections] and Anika owns it with those vocals, and of course the design is beautiful too.

      

I really wish Charlize had more to work with in The Road, she’s phenomenal with her slight role. Her departure from the film is heart-rending and I love Viggo’s reaction. It’s the saddest moment of the film, which is strange considering it’s all rather depressing.

     

I didn’t like this much, but it has one of the best scenes this year, when Judith asks for a divorce I thought the Coens’ were on to something. The dialogue here is brilliant.

It all leads to one of my favourite lines this year “I haven’t done anything. This is not some flashy thing. This is not about woopsy-doopsy." I am so going to use that in a conversation some time.

    

I’ve told you before I was very impressed with Ms. Moore’s bit role in A Single Man, and of course she’s in a favourite scene of mine. As she and Colin dance it’s a really lovely moment in the film (though I suppose it’s not as important as some of the more obvious ones) still, the scene and the subsequent confessions is just sublime in my eyes. Perfection.

     

Whatever it’s errors Jonze captures the wonder of this other world brilliantly. Max's meeting with the wild things is funny, and sweet and magical all at once. It's also a surprisingly strong acting moment for Records who meanders through brilliance and mediocrity for me. Of course Catherine O’Hara’s Judith is a good source of laughter here already setting the pace for her excellent voice work to come.
      

The coming of age film (regardless of what genre it hides itself in) is one that filmmakers and audiences often latch on. It’s not always the literal coming of age (though it sometimes touches on becoming an adult) – from Juno to Almost Famous to Mean Girls. Either could be fall into the category, and this year we had quite a few. Two came from Sundance. Precious (review) and An Education (my three reviews) both centre on their heroines as they are edified about life and its machinations. I suppose standing next to Clarice Jenny’s story could lose some its significance, but even though she doesn’t suffer at the hands of psychotic mother her coming of age is still as poignant and precious (yes, I went there) as her teenage counterpart. Education, in its basest form, plays an important role for both girls. Ms. Rainns and Ms. Stubbs are the two important teachers in each girl’s life. Though Jenny spends most of her time ignoring the importance of her education and Precious spends most of her time doubting her potential. Two beautiful moments in each film occur because of these women. My favourite moment in Precious is when Paula Patton completely sells her line “I love you!” It’s a strong moment for Gabourey but Patton’s delivery is on point. Similarly, in An Education Olivia Williams shines in her plea for Jenny to remain in school, "You can do anything you want to."

                   

Ellen Page’s Babe Ruthless doesn’t come of age in school, she grows on the track. I wonder if I misjudged Ellen Page? Juno didn’t do anything for me, but I’m awaiting her next venture before I make a decision. Unfortunately for Susie Salmon she doesn’t get the chance to revel in her education or in sports. Her life is snatched from her as a teenager and her coming of age is the most curious. She is fourteen for the entire film, yet she must grow as much as the years continue. The terror in her eyes as Tucci closes in on her in that pivotal scene is one of the strongest acting scenes of the last year. It’s a prodigious performance even if the film was panned, but you all remember how I felt about those Lovely Bones. The coming age film that should be getting such horrible reviews should be I Love You, Beth Cooper (my only F last year). The less said about the film, the better. But I do wonder how the bland Hayden Panneteire would try to sell a scene opposite Tucci if she was on Ronan’s shoes – not very well, I presume.

              

In The Young Victoria Emily Blunt must play the young Queen as she grows before her eyes. On the basest of levels, perhaps Miranda Richardson could shake hands with Mo’Nique’s Mary Jones, but then again no. Miranda’s seeming impassivity is not a sign of hatred, or jealousy she’s just a queer mother. There’s a pivotal (somewhat) scene in the film regarding a shooting and I love the shot of Miranda immediately after – no words, but her very face haunts me, even if the film is only okay. In Where the Wild Things Are Max doesn’t quite come of age as the film ends, I can’t be too sure if he’s learned anything – unlike Coraline (which incidentally would fit right into this category) I can’t discern any realisation of the importance of his family at the film ends. But, I suppose, that’s all moot.

              

Sunday is going to be a big day; but not for the reason you think. Sure, it's the Golden Globes and what not, but I'm so blase about the Oscar race and whatnot. Did you even hear the results of the BFCA? What did you think? Mo'Nique, Waltz, Streep [and Bullock], Bridges. Granted I haven't seen Crazy Heart yet, but it's still generic. Sure Mo'Nique and Waltz are fine, but...I don't know whatever. Moving on...

I've been digressing, but Sunday is a big day because Stinkyluli is hosting his Fourth Supporting Actress Blog-a-thon. I told you about this already and I fear that you thought I was merely jesting when I ordered you to participate. Well, I was not. Seriously, I wasn't. You still have about a day to write up a few words, lines or pages [asking too much?] on a Supporting Actress of your choice. It's been a good year for the Supporting Women, even though precursors are only noticing a few don't let them fool you. Just look at my banner.

Univarn gets retrospective on us and broods over not getting the appeal of some films, despite their critical and commerical success. Interesting thought, I know I missed the bus when it came to Up In the Air and The Hangover, and having just watched Precious for a second time I'm seriously re-thinking that B I gave it. I think I did give it too much. Sigh.

Nathaniel, Nick and Mike offer up another look at two Best Picture winners; this time Silence of the and Going My Way. Neither would have been my pick that year. What about you?

                 

Jose offers up a look at the Coens' A Serious Man. He tells me I should watch it, but what do you think. Should I?

And finally, rememeber that Kreativ Post. Well two more wonderful people have singled me out for it. I'm no Meryl Streep and acceptance speeches don't come to me that easily. I'll probably pull a Hepburn and stay home to avoid the pressure. Still, it would be incredibly remiss of me not to point the way to Danny and Nicholas. The former I've been reading for months and the latter I feel like a douche for not reading more often. They're both worthy of your time.

There’s quite much that has been said about Precious since its premiere on the festival circuit and its eventual cinematic premiere. To an extent, it always sucks getting a movie so late in the game; and you have to wonder if your feelings were influenced by spoilers or other reviews. Who knows? I can’t give myself a psychological analysis and determine what did or did not influence me. What I can do is give my feelings on said film. So here goes.

Precious tells the story of Clarice Precious Jones. She is an obese seventeen year old living with her abusive mother. Precious’ father [her mother’s boyfriend] is also the father of her toddler daughter and currently unborn child. That’s the crisis. Precious becomes a candidate for an alternative education programme and has intermittent meetings with a welfare officer. Her mother’s abuse becomes heightened with the birth of her second child – that’s the conflict.

             

I found Precious to be an imperfect film. Although they may, fans of Precious need not take offence, I’m just offering my take. My biggest issue with the film is Geoffrey Fletcher’s screenplay and Lee Daniels’ direction. I suppose those are big things so taking issue with them is essentially taking issue with the entire film. I suppose I am. I’m not certain if perhaps it’s the screenplay that’s the bigger problem of the two. Although I’m not the first to say it, I must assert that the lack of subtlety in this story really annoyed me. Those dream sequences are a big part of that. The very fact that they’re written and; their eventual realisation on the screen represent my least favourite parts of the film. First of all, it’s as if Fletcher and Daniels think that the audience is ignorant. Does Precious want to be a star? By all means let’s show that. Does she want to sing in the choir? Ditto for that. And on and on and on. That’s called overkill. What’s more these dream sequences come at some moments you’d wish that wouldn’t segue into the imaginary. Precious gets thrown down on the sidewalk [not as graphic as it sounds] or her mother pelts her with a blunt object. She falls. And we segue into a dream. Why not show the humiliation? Why avert the story from the horror that’s supposed to ensue and then move into a dream sequence that shows us what we’ve already established?

                

But, don’t feel that I’m talking down to Precious. I wouldn’t dare. It takes as much effort to make a bad film as it does to make a good film; and for the record Precious is not a bad film. I haven’t seen Weiez, Mulligan, Cornish, Mirren and a few other important Actress contenders, but Sidibe looks impressive from where I’m standing. Not my favourite thus far, but it’s good nonetheless. I’ll admit, she gets annoying sometimes when her speech is so garbled it become unintelligible. I understand that Precious is uneducated, but there’s a thin line between showing your character and being abstruse.

             

Now on to the supporting women. Mo’Nique as Precious’ mother is good. Quite good. But I can’t find myself calling it great as others have. I feel that I expected just a little more – not in terms of performance perhaps, but maybe screen time. I did not find any fault in her performances but it never reached that level of excellence, and at the end of the day that’s not half bad. I blame the screenplay. Mariah Carey as a welfare officer is better than the detractors of her cause, but perhaps not as sensational as her fans. If she’s nominated I won’t be shocked, but if she’s not I won’t be either. I like Mariah, but if they so badly wanted to nominate a pop star. They’ve had chances before. Deserving or not, they’ve had chances. Paula Patton however has turned into something of an unsung hero[ine]. It’s a bit sad that nothing has been said of her performance, but I found her to be the real find of the film. Perhaps not as eclectic as Mo’Nique but certainly wrought with potential.

                 

In the end I never felt emotionally involved in Precious. It never was graphic enough for me, and that pisses me off. I sound a bit gratuitous which is ironic in line of recent reviews, but there was just this incongruity that threw me. Then there’s the fact that this is closer to a Dangerous Minds themed story since more of the film occurs in the 'heavenly' room of Ms. Rains – complete with a golden hue to mark Precious’ first entrance. Subtle? Not so much. The film has the potential to shock, maybe not offensively so – but it could have been this harsh, nitty-gritty, reality check for the audience. But other than one horrible scene, that’s not as horrible as it seems, Precious skirts around those deeper issues settling for the easier issues that make the audience comfortable. And that final confession at the end, which should move me does anything but. Precious was fine; but in the end not precious enough to tempt me.

                   

American Thanksgiving has come and gone and as December begins and Christmas draws nearer a young movie blogger’s fancy turns to Oscar buzz. It seems the norm. as the year draws nearer, all the prestige pictures are released and we can’t help but contemplate who will win what – and we predict. But I don’t predict the Oscars. I just don’t have the heart. Sure when it’s a few days before I’ll get a list of who I think will we nominated. I’m actually quite good at that, but I don’t have the longevity like some for year round predictions. I suppose then you’re wondering what exactly the title of this post means.

               

I’ve seen a little over thirty films of 2009 so far – not outstanding, but considering it’s not that bad. I’m already wondering what my own personal awards will look like next February. There are a host of films I’ve yet to see. But that only makes it interesting. Still, with only a few important titles under my belt I’ve already taken a liking to a few of the Supporting Women in films I’ve seen thus far. So I’ll take a look at them whilst looking ahead at the women who’re likely to uproot them.

           

Maria Bello in The Private Lives of Pippa Lee

Kristin Chenoweth in Into Temptation

Patricia Clarkson in Whatever Works

Marion Cotillard in Public Enemies

Diane Kruger in Inglourious Basterds

              

Each of these five women with their limited roles do much to improve their respective films. I’d have loved to have any of these women in my top 5 in any particular year, so I must pay tribute to them now since it’s likely that few if any will remain in my top ten by the time I’ve seen all the films I want to.

            

Nine: Marion Cotillard, Penelope Cruz, Judi Dench perhaps Nicole Kidman or Kate Hudson

I know Cotillard is being campaigned in lead, but she’ll probably be supporting for me. If Nine hold up it could easily take three spots in my end of year awards.

The Lovely Bones: Susan Sarandon and Rachel Weisz

It’s very possible to see both these women taking a spot in my top ten or even the top 5. I’m looking forward especially to Susan Sarandon who was probably my favourite actress of the nineties.

         

Precious: MoNique, Mariah Carey perhaps Paula Patton

I won’t try to escape the buzz for Precious. I wonder if MoNique will top my awards... Still I am a fan of hers and she could very well take a place, and if Mariah is as amazing as they say, who knows?

          

Up In the Air: Vera Farmiga or Anna Kendrick

Vera Farmiga is my biggest draw to this film, and if she’s good she could end up here. I’ve been hearing good things about Kendrick, so she too could make a play for it.

           

Julianne Moore in A Single Man: With a little cameo she’s scintillating in The Private Lives of Pippa Lee in a nondescript role. I only wonder what she’ll do with a proper role here. I hope she doesn’t disappoint.

     

Natalie Portman in Brothers: I’m keeping my fingers crossed here. The trailer seemed promising enough.

                 

Drew Barymore in Everybody’s Fine: No one’s predicting this, but not being Oscar worthy doesn’t mean I won’t like it. Maybe I’ll like it, or maybe I won’t. But I’m looking out.

                  

Rosamund Pike in An Education: I was a fan of this young lady in Pride & Prejudice. I’ve never been a hater of a performance based on screen time, and regardless of how short this is, if I’m impressed so be it. we’ll see…

                

Marcia Gay Harden in Whip It: I should have seen this by now. Marcia has topped my Year End Supporting Actress list twice, will this be enough to land her there again? I doubt…but she could be in the running.

With all the recent [and deafening] buzz surrounding the prospective chances of Precious taking home a crap load of prizes at next year’s Oscars I couldn’t help but assess the cultural implications of a potential win for the film. There are two things I’ve been hearing about for ages since I’ve been taking notice of that guy called Oscar. One is that Oscar is homophobic. Two, Oscar is racist. I'm not gay, so I can’t fairly assess the former. But as a black person I’ll look at the latter.

It is a fact that the number of black persons who have been Oscar winners and nominees is a small fraction of the white winners and nominees but I don’t see how this is proof of the Academy’s racism. I’ve heard the fact that losses of Eddie Murphy, Whoopi Goldberg, Cicely Tyson, Viola Davis, Angela Bassett and countless others are all proof that Oscar hates the blacks. But as a black person myself, I really don’t see how this claim can be substantiated. The number of black actors (directors, writers etc) is much smaller than the number of whites. There is a reason that black people are regarded as a minority in America. And notwithstanding, if it comes down to two performances of equal merit, should Oscar reward the black person just because they’re black?

                   

Writing this, the topic of Denzel Washington came to mind. I don’t like him much. The guy has two Oscars, he’s a good box office draw and he’s well liked and famous. When I told this to a classmate of mine that I didn’t like him [but liked Pitt, Depp, etc] she said I was a racist – yes I’m black. But my dislike of Washington has nothing to do with his race. If for some inexplicable reason I was contestant on Jeopardy and for some reason Alex Trebeck’s clue was “The white Denzel Washington” I’d promptly answer Tom Hanks. I don’t like him either. The two actors are different sides of the same coin for me. Both are popular, two Oscars each, and bland as far as I’m concerned. But at least Washington stars in good films. Most of the time, at least. Which I can't really say for many black actors.

Isn’t the lack of blacks at the Oscars a reflection of lack of substantial good performances? Sure, Oscar isn’t omniscient and we don’t always agree with some of the choices that they make but I can’t remember when a film or actor has been snubbed completely for being black – I can’t remember it seeming like that either. And no, Dreamgirls cannot be an example. Yes Condon and Company [mainly white] were snubbed in the main categories, but Hudson [who was less deserving that Condon and Co. would have been] was nominated and went on to win. And if we’re going to talk about Dreamgirls being snubbed despite a mass of nods what of They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? or The Poseidon Adventure or even The Dark Knight. They each earned multiple nods with no correlating best picture nod. Nothing to do with being black.

                           

Precious isn’t at the top of my list as far as the possible Oscar contenders I’m yet to see goes but I wouldn’t grudge it if it wins. But I hope it doesn’t win it doesn’t turn into a march against Oscar’s racism. Who knows? Maybe, I’ll see it and think it’s perfect but perfection doesn’t always win. So I wouldn’t throw the race factor into it. To be honest though, all the recent buzz for it has made me hope it doesn’t win the Oscar. This reminds of last year when in the thunderous rise of Obama I was hoping that Hillary  Clinton would pull an upset. Not only because she turned into the underdog, but I just liked her more. I remember people saying I was a bad black person. Obama's black, a win for him would be historic etc, etc,  so I should like him. But I’ve never been one to defend something based on race. But the whole issue has become somewhat exacerbated by the comment I read where someone said that you should like Precious because it’s excellent and if you don’t you’re a racist.

                      

Since I’ve been investing in movies and awards something has always worried me. To what extent do we identify an actor with their character? It’s an old question – a throwaway one even. You might even say that it’s silly. Of course I know I’m looking at a movie…I can separate the two… but can we really. I like movie awards – the Oscar, Golden Globes, BFCA, BAFTA, SAG and on and on and on. Something that strikes me about these awards though,particularly the Oscars, is how much they love sympathetic women. This occurred to me after I was reading some early reviews for the film Precious. I have nothing against this film. In fact, although it didn’t make my list of 9 it’s in my top 15 and I hope nothing but good come to Mo’Nique. Recent reviewers have cemented the fact that Sidibe ’s performance should not go unnoticed because of how she tugs at out heartstrings etc… It’s almost as if they’re saying – if you don’t like this performance you’re a bad person. Not because Sidibe is that good [which she probably is] but because the character is sympathetic.

                                                 

In the last decade one of the biggest snubs on most awards including the Oscars in the Best Actress category was Joan Allen for her delicious turn in The Upside of Anger. Playing Terry Ann Wolfemeyer, a bitch of a woman with a serious bug up her ass she has some serious issues. She earned a nod only from the Film Critics – Globes, SAG and Oscar all ignored. The winner that year – Reese Witherspoon for an infectious performance as June Carter. Reese was in my top three that year, so don’t think I hate her. The nominees that year were all good women from the delightful Elizabeth Bennet, the sharp but good Mrs. Henderson, the sympathetic Bree and  the similarly sympathetic Josey. Terry Ann would not have fit in here.

The other day Danny wrote a review of a favourite performance of his – Hilary Swank as Maggie in Million Dollar Baby. I have my issues with this performance. One of those is the handling of the story on Swank and Eastwood’s part. We get it, Maggie is the paragon of goodness and her hillbilly family don’t deserve her. Her main competition? Annette Bening in Being Julia and Kate Winslet in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Both were abrasive women that were no match for the sympathy one could unearth from Maggie. Not to knock at Hilary’s performance – but you have to wonder how many persons couldn’t help voting for her humane character.

                                   

Just as they couldn’t vote against hers six years earlier. Swank’s work in Boys Don’t Cry was eons better than her second win but once again she beat out two women with serious character issues. Carolyn [Annette Bening in American Beauty] was a bitch. The end. And Julianne Moore in The End of the Affair was a complex character in every sense of the word. Teena Brandon was not a perfect person – but she was very sympathetic. When it came down to Annette versus Hilary – not only was Hilary playing a most compassionate character, her rags to riches story was certainly more poignant than the recently pregnant, upper middle class Mrs. Warren Beatty. No?

                          

Kate Winslet won her first Oscar this year with The Reader. I was happy to see her win. Although I still think Hana was a supporting role, and I still think her work as April in Revolutionary Road was superior the win made me happy. But why Hana over April? Sure, Hana takes part in Auschwitz and sure she’s a statutory rapist. But look at the alternative…a bored and malcontent housewife. She ignores her children and doesn’t appreciate her husband. She literally kills her unborn child! I know who gets my sympathy vote...and it's not April.

                                       

Helena Bonham Carter gave one of the most moving performances of the 90s as Kate Croy in The Wings of the Dove…she won a solitary NBR award for her performance. In case you haven't seen this, and shame on you if you have not [the movie's on youtube] Kate is something of a gold digger.The eventual winner? Helen Hunt for her gregarious turn as a single mom in As Good As It Gets. That was almost too easy.

                  

The blue print for this article came to me while watching Cheri. Don’t worry…I’m not kidding myself that Michelle can win an Oscar for it. I know a nomination even is probably out of the question…what with the 55% on RT. But trust me, if this was a story [true or fabricated] about a single mother who must work as hooker on the side and then falls in love with a man half her age only to become jilted all those award shows would be lapping it up like honey.

All jokes aside though, I think it's unfair. I understand, we love the torn character with the sympathetic arc more...but can't we make that great divide. Can't we look at two actresses who give equal performances where one is lynched and endures the gamut of injustices and where one is the bearer of these injustices and realise that not because someone is a sympathetic character make them a better performer. Must it be that we must have some heightened emotional connection to a role before we think it's a good or even great performance?
               

Since I’ve been investing in movies and awards something has always worried me. To what extent do we identify an actor with their character? It’s an old question – a throwaway one even. You might even say that it’s silly. Of course I know I’m looking at a movie…I can separate the two… but can we really. I like movie awards – the Oscar, Golden Globes, BFCA, BAFTA, SAG and on and on and on. Something that strikes me about these awards though,particularly the Oscars, is how much they love sympathetic women. This occurred to me after I was reading some early reviews for the film Precious. I have nothing against this film. In fact, although it didn’t make my list of 9 it’s in my top 15 and I hope nothing but good come to Mo’Nique. Recent reviewers have cemented the fact that Sidibe ’s performance should not go unnoticed because of how she tugs at out heartstrings etc… It’s almost as if they’re saying – if you don’t like this performance you’re a bad person. Not because Sidibe is that good [which she probably is] but because the character is sympathetic.

                                                 

In the last decade one of the biggest snubs on most awards including the Oscars in the Best Actress category was Joan Allen for her delicious turn in The Upside of Anger. Playing Terry Ann Wolfemeyer, a bitch of a woman with a serious bug up her ass she has some serious issues. She earned a nod only from the Film Critics – Globes, SAG and Oscar all ignored. The winner that year – Reese Witherspoon for an infectious performance as June Carter. Reese was in my top three that year, so don’t think I hate her. The nominees that year were all good women from the delightful Elizabeth Bennet, the sharp but good Mrs. Henderson, the sympathetic Bree and  the similarly sympathetic Josey. Terry Ann would not have fit in here.

The other day Danny wrote a review of a favourite performance of his – Hilary Swank as Maggie in Million Dollar Baby. I have my issues with this performance. One of those is the handling of the story on Swank and Eastwood’s part. We get it, Maggie is the paragon of goodness and her hillbilly family don’t deserve her. Her main competition? Annette Bening in Being Julia and Kate Winslet in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Both were abrasive women that were no match for the sympathy one could unearth from Maggie. Not to knock at Hilary’s performance – but you have to wonder how many persons couldn’t help voting for her humane character.

                                   

Just as they couldn’t vote against hers six years earlier. Swank’s work in Boys Don’t Cry was eons better than her second win but once again she beat out two women with serious character issues. Carolyn [Annette Bening in American Beauty] was a bitch. The end. And Julianne Moore in The End of the Affair was a complex character in every sense of the word. Teena Brandon was not a perfect person – but she was very sympathetic. When it came down to Annette versus Hilary – not only was Hilary playing a most compassionate character, her rags to riches story was certainly more poignant than the recently pregnant, upper middle class Mrs. Warren Beatty. No?

                          

Kate Winslet won her first Oscar this year with The Reader. I was happy to see her win. Although I still think Hana was a supporting role, and I still think her work as April in Revolutionary Road was superior the win made me happy. But why Hana over April? Sure, Hana takes part in Auschwitz and sure she’s a statutory rapist. But look at the alternative…a bored and malcontent housewife. She ignores her children and doesn’t appreciate her husband. She literally kills her unborn child! I know who gets my sympathy vote...and it's not April.

                                       

Helena Bonham Carter gave one of the most moving performances of the 90s as Kate Croy in The Wings of the Dove…she won a solitary NBR award for her performance. In case you haven't seen this, and shame on you if you have not [the movie's on youtube] Kate is something of a gold digger.The eventual winner? Helen Hunt for her gregarious turn as a single mom in As Good As It Gets. That was almost too easy.

                  

The blue print for this article came to me while watching Cheri. Don’t worry…I’m not kidding myself that Michelle can win an Oscar for it. I know a nomination even is probably out of the question…what with the 55% on RT. But trust me, if this was a story [true or fabricated] about a single mother who must work as hooker on the side and then falls in love with a man half her age only to become jilted all those award shows would be lapping it up like honey.

All jokes aside though, I think it's unfair. I understand, we love the torn character with the sympathetic arc more...but can't we make that great divide. Can't we look at two actresses who give equal performances where one is lynched and endures the gamut of injustices and where one is the bearer of these injustices and realise that not because someone is a sympathetic character make them a better performer. Must it be that we must have some heightened emotional connection to a role before we think it's a good or even great performance?