Peter Lorre in M
Edward G. Robinson in Little Caesar
|
|
|---|
Showing posts with label 1931. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1931. Show all posts
Best Actor 1931: Results
Peter Lorre in M
Edward G. Robinson in Little Caesar
Best Actor 1931: Jackie Cooper in Skippy
Jackie Cooper received his only Oscar nomination for portraying the Skippy Skinner in Skippy.
Skippy is about a young boy, who gets involved with some of the other local kids, and tries to help a poor kid from the other side of the tracks Sooky.
Jackie Cooper is the record holder for the youngest Oscar nominee in this category, as well as the only person every nominated in the lead actor category who was nominated when they were less that 18 years old. Cooper is a rather unique nomination then, and it is interesting to watch the only Child performance ever nominated in this category.
Jackie Cooper is certainly immensely likable in this performance as Skippy. He is just simply a nice kid to follow around through his little adventure through the town. Skippy is not the most original kid character, as the smart rambunctious young boy, but Cooper does try his best to make a unique portrayal of this kind of character.
Cooper is very charming in this role, and has the right confidence on screen. He knows his way around the role, and is fun to watch as he interacts with the other kids, as they play together, and he acts as the unofficial leader of the bunch. The leader who dictates who fights who, and such. Cooper has the right playful command of the screen that works well for Skippy.
There are many a scenes that require Cooper to play it cute, charming, and maybe with just the slightest tough edge, and Cooper does all three of these things very well, especially in the scene where he tries to raise money for his friend Sooky's dog, and they put on show. Copper is just properly charming and effective in that scene, and basically every other.
Cooper gives a nice charming performance throughout but is also required to show some dramatic weight when his poor friend's dog is killed. Cooper is very good in showing the sadness of his character, as well as his earnest attempts to try to cheer up his friend, but to no avail. Cooper is quite heartbreaking in these scenes, and is as effective as he is in the charming scenes. Overall Cooper's performance is a charming, effective performance, which properly carries the film.
Jackie Cooper is the record holder for the youngest Oscar nominee in this category, as well as the only person every nominated in the lead actor category who was nominated when they were less that 18 years old. Cooper is a rather unique nomination then, and it is interesting to watch the only Child performance ever nominated in this category.
Jackie Cooper is certainly immensely likable in this performance as Skippy. He is just simply a nice kid to follow around through his little adventure through the town. Skippy is not the most original kid character, as the smart rambunctious young boy, but Cooper does try his best to make a unique portrayal of this kind of character.
Cooper is very charming in this role, and has the right confidence on screen. He knows his way around the role, and is fun to watch as he interacts with the other kids, as they play together, and he acts as the unofficial leader of the bunch. The leader who dictates who fights who, and such. Cooper has the right playful command of the screen that works well for Skippy.
There are many a scenes that require Cooper to play it cute, charming, and maybe with just the slightest tough edge, and Cooper does all three of these things very well, especially in the scene where he tries to raise money for his friend Sooky's dog, and they put on show. Copper is just properly charming and effective in that scene, and basically every other.
Cooper gives a nice charming performance throughout but is also required to show some dramatic weight when his poor friend's dog is killed. Cooper is very good in showing the sadness of his character, as well as his earnest attempts to try to cheer up his friend, but to no avail. Cooper is quite heartbreaking in these scenes, and is as effective as he is in the charming scenes. Overall Cooper's performance is a charming, effective performance, which properly carries the film.
Best Actor 1931: Fredric March in The Royal Family of Broadway
Fredric March received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Tony Cavendish in The Royal Family of Broadway.
The Royal Family of Broadway is a poor film because it does not really decide what it wants to be, it could have been a screwball comedy about a crazy parody of the Barrymore family, which it is part of the time, but it also is most of the time drama about deciding whether to keep with the family's acting tradition or to change for love, that majority side is boring.
Fredric March's performance is the whole of the screwball section of the film, and therefore is the best, and only good part of the film. He plays an insane parody of John Barrymore in Tony Cavendish. March is in an odd place in this film because it is a film with straight characters and he is the only one who is not. His performance is just about entirely comedic, without only a few brief moments when he is not acting insane.
It is rather interesting to see this performance because it is parody of the hammy over the top performances of this period, meaning this is a hammy over the top performance, except it is suppose to be funny rather than serious. I also think March although stays in character, does give off the right idea that he clearly knows what he is doing in the role, and that it definitely is suppose to be a parody.
I like what he did being a completely egomaniac who never stops acting, even with his family around. Also walking with this perfect pompous walk that is just right for the role, as well as always acting like he is a larger than life constantly. March throws himself completely in every scene, and never stops. He has a few moments where he becomes sad over his mother being sick, but even in those March plays them in a comedic fashion, acting like a little kid.
Now the most important question is he funny. Well I will say his performance never quite made me laugh too much, but I enjoyed watching his performance nevertheless. I think though that the film is constantly working against his performance unfortuantely. No one is really working with his comedic pieces, and instead they stay serious and in their own boring stories. Also the film just needed even more of him, and frankly should have been built around him. Overall I liked this performance but the rating troubles me. When I think of the film I say 3.5, but when I think of his performance I think of 4, so I guess I will think of his performance last.
Fredric March's performance is the whole of the screwball section of the film, and therefore is the best, and only good part of the film. He plays an insane parody of John Barrymore in Tony Cavendish. March is in an odd place in this film because it is a film with straight characters and he is the only one who is not. His performance is just about entirely comedic, without only a few brief moments when he is not acting insane.
It is rather interesting to see this performance because it is parody of the hammy over the top performances of this period, meaning this is a hammy over the top performance, except it is suppose to be funny rather than serious. I also think March although stays in character, does give off the right idea that he clearly knows what he is doing in the role, and that it definitely is suppose to be a parody.
I like what he did being a completely egomaniac who never stops acting, even with his family around. Also walking with this perfect pompous walk that is just right for the role, as well as always acting like he is a larger than life constantly. March throws himself completely in every scene, and never stops. He has a few moments where he becomes sad over his mother being sick, but even in those March plays them in a comedic fashion, acting like a little kid.
Now the most important question is he funny. Well I will say his performance never quite made me laugh too much, but I enjoyed watching his performance nevertheless. I think though that the film is constantly working against his performance unfortuantely. No one is really working with his comedic pieces, and instead they stay serious and in their own boring stories. Also the film just needed even more of him, and frankly should have been built around him. Overall I liked this performance but the rating troubles me. When I think of the film I say 3.5, but when I think of his performance I think of 4, so I guess I will think of his performance last.
Best Actor 1931: Lionel Barrymore in A Free Soul
Lionel Barrymore won an Oscar from his only acting nomination for portraying lawyer Stephen Ashe in A Free Soul.
A Free Soul tells of a father Stephen Ashe and daughter Jan Ashe (Norma Shearer) who are harmed down by their own vices his alcoholism, and her relationship with a brutal gangster (Clark Gable), whom the father got off a murder charge.
Lionel Barrymore's performance here is sometimes treated negatively as an overly hammy performance, and I very much disagree with that view. Barrymore style of acting does indeed always have a degree of theatricality to his performance, but that is not automatically a bad thing, if he uses it in the right manner. Also I would disagree with it because this is one of his more restrained performances.
Barrymore's portrayal of Ashe is functionally good in the early scenes. He required to do a few scenes of being a smooth lawyer which he does well enough, but also a man who requires to get drunk to get along with life. Barrymore actually does these early drunk scenes in a just fine manner, not overly realistic but still in a manner that works, since he does not go over the top.
His relationship with Norma Shearer is key to the film though. They are both actually pretty good in showing the relationship between the father and daughter. They both have the right naturalism together, and create their painful relationship together well. It is interesting how Barrymore portrays him as a loving father, but one who is unable to really help in her problematic relationship.
An interesting part of his performance though is his portrayal of Stephen Ashe's alcoholism. It is true he has the usual drunk scenes, which are fine, but most interesting about his portrayal are his scenes in the country where both Ashe and his daughter try to shed his daughter. Lionel Barrymore is truly effective in that he shows a deep pain from his alcoholism, and effectively portrays the brutal effect withdrawal has on him.
Barrymore's final scene though perhaps is his best where Ashe in court tries to defend Jan's old boyfriend (Leslie Howard) who killed the gangster. It is a very dramatic speech that Ashe makes to the jury, and Barrymore handles quite well. He puts the right passion and power into his speech, that I do not deny that it probably did give him the Oscar. Overall his performance is certianly from 1931 since it is dated in its own way, but it is also certainly an effective heartfelt performance.
Lionel Barrymore's performance here is sometimes treated negatively as an overly hammy performance, and I very much disagree with that view. Barrymore style of acting does indeed always have a degree of theatricality to his performance, but that is not automatically a bad thing, if he uses it in the right manner. Also I would disagree with it because this is one of his more restrained performances.
Barrymore's portrayal of Ashe is functionally good in the early scenes. He required to do a few scenes of being a smooth lawyer which he does well enough, but also a man who requires to get drunk to get along with life. Barrymore actually does these early drunk scenes in a just fine manner, not overly realistic but still in a manner that works, since he does not go over the top.
His relationship with Norma Shearer is key to the film though. They are both actually pretty good in showing the relationship between the father and daughter. They both have the right naturalism together, and create their painful relationship together well. It is interesting how Barrymore portrays him as a loving father, but one who is unable to really help in her problematic relationship.
An interesting part of his performance though is his portrayal of Stephen Ashe's alcoholism. It is true he has the usual drunk scenes, which are fine, but most interesting about his portrayal are his scenes in the country where both Ashe and his daughter try to shed his daughter. Lionel Barrymore is truly effective in that he shows a deep pain from his alcoholism, and effectively portrays the brutal effect withdrawal has on him.
Barrymore's final scene though perhaps is his best where Ashe in court tries to defend Jan's old boyfriend (Leslie Howard) who killed the gangster. It is a very dramatic speech that Ashe makes to the jury, and Barrymore handles quite well. He puts the right passion and power into his speech, that I do not deny that it probably did give him the Oscar. Overall his performance is certianly from 1931 since it is dated in its own way, but it is also certainly an effective heartfelt performance.
Best Actor 1931: Adolphe Menjou in The Front Page
Adolphe Menjou received his only Oscar nomination for portraying newspaper editor Walter Burns in The Front Page.
The Front Page is an okay screwball comedy, but its remake His Girl Friday is superior.
Adolphe Menjou is barely in the film for about its whole first half, he only shows briefly as Walter Burns lures his best reporter Hildy (Pat O'Brien) into following the story of a man who is about to be executed. In this brief scene Burns convinces Hildy by basically threatening to put a frame up on him by falsely calling the fire department and falsely blaming him. Its a short scene but Menjou is fine in showing the sly controlling way of his character, showing he is always two steps ahead of everyone.
He shows up eventually once again to push Hildy, and Hildy's fiancee, and just about everyone else around as he orchestrates the events to turn out the exact way he wants to. I will say Menjou is good and is properly commanding in his manipulations of everyone and everything around. He has a good enough amount of energy, and shows up the underlying intelligence of his character through his manner, such his shifty eyes.
Although he is fine, and seems downright amazing one the last performance someone saw was Richard Dix, he still could have been even better as Cary Grant is in the same role in His Girl Friday. The rating may seem a little low but I do like him, its just he just does not have that much to overall, and he as Grant showed the role can be something really effective and entertaining.
Adolphe Menjou is barely in the film for about its whole first half, he only shows briefly as Walter Burns lures his best reporter Hildy (Pat O'Brien) into following the story of a man who is about to be executed. In this brief scene Burns convinces Hildy by basically threatening to put a frame up on him by falsely calling the fire department and falsely blaming him. Its a short scene but Menjou is fine in showing the sly controlling way of his character, showing he is always two steps ahead of everyone.
He shows up eventually once again to push Hildy, and Hildy's fiancee, and just about everyone else around as he orchestrates the events to turn out the exact way he wants to. I will say Menjou is good and is properly commanding in his manipulations of everyone and everything around. He has a good enough amount of energy, and shows up the underlying intelligence of his character through his manner, such his shifty eyes.
Although he is fine, and seems downright amazing one the last performance someone saw was Richard Dix, he still could have been even better as Cary Grant is in the same role in His Girl Friday. The rating may seem a little low but I do like him, its just he just does not have that much to overall, and he as Grant showed the role can be something really effective and entertaining.
Best Actor 1931: Richard Dix in Cimarron
Richard Dix received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Yancey Cravat in Cimarron.
Cimarron is quite a bad, and boring western. There is not anything interesting about it not even as a historical curiosity.
Richard Dix's performance possibly has to be seen to be believed at times, because it defies the conventions of every other performance that I have reviewed so far in the category, it certainly stands alone, which is not praise trust me. Richard Dix is not an actor I say i have seen before watching this film, but he has quite the bizarre acting tendencies.
Richard Dix's screen presence, or that lack thereof is quite an abnormality. He has this voice that almost sounds like a more relaxed Bing Crosby at times. His performance is quite hard to believe how just downright dull he is some of the time, as he either smiles very plainly, or talks through this very slow very boring speeches of his that he does not seem to put that much effort into.
He does not have a single bit of chemistry with a single member of the cast, and certainly does not have with his co-star Irene Dunne who portrays his wife. They do not really show the slightest bit of emotion to one another that seems at all human. They mostly just stare at one another not anything more than that.
Now the best and the worst part of his performance is his strong rooting and tooting he does sometimes during his performance. These are bizarre out of place with his dull characterization the rest of the time. Now the reason I said also best because they are rather unintentionally funny considering how odd these yells he does.
Dix is never charming, he never is commanding, he is never interesting, he just is there most of the time, even when he is talking loudly it is hard to pay attention to this performance, which defies almost every method usually used to create a good performance. He is never ever for a single moment up to the task of this performance.
This is just a terrible performance from beginning to end, it either bores one or causes one's mouth to become agape in reaction to his moments where he decides to cry out. This is an example of a bad old timey performance, the type of performance that gives other performances from this time a bad name, there is never one single second of this performance that is good for even a moment.
Richard Dix's performance possibly has to be seen to be believed at times, because it defies the conventions of every other performance that I have reviewed so far in the category, it certainly stands alone, which is not praise trust me. Richard Dix is not an actor I say i have seen before watching this film, but he has quite the bizarre acting tendencies.
Richard Dix's screen presence, or that lack thereof is quite an abnormality. He has this voice that almost sounds like a more relaxed Bing Crosby at times. His performance is quite hard to believe how just downright dull he is some of the time, as he either smiles very plainly, or talks through this very slow very boring speeches of his that he does not seem to put that much effort into.
He does not have a single bit of chemistry with a single member of the cast, and certainly does not have with his co-star Irene Dunne who portrays his wife. They do not really show the slightest bit of emotion to one another that seems at all human. They mostly just stare at one another not anything more than that.
Now the best and the worst part of his performance is his strong rooting and tooting he does sometimes during his performance. These are bizarre out of place with his dull characterization the rest of the time. Now the reason I said also best because they are rather unintentionally funny considering how odd these yells he does.
Dix is never charming, he never is commanding, he is never interesting, he just is there most of the time, even when he is talking loudly it is hard to pay attention to this performance, which defies almost every method usually used to create a good performance. He is never ever for a single moment up to the task of this performance.
This is just a terrible performance from beginning to end, it either bores one or causes one's mouth to become agape in reaction to his moments where he decides to cry out. This is an example of a bad old timey performance, the type of performance that gives other performances from this time a bad name, there is never one single second of this performance that is good for even a moment.
Best Actor 1931
Richard Dix in Cimarron
Adolphe Menjou in The Front Page
Lionel Barrymore in A Free Soul
Jackie Cooper in Skippy
Fredric March in The Royal Family of Broadway
With the recent passing of Jackie Cooper, I thought I ought to take a look at at this year where he received his only Oscar nomination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
