|
|
|---|
Showing posts with label 1998. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1998. Show all posts
Best Actor 1998: Results
Best Actor 1998: Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan
Tom Hanks received his fourth Oscar nomination for portraying Capt. John Miller in Saving Private Ryan.
Saving Private Ryan certainly is well made in some aspects, most certainly, but I feel the writing fails to be really all that great. Although when it originally came out it was praised for a lack of cliche, and although John Wayne is not the leader, the crew is just as cliched in a lot of ways than the ones in some of his movies that I have seen. There is the straight laced religious sniper, the crusty right hand man, the cynical guy, the wet behind the ears guy, the cannon fodder, or basically the one dimensional guy besides a token scene or one aspect of the character.
Tom Hanks is the leader of the small group of men searching for Private Ryan to bring him home. Hanks works as the normal man in an extreme situation who can be followed throughout the film. He maintains presence in the film despite the fact that it is a big war movie, and an ensemble piece in some ways. He does work as the common man well, and can be fairly well identified with. I never fully believed Tom Hanks as a World War II solider, but that is hardly his fault, and his performance is good enough to get around this. He keeps realism in the film, and despite Miller being a standard character in a few ways Hanks still allows room for development.
Much of his performance are reactions though, whether it is to the battles he is in, to what he sees, reaction to his men, or something else. Hanks' reactions are always authentic, and always properly reinforce the feelings of the scenes he is in. Hanks is able to find the right tone for the scenes, and even can handle the scenes of a little humor well without spoil the tone of the film by ever seeming to actory in his performance. Despite many of his scenes being mostly functional such as giving orders or being in the action, or reactionary Hanks still finds moments in which he shows Miller's development and complexity. He never really says everything about Miller but he suggests incredibly well, especially when speaking of the man he has possibly saved or his quiet reactions to the deaths of his men.
The other main aspect of Miller that Hanks does a good job handling is his leadership. He is not a loud or imposing leader who calls out his orders, rather a more quiet man who is quiet in his control and motivation of his troops through his own respect he sort of earns. Hanks seems believable as a leader, and as a quiet leader like this. A leader who resolves his issues quietly. I would say though when he is doing a few scenes of the large command he is less believable. Especially at the end when he organizes the plan, I just did not at all fully believe his performance there or a few other scenes where he perhaps could have used just a little strong command. Still though a very good performance, still sticks out in a film of this type, and fulfills his role for the most part and adds more when he can.
Tom Hanks is the leader of the small group of men searching for Private Ryan to bring him home. Hanks works as the normal man in an extreme situation who can be followed throughout the film. He maintains presence in the film despite the fact that it is a big war movie, and an ensemble piece in some ways. He does work as the common man well, and can be fairly well identified with. I never fully believed Tom Hanks as a World War II solider, but that is hardly his fault, and his performance is good enough to get around this. He keeps realism in the film, and despite Miller being a standard character in a few ways Hanks still allows room for development.
Much of his performance are reactions though, whether it is to the battles he is in, to what he sees, reaction to his men, or something else. Hanks' reactions are always authentic, and always properly reinforce the feelings of the scenes he is in. Hanks is able to find the right tone for the scenes, and even can handle the scenes of a little humor well without spoil the tone of the film by ever seeming to actory in his performance. Despite many of his scenes being mostly functional such as giving orders or being in the action, or reactionary Hanks still finds moments in which he shows Miller's development and complexity. He never really says everything about Miller but he suggests incredibly well, especially when speaking of the man he has possibly saved or his quiet reactions to the deaths of his men.
The other main aspect of Miller that Hanks does a good job handling is his leadership. He is not a loud or imposing leader who calls out his orders, rather a more quiet man who is quiet in his control and motivation of his troops through his own respect he sort of earns. Hanks seems believable as a leader, and as a quiet leader like this. A leader who resolves his issues quietly. I would say though when he is doing a few scenes of the large command he is less believable. Especially at the end when he organizes the plan, I just did not at all fully believe his performance there or a few other scenes where he perhaps could have used just a little strong command. Still though a very good performance, still sticks out in a film of this type, and fulfills his role for the most part and adds more when he can.
Best Actor 1998: Roberto Benigni in Life is Beautiful
Roberto Benigni won an Oscar from his only acting nomination for portraying Guido Orefice in Life is Beautiful.
It is hard to know what quite to make out of this film, comedy simply does not seem to be the right tone for a holocaust movie especially one that takes itself somewhat seriously. I'd say it would have to be like a pitch black comedy of sorts like Seven Beauties to work.
Who was the first actor to win in this category for a foreign language performance, was it Giancarlo Giannini's brilliant performance in Seven Beauties, or perhaps one of Marcello Mastroianni's performances, no not one of those who could have been incredibly deserving no the first was for Benigni.
There is not that much to his performance really. All he really does is smile, and clown around throughout the film, with the occasional sad face. He really just keeps smiling throughout doing his clown act, and that is it no matter what the situation is. I understand that this is what Guido's character is suppose to be, but even if that seems right for the character it does not make his performance here an impressive one.
Now after the fact that he does the same thing over and over again, does this thing that he does over and over again work? Well not for me really. I never found him to be all that funny or charming. I will grant him that he tries very hard to get a laugh, and to seem really really charming but I never really found him to be. He did not grow on me in the least, and his performance does not make his own film work either, despite being essential for it to. He never made the story convincing for me even in a fantastical sort of way, his performance simply failed to work.
Who was the first actor to win in this category for a foreign language performance, was it Giancarlo Giannini's brilliant performance in Seven Beauties, or perhaps one of Marcello Mastroianni's performances, no not one of those who could have been incredibly deserving no the first was for Benigni.
There is not that much to his performance really. All he really does is smile, and clown around throughout the film, with the occasional sad face. He really just keeps smiling throughout doing his clown act, and that is it no matter what the situation is. I understand that this is what Guido's character is suppose to be, but even if that seems right for the character it does not make his performance here an impressive one.
Now after the fact that he does the same thing over and over again, does this thing that he does over and over again work? Well not for me really. I never found him to be all that funny or charming. I will grant him that he tries very hard to get a laugh, and to seem really really charming but I never really found him to be. He did not grow on me in the least, and his performance does not make his own film work either, despite being essential for it to. He never made the story convincing for me even in a fantastical sort of way, his performance simply failed to work.
Best Actor 1998: Edward Norton in American History X
Edward Norton received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Neo Nazi Derek Vinyard in American History X.
American History X is a interesting and very effective film about racism, it is not quite perfect but it certainly is a strong effort.
The film is not in chronological order but I think it is possibly best to look at Edward Norton's in this way. His earliest moment then is as a teenager, before really be effected by anything, and very open to different people's ideas. His thought on his current teacher is heard by his father who than questions them, and eventually makes racist statements that affect Derek. Norton is appropriately naive and simple in this early scene and it is amazing how he really seems just a normal kid in this scene especially in contrast to the later moments of the film. His other moment as his younger self is a really outstanding moment of Norton's performance, in which he shows his sadness and anger at the death of his father. His emotions are completely honest here, making the transformation of the character realistic, and also making the character's racism something that is never a stereotypical.
Derek instantly becomes an integral member of a local groups of Neo-Nazi white supremacists. Norton terrific in a very chilling way in these scenes. He is oddly charismatic while he makes his racist remarks. Norton shows the right oddly misplaced passion in these scenes, that makes these scenes especially disconcerting. Norton shows that Derek is not a dumb guy really, and that even a smart person can simply be lead this way. Norton makes Derek's hatred very realistic and that is pivotal for the film. He never seems to be acting the racism but rather that it is simply part of Derek's world view.
Two scenes in particular are especially made very effective due to Norton. The first when he gets in to an argument with his family over his views, and fights with everyone. The strongest moment though is when he shows some regret to his mother and sister of the violent way he reacted. Norton correctly shows here that although Derek is a racist, he still yet is a human. The other scene though is his scene where he kill two black men who break into his car. Norton is chilling here showing Derek's hate in its purest form. His smile at the very end of the scene is especially darkly effecting. Norton shows the true hate in Derek's heart here in a stunning moment.
Derek is sent to prison after his murders, and meets up with other supremacists inside the prison. Norton performance here is essential to the film, and an extreme challenge. He at first still acts like he has before, but becomes disillusioned with his cohorts due to their lack of beliefs. He is then beaten and raped by them for leaving their group, and for befriending a black inmate. Norton transformation is simply outstanding as he acts his cocky self at the beginning of his prison, but starts to see his hate as pointless as incorrect. Derek's transformation is slow in his friendship with the black prisoner Lamont and Norton very carefully shows this change incredibly well, as he simply becomes a better person. He makes this part very truthful, and completely realistic, his transformation is made even more complete by his brutal rape though. Norton is exceptional as Derek has changed from the assailant to the victim, Derek shows a truly saddened man from his earlier actions, and hurt man from what has happened to him.
After getting out prison Derek has become just about completely reformed, now wishing to help his struggling family and set straight his Neo Nazi younger brother (Edward Furlong). Norton loses none of his strength as Derek is now a man who regrets his actions, and tries his best to rectify them. His portrait of Derek is honest and absolutely convincing as he confronts his brother and his former friends over their racism. He handles all of these scenes with the utmost power and poignancy. It is fascinating how Norton can make the transition from a chilling hate filled character to a honest good man. Such a transition is extreme but Norton absolutely pulls it off in this great performance, that even peaks in the final moments of the film as Derek faces one more final tragedy, Norton is truly heartbreaking at the final end. A performance rarely can be both completely chilling and heartbreaking, threatening then thoughtful, hateful yet also poignant, but Norton's is which makes this an outstanding show of acting.
The film is not in chronological order but I think it is possibly best to look at Edward Norton's in this way. His earliest moment then is as a teenager, before really be effected by anything, and very open to different people's ideas. His thought on his current teacher is heard by his father who than questions them, and eventually makes racist statements that affect Derek. Norton is appropriately naive and simple in this early scene and it is amazing how he really seems just a normal kid in this scene especially in contrast to the later moments of the film. His other moment as his younger self is a really outstanding moment of Norton's performance, in which he shows his sadness and anger at the death of his father. His emotions are completely honest here, making the transformation of the character realistic, and also making the character's racism something that is never a stereotypical.
Derek instantly becomes an integral member of a local groups of Neo-Nazi white supremacists. Norton terrific in a very chilling way in these scenes. He is oddly charismatic while he makes his racist remarks. Norton shows the right oddly misplaced passion in these scenes, that makes these scenes especially disconcerting. Norton shows that Derek is not a dumb guy really, and that even a smart person can simply be lead this way. Norton makes Derek's hatred very realistic and that is pivotal for the film. He never seems to be acting the racism but rather that it is simply part of Derek's world view.
Two scenes in particular are especially made very effective due to Norton. The first when he gets in to an argument with his family over his views, and fights with everyone. The strongest moment though is when he shows some regret to his mother and sister of the violent way he reacted. Norton correctly shows here that although Derek is a racist, he still yet is a human. The other scene though is his scene where he kill two black men who break into his car. Norton is chilling here showing Derek's hate in its purest form. His smile at the very end of the scene is especially darkly effecting. Norton shows the true hate in Derek's heart here in a stunning moment.
Derek is sent to prison after his murders, and meets up with other supremacists inside the prison. Norton performance here is essential to the film, and an extreme challenge. He at first still acts like he has before, but becomes disillusioned with his cohorts due to their lack of beliefs. He is then beaten and raped by them for leaving their group, and for befriending a black inmate. Norton transformation is simply outstanding as he acts his cocky self at the beginning of his prison, but starts to see his hate as pointless as incorrect. Derek's transformation is slow in his friendship with the black prisoner Lamont and Norton very carefully shows this change incredibly well, as he simply becomes a better person. He makes this part very truthful, and completely realistic, his transformation is made even more complete by his brutal rape though. Norton is exceptional as Derek has changed from the assailant to the victim, Derek shows a truly saddened man from his earlier actions, and hurt man from what has happened to him.
After getting out prison Derek has become just about completely reformed, now wishing to help his struggling family and set straight his Neo Nazi younger brother (Edward Furlong). Norton loses none of his strength as Derek is now a man who regrets his actions, and tries his best to rectify them. His portrait of Derek is honest and absolutely convincing as he confronts his brother and his former friends over their racism. He handles all of these scenes with the utmost power and poignancy. It is fascinating how Norton can make the transition from a chilling hate filled character to a honest good man. Such a transition is extreme but Norton absolutely pulls it off in this great performance, that even peaks in the final moments of the film as Derek faces one more final tragedy, Norton is truly heartbreaking at the final end. A performance rarely can be both completely chilling and heartbreaking, threatening then thoughtful, hateful yet also poignant, but Norton's is which makes this an outstanding show of acting.
Best Actor 1998: Nick Nolte in Affliction
Nick Nolte received his second Oscar nomination for portraying small town cop Wade Whitehouse in Affliction.
Affliction is a rather unusual film in a few ways such as having a plot that is a purposeful fake out, but it also is standard in many ways such as several fairly simple characters. Overall it simply did not work for me.
I'll again admit I have never found Nolte to be all that interesting of an actor. I particularly do not find his abilities as a leading man like in the Prince of Tides, luckily though Wade Whitehouse is not at all a leading man character. Wade is a town cop who is poorly respected by just about everyone, and is disliked almost in the same way. Nolte does do a good job a be appropriately pathetic as Wade. His inability to fulfill the smallest tasks of his job as a cop and as a father, is made proper do to Nolte lack of command, and lack of self-confidence. Everything about Wade lacks confidence, and I will say that Nolte does a good job of that, even though I will not say that seems like the biggest challenge.
Wade is a troubled man with a troubled past, and present. His past involving his abuse from his father (James Coburn), and the present involving the sudden death of his mother, a sever toothache, and a theory of his that a local hunting accident was not accident. Nolte gives fine performance showing the frustrations of Wade, along with his possible paranoia due to his abuse as a child. His slow degeneration throughout the film is fairly well handled by Nolte, as he grows more and more frustrated and paranoid.I also like how Nolte shows how Wade grows a little more strength despite the strength being misplaced in a incorrect idea.
I think Nolte does reach the end of the character's rope fairly well, and does give a completely respectable performance. I will say still that I do think the performance could perhaps have been better. Although I think he is realistic and fairly effective, there still seemed to be something stopping him from really hitting the right note with his performance. I cannot point to what exactly, but his performance never truly effected me. Still I will admit being for some reason extra hard on Nolte, since if he did achieve even more with this performance it would have been a truly great one. Nonetheless though it is a good one.
I'll again admit I have never found Nolte to be all that interesting of an actor. I particularly do not find his abilities as a leading man like in the Prince of Tides, luckily though Wade Whitehouse is not at all a leading man character. Wade is a town cop who is poorly respected by just about everyone, and is disliked almost in the same way. Nolte does do a good job a be appropriately pathetic as Wade. His inability to fulfill the smallest tasks of his job as a cop and as a father, is made proper do to Nolte lack of command, and lack of self-confidence. Everything about Wade lacks confidence, and I will say that Nolte does a good job of that, even though I will not say that seems like the biggest challenge.
Wade is a troubled man with a troubled past, and present. His past involving his abuse from his father (James Coburn), and the present involving the sudden death of his mother, a sever toothache, and a theory of his that a local hunting accident was not accident. Nolte gives fine performance showing the frustrations of Wade, along with his possible paranoia due to his abuse as a child. His slow degeneration throughout the film is fairly well handled by Nolte, as he grows more and more frustrated and paranoid.I also like how Nolte shows how Wade grows a little more strength despite the strength being misplaced in a incorrect idea.
I think Nolte does reach the end of the character's rope fairly well, and does give a completely respectable performance. I will say still that I do think the performance could perhaps have been better. Although I think he is realistic and fairly effective, there still seemed to be something stopping him from really hitting the right note with his performance. I cannot point to what exactly, but his performance never truly effected me. Still I will admit being for some reason extra hard on Nolte, since if he did achieve even more with this performance it would have been a truly great one. Nonetheless though it is a good one.
Best Actor 1998: Ian McKellen in Gods and Monsters
Ian McKellen received his first Oscar nomination for portraying homosexual movie director James Whale in Gods and Monsters.
Gods and Monsters is certainly an interesting movie. I am not sure though if it really succeeds in terms of the development of its themes and ideas, but it is most certainly interesting.
Ian Mckellen portrays James Whale throughout the film seemingly without challenge. He shows an instant ease with the role instantly. He instantly is comfortable in the role from the first moment he is on the screen. This relaxation in this role is essential for its effectiveness. Whale is a homosexual who still in fact tries to attempt being active, even if his attempts are many times covert, in a slight way to get some sort of thrill for himself. This is some ways an important aspect of this character, which McKellen never exploits in his performance, but rather makes it the natural way Whale is and wants to be. This lusting from Whale is not overdone to be overly creepy, nor is it underdone to seem some overly romantic idea, instead McKellen find the right realistic tone which works fantastically.
Another aspect of Whale is his enormous past, both his painful memories of his wartime, and childhood experiences, but also that of his more glorious days as a successful film artist. McKellen again excels in his scenes showing Whale's love for his art and his artistry. He finds the perfect note to convey this though, since Whale does not simply love his whole artistry. He shows a distinct hatred for the treatment of some of his work, and how his film making ended. Also a distaste for only being remembered for his monster pictures. He though still shows a true admiration for what he has done, and shows a sense of an accomplishment of his work. McKellen balances these feelings well, also Whale as he speaks of these films states everything as the real director of the film, which McKellen did perfectly.
His most dramatic moments are when Whale thinks about his past. McKellen really excels here because the past is shown to us, therefore he could have simply spoke of it and done nothing else but McKellen shows Whale own feelings on the matters mostly without words. He conveys both the happiness in his past with the pain of his losses exceedingly well. McKellen tells of these stories always with the right passive passion in a way that rings true to the character. McKellen brigns out all his past, his current lusts, and pains the most in his final moments. The final scene where he tries to bring his gardener Clay Boone (Brendan Frasier) to kill him by sexually advancing on him. McKellen is terrific in this penultimate scene, mixing the right intensity in his attempts to enrage the man to killing, along with showing his past once more, and his current pain he wants to end. It is a odd scenes in many ways but McKellen stays realistic and effective in this scene just as he is throughout the film.
Ian Mckellen portrays James Whale throughout the film seemingly without challenge. He shows an instant ease with the role instantly. He instantly is comfortable in the role from the first moment he is on the screen. This relaxation in this role is essential for its effectiveness. Whale is a homosexual who still in fact tries to attempt being active, even if his attempts are many times covert, in a slight way to get some sort of thrill for himself. This is some ways an important aspect of this character, which McKellen never exploits in his performance, but rather makes it the natural way Whale is and wants to be. This lusting from Whale is not overdone to be overly creepy, nor is it underdone to seem some overly romantic idea, instead McKellen find the right realistic tone which works fantastically.
Another aspect of Whale is his enormous past, both his painful memories of his wartime, and childhood experiences, but also that of his more glorious days as a successful film artist. McKellen again excels in his scenes showing Whale's love for his art and his artistry. He finds the perfect note to convey this though, since Whale does not simply love his whole artistry. He shows a distinct hatred for the treatment of some of his work, and how his film making ended. Also a distaste for only being remembered for his monster pictures. He though still shows a true admiration for what he has done, and shows a sense of an accomplishment of his work. McKellen balances these feelings well, also Whale as he speaks of these films states everything as the real director of the film, which McKellen did perfectly.
His most dramatic moments are when Whale thinks about his past. McKellen really excels here because the past is shown to us, therefore he could have simply spoke of it and done nothing else but McKellen shows Whale own feelings on the matters mostly without words. He conveys both the happiness in his past with the pain of his losses exceedingly well. McKellen tells of these stories always with the right passive passion in a way that rings true to the character. McKellen brigns out all his past, his current lusts, and pains the most in his final moments. The final scene where he tries to bring his gardener Clay Boone (Brendan Frasier) to kill him by sexually advancing on him. McKellen is terrific in this penultimate scene, mixing the right intensity in his attempts to enrage the man to killing, along with showing his past once more, and his current pain he wants to end. It is a odd scenes in many ways but McKellen stays realistic and effective in this scene just as he is throughout the film.
Best Actor 1998
Ian McKellen in Gods and Monsters
Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan
Roberto Benigni in Life is Beautiful
Edward Norton in American History X
Nick Nolte in Affliction
Who do you predict, and pick?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
