Morgan Freeman in Seven
|
|
|---|
Showing posts with label Anthony Hopkins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anthony Hopkins. Show all posts
Best Actor 1995: Results
Morgan Freeman in Seven
Best Actor 1995: Anthony Hopkins in Nixon
Anthony Hopkins received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Richard Nixon in Nixon.
Nixon is Oliver Stone' none too subtle film about Richard M. Nixon. Although it really is not very believable, and every point is hammered in far too much, it actually is watchable and moves along surprisingly well for a three hour film.
The really is not a single subtle thing about the whole film including say Stone's constant editing, his rather evil sounding soundtrack, or some of those scenes particularly the one with Mao Zedong as well as Anthony Hopkins' performance. Hopkins does not go for a subtle, underplaying portrayal of Nixon for a second in this film.
Nixon is portrayed rather oddly throughout the film, and not only by Hopkins himself. Hopkins is simply made up in such a fashion to make him simply bizarre with his hair, makeup, and sweat. Nixon certainly was not a standard looking chap, but he was not this odd looking. This is not helped by Hopkins either though.
The way Hopkins stands as Nixon is a complete characterture, his posture everything is basically a cartoonish portrait of Nixon that is rather hard to believe. Hopkins sort of does a Nixon voice as well, but not really a bold one ever. I'd say his accent actually is the least distracting part of his performance. It still is not Nixon's voice though, something many actors have a problem with for some reason.
Hopkins actually in this film never looked like Nixon, but even more than that, I felt he looked frankly like some sort of strange creature the whole time. Nixon always looks a little too out of place, yes he is suppose to be a perpetual outsider, but this is too much, he just does not look like a human which is very distracting. I think this is particularly not helped by his constant awkward mouth movements, and tongue movements which fails to suggest the actual Nixon properly.
Hopkins actual performance therefore is already not exactly going to be convincing unless he is extremely good, which he really isn't. Due to the fact that this is Oliver Stone, Hopkins always must portray Nixon is basically the same fashion throughout. Nixon is a paranoid mess from beginning to end, allowing for no real transition to occur.
Hopkins portrays Nixon as a socially inept man, too inept really to make believable that he ever was able to be a politician, he is frankly just too grotesque in his portrayal to be believed. I just never bought the characterization because it never made completely sense, Hopkins portrayed him as too much of an insane lunatic, without even a what seems a single logical notion in his head, which is exactly what Stone wanted I'm sure, but it does not exactly make a truly believable character.
I did not see how Nixon could accomplish a single thing he really did from really romancing Pat Nixon, or convincing to stay with him, or running his successful political campaign or having the ability to keep anyone with him. The problem is I think is Nixon almost always seems like an utter incompetent, with Hopkins even in scenes where he is suppose to be in control I just did not by it because Hopkins' method of portraying him.
Hopkins certainly has a moment or too I think such as when he reflects about his past with his brothers which is done well enough, as well as suggesting the sad state of his character, without overdoing it like the rest of his character. Hopkins handles quite well in fact in his way of showing how his parents deeply left a mark he was never able to be rid of.
The rest of his Nixon is just really too flawed for its own good, yes he could have been a complete evil doer, but I think frankly he should have seemed a little more charismatic, and able one to make this story actually believable. I will just say compare his addresses to the real footage of Nixon it just does not much up in far too many ways. This is not an entirely bad performance though, and I am sure it is the type the director wanted. The performance though still is always a bit too much.
The really is not a single subtle thing about the whole film including say Stone's constant editing, his rather evil sounding soundtrack, or some of those scenes particularly the one with Mao Zedong as well as Anthony Hopkins' performance. Hopkins does not go for a subtle, underplaying portrayal of Nixon for a second in this film.
Nixon is portrayed rather oddly throughout the film, and not only by Hopkins himself. Hopkins is simply made up in such a fashion to make him simply bizarre with his hair, makeup, and sweat. Nixon certainly was not a standard looking chap, but he was not this odd looking. This is not helped by Hopkins either though.
The way Hopkins stands as Nixon is a complete characterture, his posture everything is basically a cartoonish portrait of Nixon that is rather hard to believe. Hopkins sort of does a Nixon voice as well, but not really a bold one ever. I'd say his accent actually is the least distracting part of his performance. It still is not Nixon's voice though, something many actors have a problem with for some reason.
Hopkins actually in this film never looked like Nixon, but even more than that, I felt he looked frankly like some sort of strange creature the whole time. Nixon always looks a little too out of place, yes he is suppose to be a perpetual outsider, but this is too much, he just does not look like a human which is very distracting. I think this is particularly not helped by his constant awkward mouth movements, and tongue movements which fails to suggest the actual Nixon properly.
Hopkins actual performance therefore is already not exactly going to be convincing unless he is extremely good, which he really isn't. Due to the fact that this is Oliver Stone, Hopkins always must portray Nixon is basically the same fashion throughout. Nixon is a paranoid mess from beginning to end, allowing for no real transition to occur.
Hopkins portrays Nixon as a socially inept man, too inept really to make believable that he ever was able to be a politician, he is frankly just too grotesque in his portrayal to be believed. I just never bought the characterization because it never made completely sense, Hopkins portrayed him as too much of an insane lunatic, without even a what seems a single logical notion in his head, which is exactly what Stone wanted I'm sure, but it does not exactly make a truly believable character.
I did not see how Nixon could accomplish a single thing he really did from really romancing Pat Nixon, or convincing to stay with him, or running his successful political campaign or having the ability to keep anyone with him. The problem is I think is Nixon almost always seems like an utter incompetent, with Hopkins even in scenes where he is suppose to be in control I just did not by it because Hopkins' method of portraying him.
Hopkins certainly has a moment or too I think such as when he reflects about his past with his brothers which is done well enough, as well as suggesting the sad state of his character, without overdoing it like the rest of his character. Hopkins handles quite well in fact in his way of showing how his parents deeply left a mark he was never able to be rid of.
The rest of his Nixon is just really too flawed for its own good, yes he could have been a complete evil doer, but I think frankly he should have seemed a little more charismatic, and able one to make this story actually believable. I will just say compare his addresses to the real footage of Nixon it just does not much up in far too many ways. This is not an entirely bad performance though, and I am sure it is the type the director wanted. The performance though still is always a bit too much.
Best Actor 1995
Sean Penn in Dead Man Walking
Anthony Hopkins in Nixon
Nicolas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas
Richard Dreyfuss in Mr. Holland's Opus
Massimo Troisi in The Postman
Best Actor 1991: Results
John Turturro in Barton Fink
Best Actor 1991: Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs
Anthony Hopkins won an Oscar from his first nomination for portraying psychotic cannibalistic killer Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs.
The Silence of the Lambs is a very effective psychological thriller and certainly is far superior than the other films with nominees for best actor this year.
One question commonly asked about Hopkins' performance is whether it is lead or supporting. This performance is one that seems to defy these distinctions, because it is incredibly short in terms of screen time, and his character is not the focus of the film. He though is one of if not the most memorable part of the film, and still seems absolutely essential to the film, despite not even really being the villain of the film. His performance really is one that I am not sure which he is but due to the quality of the rest of the actor nominees I would most certainly put his performance in the lead category.
Hopkins performance is a short one for sure, and one that can actually easily be reviewed by each of his individual scenes. Hopkins' opening scene is actually one of incredible challenge, because of the huge build up to his appearance made as Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) makes her way to him. Hopkins certainly utilizes this to great effect, since he makes a big impression as the camera pans over him oddly standing in the middle of his cell. Hopkins performance is fascinating because I am sure the way he stands and moves, the way he looks with his eyes, and his voice were all very calculated, yet in the film his performance never comes off this way. Some how it is never artificial despite the nature of the character. His first scene Hopkins brilliantly controls the film, with the way he tries to manipulate Starling. Hopkins instantly shows us a man psychotic, without showing him doing any violence, and a man with complete control of his surrounding despite the fact that he is a prisoner in a glass cell.
Foster and Hopkins simply create fascinating scenes together. They play off each other perfectly in all of their scenes, developing a bizarre yet strangely interesting relationship. They play an odd game of sorts for Hannibal's enjoyment and for Starling need for information about another killer Buffalo Bill. The game they play together could not have been done any better or more effective they simply brilliant together. Hopkins is always fascinating because of how carefully and perfectly he displays Hannibal's mile a minute mind. He reacts and attack Starling, and Hopkins does this perfectly with his manner of speaking with that brilliant voice he uses, who knew a combination of Truman Capote and Katherine would be so viscerally effective, and with his eyes which are always piercing through, like Hannibal sees everything at all times. He mixes his odd love for Starling but also his love for the game like competition of minds without fault.
Hopkins keeps Hannibal on the right note and tone in all of his brief scenes and always makes the most of his screen time. He never over acts even though it would be so easy too, he always knows exactly to play a scene and simply gives a truly great villainous performance. Every moment in his performance really is spot on. Especially the use of his face and eyes, and certainly makes the most of every close up he has. He always conveys the evilness, psychotics and genius of Hannibal in every scene. Hopkins properly never stops with him, every scene even when he is reacting you can always see he is looking for weakness, and his chances in every moment, simply a brilliant performance. Hopkins gives makes one of the most memorable characters all in a short amount of screen time. He never faults once in a performance that could have been full of them, and gives a truly unforgettable performance.
One question commonly asked about Hopkins' performance is whether it is lead or supporting. This performance is one that seems to defy these distinctions, because it is incredibly short in terms of screen time, and his character is not the focus of the film. He though is one of if not the most memorable part of the film, and still seems absolutely essential to the film, despite not even really being the villain of the film. His performance really is one that I am not sure which he is but due to the quality of the rest of the actor nominees I would most certainly put his performance in the lead category.
Hopkins performance is a short one for sure, and one that can actually easily be reviewed by each of his individual scenes. Hopkins' opening scene is actually one of incredible challenge, because of the huge build up to his appearance made as Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) makes her way to him. Hopkins certainly utilizes this to great effect, since he makes a big impression as the camera pans over him oddly standing in the middle of his cell. Hopkins performance is fascinating because I am sure the way he stands and moves, the way he looks with his eyes, and his voice were all very calculated, yet in the film his performance never comes off this way. Some how it is never artificial despite the nature of the character. His first scene Hopkins brilliantly controls the film, with the way he tries to manipulate Starling. Hopkins instantly shows us a man psychotic, without showing him doing any violence, and a man with complete control of his surrounding despite the fact that he is a prisoner in a glass cell.
Foster and Hopkins simply create fascinating scenes together. They play off each other perfectly in all of their scenes, developing a bizarre yet strangely interesting relationship. They play an odd game of sorts for Hannibal's enjoyment and for Starling need for information about another killer Buffalo Bill. The game they play together could not have been done any better or more effective they simply brilliant together. Hopkins is always fascinating because of how carefully and perfectly he displays Hannibal's mile a minute mind. He reacts and attack Starling, and Hopkins does this perfectly with his manner of speaking with that brilliant voice he uses, who knew a combination of Truman Capote and Katherine would be so viscerally effective, and with his eyes which are always piercing through, like Hannibal sees everything at all times. He mixes his odd love for Starling but also his love for the game like competition of minds without fault.
Hopkins keeps Hannibal on the right note and tone in all of his brief scenes and always makes the most of his screen time. He never over acts even though it would be so easy too, he always knows exactly to play a scene and simply gives a truly great villainous performance. Every moment in his performance really is spot on. Especially the use of his face and eyes, and certainly makes the most of every close up he has. He always conveys the evilness, psychotics and genius of Hannibal in every scene. Hopkins properly never stops with him, every scene even when he is reacting you can always see he is looking for weakness, and his chances in every moment, simply a brilliant performance. Hopkins gives makes one of the most memorable characters all in a short amount of screen time. He never faults once in a performance that could have been full of them, and gives a truly unforgettable performance.
Best Actor 1991
Robert De Niro in Cape Fear
Warren Beatty in Bugsy
Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs
Robin Williams in The Fisher King
Nick Nolte in The Prince of Tides
Here is the special Halloween edition of Best Actor, since there is not anything scarier than Bugsy, The Fisher King, and the Prince of Tides.
Best Supporting Actor 1997: Results
4. Anthony Hopkins in Amistad- Hopkins is very good as John Quincy Adams, playing the part as it should be played, with a very good final speech.
3. Greg Kinnear in As Good As It Gets- Greg Kinnear is very good in all his scenes and shows the changes of his character well, even in amidst of bad writing.
Kevin Spacey in L.A. Confidential
Best Supporting Actor 1997: Anthony Hopkins in Amistad
Anthony Hopkins received his fourth Oscar nomination for portraying the elderly John Quincy Adams in Amistad.
As much as I always am interested in history, and historical films this film bored me most of the time. It was too slow and stale and left most of the character underdeveloped. It does feel too much like a history lesson, but it does not even have all of its facts right.
Anthony Hopkins plays Quincy Adams who in this film is an old man but still involved in politics enough to help the slaves who revolted on the Amistad ship. As Adams, Hopkins drifts in and out of the film showing slight interest in the case early on and then eventually defending enslaved people in front of the supreme court. Hopkins is just fine in all of his scenes. I like the voices he uses for Adams and he certainly looks a lot like Adams in this film. He does his best possible job at being Adams without ever really seeming to force any mannerisms or anything like that. He does just a good job of being the historical person who he is portraying. His character is not overly complex and is a part that is more functionary. Still though Hopkins fully fulfills the function as well as possible. He sells Adams's age well and never does not seem as he should be. He mostly just has short little conversations that Hopkins does a fine job with, that is until the his final big speech in front of the supreme court. Hopkins does a very good job with the speech making it pretty effective abut still it is not one of the greatest ever, just a good end speech. Overall he is just fine throughout and I wish a little more of the movie had been about him because Hopkins does quite well even without really that complex of a character.
Anthony Hopkins plays Quincy Adams who in this film is an old man but still involved in politics enough to help the slaves who revolted on the Amistad ship. As Adams, Hopkins drifts in and out of the film showing slight interest in the case early on and then eventually defending enslaved people in front of the supreme court. Hopkins is just fine in all of his scenes. I like the voices he uses for Adams and he certainly looks a lot like Adams in this film. He does his best possible job at being Adams without ever really seeming to force any mannerisms or anything like that. He does just a good job of being the historical person who he is portraying. His character is not overly complex and is a part that is more functionary. Still though Hopkins fully fulfills the function as well as possible. He sells Adams's age well and never does not seem as he should be. He mostly just has short little conversations that Hopkins does a fine job with, that is until the his final big speech in front of the supreme court. Hopkins does a very good job with the speech making it pretty effective abut still it is not one of the greatest ever, just a good end speech. Overall he is just fine throughout and I wish a little more of the movie had been about him because Hopkins does quite well even without really that complex of a character.
Best Supporting Actor 1997
Robert Forster in Jackie Brown
Anthony Hopkins in Amistad
Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting
Burt Reynolds in Boogie Nights
Greg Kinnear in As Good As It Gets
Who do you pick? What do you predict my ranking will be?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
