Best film performances of 2003

I've seen all the major films from that year except In America, 21 Grams, American Splendor, Thirteen, the one that Patricia Clarkson was nominated for, Monster, Something's Gotta Give, Whale Rider, and Big Fish, so again, this is based on what I've seen. (Also haven't seen LOTR but that had no acting accolades)



Also, I honestly believe Jonny Depp was a supporting role, that's just me:



Picture:

1. Cold Mountain 2. Last Samurai 3. Seabiscuit 4. Mystic River 5. Master and Commander 6. Finding Nemo 7. X2 8. House of Sand and Fog 9. Pirates of the Carribean 10. Lost in Translation



Director:

1. Anthony Minghellia 2. Clint Eastwood 3. Peter Weir 4. Ed Zwick 5. Gore Verbinski



Actor: 1 (tie). Ben Kingsley-House of Sand and Fog & Jude Law-Cold Mountain 3. Sean Penn, Mystic River 4. Tobey MaGuire, Seabiscuit 5. Russell Crowe, Master and Commander

Notes: I love the role Kingsley chose. Most of the parts he plays are gangsters and hitmen and hear he choses an immigrant who works at a gas station trying to keep his dignity, what a great change of pace, and of course, his emotional scene where he goes through his son's death is immensely powerful. Jude Law, I felt was the heart and soul of Cold Mountain's journey, and through his transformation is how the film works. I think MaGuire's performance will always be overlooked in his career, or have people just given up on MaGuire by now?



Supp. Actor: 1. Jeff Bridges, Seabiscuit 2. Jonny Depp, Pirates of the Carribean 3 (tie). Alec Baldwin-The Cooler & Ken Wattanabe-Last Samurai 5. Paul Bettany-Master and Commander

Notes: I think Seabiscuit is basically a Disneyesque story of the underdog that overcomes the odds, and the reason why it resonated so well is that the actors put their heart and soul into it. Jeff Bridges has a certain calmness to him in this part of a man who's been through a lot that I haven't seen from him before. Depp, of course, does everything right with his character. He brings physical comedy, presence, and originality to the role. His character's schemes are so zany and improbable, yet it all seems believable with Depp.



Actress: 1. Scarlett Johannson-Lost in Translation 2. Jennifer Connelly-House of Sand and Fog 3. Nicole Kidman-Dogville 4. Charlotte Rampling-Swimming Pool 5. Brittney Murphy-Uptown Girls

Notes: Johannson is solemn, quiet, and reserved. It's hard to make a May-December romance look believable and she was very relatable. Connelly, of course, had a lot of desperation in her part, there was a lot of inner intensity to her, like someone who was on the edge. Uptown Girls was a small and insignificant film, I know, but Murphy really took the mediocre material and did something with it. Kidman was also good in Cold Mountain and had the added challenge of a Southern accent but Dogville, there was nothing but a soundstage and her acting so she had to win the viewer over with no added frills.



Supp. Actress: 1. Rene Zellweger, Cold Mountain 2. Marcia Gay Harden, Mystic River 3. Kiyoki, Last Samurai 4. Elizabeth Banks, Seabiscuit 5. Patricia Clarkson, Dogville Wasn't that much of a fan of Shoreh Aghdoshloo who was nominated in this category.

Notes: Zellweger was the best, but I think it was a weak year in this category. Dogville had a number of talented female leads, but Clarkson is the one from that film for me because she had the most believable transformation from innocent to evil that the town goes through, and she really nailed the scene where she breaks Nicole Kidman's dolls.



Ensemble: 1. House of Sand and Fog 2. Mystic River 3. Seabiscuit 4. Cold Mountain 5. Dogville

Review: All the King's Men

This is a review I wrote for All the King's Men that almost, almost got published by the Prince George's Sentinel (in MD) which is a dinky small paper that wouldn't have paid me much and i don't really like their format much anyway, to be honest, but still they were nice enough to offer me the chance to go out of my way to see the movie and write them a review and send it into them. One interesting thing about this review is that, oddly enough, i didn't like the movie, i was planning on writing about the positives and then the negatives but by the time i got through with the positives, i was out of word space, so i just sent it in.:

Admittingly, the bar is set pretty high to start with for All the King’s Men. For one, a picture that was originally acclaimed to the point of winning a best picture oscar doesn’t really call out to be remade unless it can be enhanced with special effects like this past December’s King Kong. The cast is also populated by a cast overstuffed with Oscar-starved actors who armed with dialect coaches are eager to pounce come awards season. Whether this political drama will actually deliver come January is one that most critics are answering no to and while that’s understandable, the film is certainly worth a look.

The 2006 version of All the King’s Men was adapted for the screen by James Carville, well-known political consultant and former host of CNN’s Crossfire. Carville was inspired to delve into screenwriting out of a love for the 1946 book and wrote the screenplay without so much as a glance of the 1949 screen adaptation. Penned by Robert Penn Warren, the Pullitzer Prize-winning novel is a profound epic and by adapting this story to screen, the film benefits from having a classically-concieved story that’s as rich as few other films today are.

The novel is based on the life of Louisiana governor and champion of the poor Huey Long. The title, in fact, comes from the motto “Every man a King” of Long’s Share the Wealth initiative which he used to redistribute wealth and pull people out of depression. Long was a very curious political figure which the movie to some extent mines with its fictitional protagonist Willie Stark. Played by Sean Penn in a thick accent, Stark comes across as a simpleton with petty desires but has the ability and drive to inspire people with profound sayings such as, “Your will is my strength,” and “You work for me because I am the way I am, and you are the way you are and that’s just an arrangement found in the natural order of things.” However, the core of the film really lies within Jude Law’s Jack Burden, a reporter-turned-right-hand-man for Stark who’s torn between loyalty to Stark’s ideals and his godfather (Anthony Hopkins) and best friend (Ruffalo) who both oppose Stark. Law carries the part ably and through him, the story becomes more of a contemplative study of values and Sothern life reminiscent of To Kill a Mockingbird or A Time to Kill. If there is one main weakness to the film however, it’s that a lot of the questions of right and wrong, and whether the symbol of an honest politician is a myth, get muddled up through a somewhat confusing plot and a lack of clarity over who’s doing what to whom and why.

All the King’s Men released in the akward buffer between summer blockbusters and the Oscar-caliber season will understandably suffer but is worth seeing.

Film accents

I saw the Departed tonight, and among other things I was thinking about accents. This movie is basically like Goodfellas in Boston, and every actor in the movie made a conscious effort to sound a little more Bostontonian with his or her accent, which begs the question, what about Matt Damon? He's actually from Boston so why did he have to change his accent at all. Maybe since Matt Damon hasn't lived in Boston, or has done a lot of other movies that required a lot of different accents, in a while he felt he needed to overcompensate? The last movie I saw before this was All the King's Men and everyone in that movie really got into their Cajun accents, except for Patrticia Clarkson who just talked like she usually does. I looked it up, and Patricia Clarkson is from New Orleans, so she was smart to save herself the effort and cost of a dialect coach. It also means that she really is the standard by which all of the stars should've measured themselves in preparing for the role.