Darren McGavin in A Christmas Story
Ed Harris in The Right Stuff
Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2005: Ed Harris in A History of Violence
Ed Harris did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Carl Fogarty in A History of Violence.Ed Harris portrays the Philadelphia gangster who comes looking for diner owner Tom Stall who recently killed two men trying to rob his diner..
Best Supporting Actor 2011: Nick Nolte in Warrior
Nick Nolte received his third Oscar nomination for portraying Paddy Conlon in Warrior.Warrior details a winner take all mixed martial art tournament whose two main combatants are estranged brothers (Tom Hardy, Joel Edgerton) fighting for their own difficult reasons.
Alternate Best Actor 2011
And the Nominees Were Not:Ryan Gosling in DriveRobert Wieckiewicz in In DarknessMichael Fassbender in ShameMichael Shannon in Take ShelterBrendan Gleeson in The Guard..
Showing posts with label 1983 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1983 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983: Results
Darren McGavin in A Christmas Story
Ed Harris in The Right Stuff
Best Supporting Actor 1983: Charles Durning in To Be Or Not To Be
Charles Durning received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Colonel Erhardt in To Be Or Not To Be.
To Be Or Not To Be is the Mel Brooks remake of the comedy about a group of actors who try to foil a Nazi plot in Warsaw Poland.
Charles Durning I must say must have been a popular, or very well liked guy during 82 and 83, since both times he was nominated for films in which he was the sole nomination. Also both films were unsuccessful in some way his Whorehouse critically, this film commercially. Also just like his first nomination his role is quite small and only in a few scenes. It would seem there had to be some other reason he was nominated these two times, like people were not sure who to put in a blank spot and said I like Charles Durning I'll vote for him. I suppose why not as Durning is always a competent character actor, and at least this time he was nominated for the right performance unlike in 1982.
Durning portray one of the many bumbling Nazis in To Be Or Not To Be who are fooled by the actors. I must say I enjoyed the three main Nazi villains who all are amusing in their own. Jose Ferrer was pretty good as a treacherous professor, and Christopher Lloyd has some very enjoyable scenes with Durning as an S.S. Captain and S.S. Colonel respectively. Lloyd being an absolutely no nonsense Captain following order and always claiming not knowing anything, whereas Durning is the more casual superior who is constantly blaming others for any problems or even sometimes even making a joke at Hitler's expense.
Durning is not particularly threatening, only Ferrer has any sort of menace as a villain, but that is really the point of his character. The Colonel is just suppose to be a comical character. Durning is enjoyable enough particularly in his exchanges with Christopher Lloyd with Durning being the more explosively comical one and Lloyd acting as the strange man. They both have a fun dynamic as the two act surprised at their failures with Lloyd being taken aback, and Durning always yelling at Lloyd to always try to remove any blame from himself.
Durning is also enjoyable when he is being constantly surprised by the various impersonations the actors do to fool him. Although most of what he does is make a surprised look, or plead not to have his Hitler jokes revealed Durning still manages not to be repetitive and I certainly did continually get a chuckle out of his antics. Also I will give Durning credit he really does not go over the top with his performance, and is probably funnier because of it. He is always a Nazi officer who is bumbler acting this way not just an actor doing crazy things as characters very often become.
I must say this is an entertaining performance from Charles Durning even though it is quite simple, but hey he stays funny in all of his scenes even if he only has a few of them. I would say though that he is not the best part of the film, combined with Christopher Lloyd he is the best part of the film, and alone he is just one of the most enjoyable films. I probably should say this is not the greatest comedy ever but I laughed enough to say it was still a good one and to his credit most of the laughs in the film came from Durning. This is not the most complex of performances but Durning certainly puts his all into being funny, and he is, so mission accomplished.
Charles Durning I must say must have been a popular, or very well liked guy during 82 and 83, since both times he was nominated for films in which he was the sole nomination. Also both films were unsuccessful in some way his Whorehouse critically, this film commercially. Also just like his first nomination his role is quite small and only in a few scenes. It would seem there had to be some other reason he was nominated these two times, like people were not sure who to put in a blank spot and said I like Charles Durning I'll vote for him. I suppose why not as Durning is always a competent character actor, and at least this time he was nominated for the right performance unlike in 1982.
Durning portray one of the many bumbling Nazis in To Be Or Not To Be who are fooled by the actors. I must say I enjoyed the three main Nazi villains who all are amusing in their own. Jose Ferrer was pretty good as a treacherous professor, and Christopher Lloyd has some very enjoyable scenes with Durning as an S.S. Captain and S.S. Colonel respectively. Lloyd being an absolutely no nonsense Captain following order and always claiming not knowing anything, whereas Durning is the more casual superior who is constantly blaming others for any problems or even sometimes even making a joke at Hitler's expense.
Durning is not particularly threatening, only Ferrer has any sort of menace as a villain, but that is really the point of his character. The Colonel is just suppose to be a comical character. Durning is enjoyable enough particularly in his exchanges with Christopher Lloyd with Durning being the more explosively comical one and Lloyd acting as the strange man. They both have a fun dynamic as the two act surprised at their failures with Lloyd being taken aback, and Durning always yelling at Lloyd to always try to remove any blame from himself.
Durning is also enjoyable when he is being constantly surprised by the various impersonations the actors do to fool him. Although most of what he does is make a surprised look, or plead not to have his Hitler jokes revealed Durning still manages not to be repetitive and I certainly did continually get a chuckle out of his antics. Also I will give Durning credit he really does not go over the top with his performance, and is probably funnier because of it. He is always a Nazi officer who is bumbler acting this way not just an actor doing crazy things as characters very often become.
I must say this is an entertaining performance from Charles Durning even though it is quite simple, but hey he stays funny in all of his scenes even if he only has a few of them. I would say though that he is not the best part of the film, combined with Christopher Lloyd he is the best part of the film, and alone he is just one of the most enjoyable films. I probably should say this is not the greatest comedy ever but I laughed enough to say it was still a good one and to his credit most of the laughs in the film came from Durning. This is not the most complex of performances but Durning certainly puts his all into being funny, and he is, so mission accomplished.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983: Sam Shepard in The Right Stuff
Sam Shepard received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Chuck Yeager in The Right Stuff.
The Right Stuff tells of test pilots who later become astronauts due to the space race.
The Right Stuff is an ensemble film but at the very beginning of the film Sam Shepard is the lead of the film as test pilot Chuck Yeager who is the first pilot to break the sound barrier. Sam Shepard takes quite a low key approach to his performance which certainly makes sense for Yeager who is a man of a very few words. Yeager although is in many ways an unassuming man, he at the same time is a man of great presence. Shepard does hold the screen as Yeager showing always that Yeager although quiet is an unmistakably strong willed man. Shepard makes Yeager a man who says more in one word than many would in a speech.
Yeager is always sure of himself, and ready for anything. Shepard makes Yeager's reaction to being challenged by the idea of breaking the sound barrier barely something that even phases him. Shepard is excellent here because he never makes Yeager seem like some sort of pompous man at all, even though he is shrugging off doing something that seemed impossible as almost nothing. Shepard brings a certain somewhat almost otherworldly quality to Yeager. He is a man who is simply completely true to himself he understands his own abilities, and knows there is no reason to ever sell himself short.
Shepard brings to life Yeager's complete self efficacy flawlessly. In short Shepard never lies in his performance. All of Yeager's complete self assurance, and confidence never seems forced for a moment. Shepard is the man in total control of his situation, and without a hint of hesitation or fear for situation despite the very likely chance of dying faced by all test pilots. When Yeager decides to proceed with his considered by some impossible task without a second thought despite having broken two of his ribs in a horse riding and needing a broom handle to properly secure that his jet's door is closed, we do not give it a second thought because brings to life this uninhibited confidence and drive perfectly.
After achieving his mission Yeager no longer is the main character as the film focuses on the first astronauts while Yeager rebukes the whole idea of being one believing the pilot is not an important facet of the whole thing. Yeager does not completely disappear as it shows the stories of the astronauts rather it comes back to him every so often to show how the attention has gone away from the original pilots, as well as Yeager's own changes in view toward the concept of being an astronaut. These scenes are short and of course with few spoken words, but again Shepard is flawless in his conveying of how Yeager sees the astronauts as more than spam in a can.
This is a good performance by Sam Shepard and he creates a vivid portrait of this remarkable man. Shepard manages to do this despite the fact he really does not have a single scene in which delves deep into his character. This is a performance that is constantly on the move, and is a performance that is very much in the moment. Shepard though makes the most of each and every one of these moments. Shepard always keeps us interested in Yeager even in just those short later scenes. He does not have a single wasted second in his performance, and makes Chuck Yeager the exact sort of man the title of the film refers to.
Yeager is always sure of himself, and ready for anything. Shepard makes Yeager's reaction to being challenged by the idea of breaking the sound barrier barely something that even phases him. Shepard is excellent here because he never makes Yeager seem like some sort of pompous man at all, even though he is shrugging off doing something that seemed impossible as almost nothing. Shepard brings a certain somewhat almost otherworldly quality to Yeager. He is a man who is simply completely true to himself he understands his own abilities, and knows there is no reason to ever sell himself short.
Shepard brings to life Yeager's complete self efficacy flawlessly. In short Shepard never lies in his performance. All of Yeager's complete self assurance, and confidence never seems forced for a moment. Shepard is the man in total control of his situation, and without a hint of hesitation or fear for situation despite the very likely chance of dying faced by all test pilots. When Yeager decides to proceed with his considered by some impossible task without a second thought despite having broken two of his ribs in a horse riding and needing a broom handle to properly secure that his jet's door is closed, we do not give it a second thought because brings to life this uninhibited confidence and drive perfectly.
After achieving his mission Yeager no longer is the main character as the film focuses on the first astronauts while Yeager rebukes the whole idea of being one believing the pilot is not an important facet of the whole thing. Yeager does not completely disappear as it shows the stories of the astronauts rather it comes back to him every so often to show how the attention has gone away from the original pilots, as well as Yeager's own changes in view toward the concept of being an astronaut. These scenes are short and of course with few spoken words, but again Shepard is flawless in his conveying of how Yeager sees the astronauts as more than spam in a can.
This is a good performance by Sam Shepard and he creates a vivid portrait of this remarkable man. Shepard manages to do this despite the fact he really does not have a single scene in which delves deep into his character. This is a performance that is constantly on the move, and is a performance that is very much in the moment. Shepard though makes the most of each and every one of these moments. Shepard always keeps us interested in Yeager even in just those short later scenes. He does not have a single wasted second in his performance, and makes Chuck Yeager the exact sort of man the title of the film refers to.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983: Rip Torn in Cross Creek
Rip Torn received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Marsh Turner in Cross Creek.
Cross Creek tells the true story Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings (Mary Steenburgen) attempting to find inspiration to right by moving to a backwoods Florida town.
Rip Torn portrays one of the residents of the town Marsh Turner, and something interesting about Torn's nomination is that Torn is portraying a character who was the inspiration for an earlier Oscar nominated character. The character portrayed by Gregory Peck in The Yearling who was nominated in the lead role. It almost two actors playing the same character though since they were really both are supporting characters in their films, Peck's lead position most likely came from merely his leading man status. Both portray a farming father in the backwoods of Florida, and both are forced to separate their child from their pet Doe who after growing up threatens the family's livelihood.
In every way, and I mean every way Torn's performance is better than Gregory Peck's. Where Peck downright struggled to find an accent to fits his character's very specific dialect. Torn is actually quite natural though with accent that fits his character well and shows us where he is from. A southern style accent really is one of the most easily distracting accents, especially when done poorly. Peck for example tried to avoid kind of, but instead just sounded unnatural reciting the dialect of the region. Torn handles it especially well that only succeeds in amplifying his character, and certainly making his dialect seem like just part of the man as a whole.
A great deal of his performance is just creating this somewhat unusual man with his very distinct lifestyle. Torn is effective in doing this in a rather simple fashion by not trying to ever make his character overly colorful. Torn plays it straight and just wants to show Marsh as a the man he is. Torn effectively conveys the whole history of not only this man but also the state of the people in Cross Creek. In his manner, the way he talks the way he walks he shows the experience of this man's hard life that is very specific to his land, he shows the whole sometimes very difficult life of this man in his performance.
Marsh Tuner in the film is a man who is very much rough around the edges. He is uncouth, and not always careful particularly with his pigs. He never quite seems to be fully able to express himself perfectly, or understand the manners others go by. Nevertheless he has a distinct moral code, and is a gentleman in heart. Torn again brings this to life well. He subtly shows that inside his rather crude exterior is a good man, it is not in a way in which he actively tries to be good. Torn rather that there is an inherit morality in the man, that when he is forced to he can't help but express it. He presents it as just the natural reaction of Marsh no matter the situation.
The pivotal moments of his performance do come when he kills his daughter doe. The Yearling biggest problem was the lack of weight brought by Peck in these scenes where the death of his son only friend seemed to barely phase him. Torn on the other hand brings the true weight of the scene through his performance. Torn rather brings to life the incredible pain and sorrow that Marsh feels for doing this to his daughter, whom he loves, even though it is what he has to do. His final scenes are heartbreaking as he brings us into Marsh's drunken despair he feels for what he has done.
This is a good performance by Rip Torn that realizes his unique character effectively. It is also interesting to see how Rip Torn succeeds with his character in the ways in which Gregory Peck failed in his portrayal of almost the same one. I would say it is not an incredible performance as it is held back a little just by the time the film devotes to him, at times his character seems a little too much like an after thought, and his interactions with the Steenburgen's character frankly could have been more fleshed out sense I think the film could have used more of his character. Still this is a good performance that fulfills his role well.
Rip Torn portrays one of the residents of the town Marsh Turner, and something interesting about Torn's nomination is that Torn is portraying a character who was the inspiration for an earlier Oscar nominated character. The character portrayed by Gregory Peck in The Yearling who was nominated in the lead role. It almost two actors playing the same character though since they were really both are supporting characters in their films, Peck's lead position most likely came from merely his leading man status. Both portray a farming father in the backwoods of Florida, and both are forced to separate their child from their pet Doe who after growing up threatens the family's livelihood.
In every way, and I mean every way Torn's performance is better than Gregory Peck's. Where Peck downright struggled to find an accent to fits his character's very specific dialect. Torn is actually quite natural though with accent that fits his character well and shows us where he is from. A southern style accent really is one of the most easily distracting accents, especially when done poorly. Peck for example tried to avoid kind of, but instead just sounded unnatural reciting the dialect of the region. Torn handles it especially well that only succeeds in amplifying his character, and certainly making his dialect seem like just part of the man as a whole.
A great deal of his performance is just creating this somewhat unusual man with his very distinct lifestyle. Torn is effective in doing this in a rather simple fashion by not trying to ever make his character overly colorful. Torn plays it straight and just wants to show Marsh as a the man he is. Torn effectively conveys the whole history of not only this man but also the state of the people in Cross Creek. In his manner, the way he talks the way he walks he shows the experience of this man's hard life that is very specific to his land, he shows the whole sometimes very difficult life of this man in his performance.
Marsh Tuner in the film is a man who is very much rough around the edges. He is uncouth, and not always careful particularly with his pigs. He never quite seems to be fully able to express himself perfectly, or understand the manners others go by. Nevertheless he has a distinct moral code, and is a gentleman in heart. Torn again brings this to life well. He subtly shows that inside his rather crude exterior is a good man, it is not in a way in which he actively tries to be good. Torn rather that there is an inherit morality in the man, that when he is forced to he can't help but express it. He presents it as just the natural reaction of Marsh no matter the situation.
The pivotal moments of his performance do come when he kills his daughter doe. The Yearling biggest problem was the lack of weight brought by Peck in these scenes where the death of his son only friend seemed to barely phase him. Torn on the other hand brings the true weight of the scene through his performance. Torn rather brings to life the incredible pain and sorrow that Marsh feels for doing this to his daughter, whom he loves, even though it is what he has to do. His final scenes are heartbreaking as he brings us into Marsh's drunken despair he feels for what he has done.
This is a good performance by Rip Torn that realizes his unique character effectively. It is also interesting to see how Rip Torn succeeds with his character in the ways in which Gregory Peck failed in his portrayal of almost the same one. I would say it is not an incredible performance as it is held back a little just by the time the film devotes to him, at times his character seems a little too much like an after thought, and his interactions with the Steenburgen's character frankly could have been more fleshed out sense I think the film could have used more of his character. Still this is a good performance that fulfills his role well.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983: Jack Nicholson in Terms of Endearment
Jack Nicholson won his second Oscar from his seventh nomination for portraying Garrett Breedlove in Terms of Endearment.
Jack Nicholson is an actor who I think highly of, as he had one of the greatest strings of performances of any actor during the 70's. Nicholson though is an actor whose qualities did downturn a bit from the 80's on though. This mostly seemed to result from Nicholson almost being too aware that he is a great actor that he wasn't nearly as great. Don't get me wrong Nicholson still gave great performances such as with the three performances in which I give him the win Ironweed, Reds, and About Schmidt. The thing is all three of those performances have something in common all three of them are very non Nicholson style performances.
Now it is true that I loved all of Nicholson's nominated work in the seventies all four of those performances are oustanding. It is also true that some of those performances particularly One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest and Chinatown are completely filled with Nicholson's unique style. The only thing was in the seventies Nicholson used his unique styles always within in characterizations creating remarkable portraits of the men he portrayed. Later on Nicholson started doing his mannerism as a separation thing that he just has to do, and he stopped using them as effectively because of this reason. In fact this is a problem I have with many of his later performance, particularly his work in The Departed because that was just one long over the top Nicholson mannerism fest.
Finally to get to the point is that his use of his mannerisms always seem to be Nicholson performing them rather than actually being part of the character in this performance. This is especially true early in his performance as he almost wants to make an impact in his short scenes by doing his trademark shtick. It just never seems completely true to his character, in fact it is actually a bit distracting. Luckily though Nicholson after his somewhat shaky early scenes does settle down, and actually delves into becoming his character. I don't want to be mistaken though Nicholson is not bad in these scenes, just more of a little too self indulgent and obvious for his own good.
Later on in the film when his character of the womanizing, thrill seeking former astronaut starts a relationship with Aurora Greenway (Shirley MacLaine) Nicholson certainly comes into the role quickly. He certainly is appropriately boisterous and energetic in his role. His character just wants to enjoy life to its fullest, as almost compensate for the fact that he will never have his biggest thrill again which was to go into outer space. Nicholson has a great joy of performance here that works perfectly for his character who only wants to enjoy himself. Nicholson's smile is constantly on display here, and it certainly fits for his sometimes devious character.
Although Nicholson somewhat became typecast as the love interest for a reserved as well as strong willed woman as seen in As Good As It Gets, and Something's Gotta Give his dynamic with Shirley MacLaine certainly does work here, and it shows why Nicholson probably found him self cast in films with rather similar situations. Nicholson always shows the womanizing Garrett early on trying every trick he knows to try to get his way with Aurora, but is rather flabbergasted by the response he gets. Nicholson plays this well finding a great deal of humor in the Garrett's attempts, as well as his reactions to Aurora's sometimes quite stern responses.
Even though their relationship at first is mostly a series of comedic exchanges caused by their personalities a love relationship eventually does develop. This is not a long precise one, but the actors portray it convincingly. Nicholson carefully but effectively shows the deepening of the relationship almost by Garrett letting loose just a bit, and showing Garrett turns off the part of him that wants just instant gratification. It is a subtle transition but very well handled by Nicholson.
Later on in the film though Garrett becomes hesitant to pursue the relationship due the commitment he is feeling toward something the freewheeling astronaut wants to avoid. Nicholson is good in these later scenes showing Garrett a very much confused man who wants to be there for Aurora to some extent yet at the same time does not want to become too involved either. It is certainly a strange combination of emotion, but Nicholson brings to life wonderfully. He shows him as a man who is always contemplating his situation at almost all times, although Nicholson even in the most serious scenes keeps just the right glint of Garrett's more mischievous side.
All things considered this is a good performance from Nicholson. Creating an entertaining presence for the film and an effective foil for MacLaine's Aurora. I will say that I do not put it as a great performance, or as one of Nicholson's very best. It never achieves the greatness of his earlier work, and part of the reason I would say is his overuse of his trademark mannerisms early in the film, when he could have shown as more of Garrett at that point. Instead too many of his early scenes feel like Nicholson just doing his thing rather than a full fledged character. Nevertheless he does find his character as the film progresses that I would still say this is an enjoyable somewhat standard performance by a great actor.
Now it is true that I loved all of Nicholson's nominated work in the seventies all four of those performances are oustanding. It is also true that some of those performances particularly One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest and Chinatown are completely filled with Nicholson's unique style. The only thing was in the seventies Nicholson used his unique styles always within in characterizations creating remarkable portraits of the men he portrayed. Later on Nicholson started doing his mannerism as a separation thing that he just has to do, and he stopped using them as effectively because of this reason. In fact this is a problem I have with many of his later performance, particularly his work in The Departed because that was just one long over the top Nicholson mannerism fest.
Finally to get to the point is that his use of his mannerisms always seem to be Nicholson performing them rather than actually being part of the character in this performance. This is especially true early in his performance as he almost wants to make an impact in his short scenes by doing his trademark shtick. It just never seems completely true to his character, in fact it is actually a bit distracting. Luckily though Nicholson after his somewhat shaky early scenes does settle down, and actually delves into becoming his character. I don't want to be mistaken though Nicholson is not bad in these scenes, just more of a little too self indulgent and obvious for his own good.
Later on in the film when his character of the womanizing, thrill seeking former astronaut starts a relationship with Aurora Greenway (Shirley MacLaine) Nicholson certainly comes into the role quickly. He certainly is appropriately boisterous and energetic in his role. His character just wants to enjoy life to its fullest, as almost compensate for the fact that he will never have his biggest thrill again which was to go into outer space. Nicholson has a great joy of performance here that works perfectly for his character who only wants to enjoy himself. Nicholson's smile is constantly on display here, and it certainly fits for his sometimes devious character.
Although Nicholson somewhat became typecast as the love interest for a reserved as well as strong willed woman as seen in As Good As It Gets, and Something's Gotta Give his dynamic with Shirley MacLaine certainly does work here, and it shows why Nicholson probably found him self cast in films with rather similar situations. Nicholson always shows the womanizing Garrett early on trying every trick he knows to try to get his way with Aurora, but is rather flabbergasted by the response he gets. Nicholson plays this well finding a great deal of humor in the Garrett's attempts, as well as his reactions to Aurora's sometimes quite stern responses.
Even though their relationship at first is mostly a series of comedic exchanges caused by their personalities a love relationship eventually does develop. This is not a long precise one, but the actors portray it convincingly. Nicholson carefully but effectively shows the deepening of the relationship almost by Garrett letting loose just a bit, and showing Garrett turns off the part of him that wants just instant gratification. It is a subtle transition but very well handled by Nicholson.
Later on in the film though Garrett becomes hesitant to pursue the relationship due the commitment he is feeling toward something the freewheeling astronaut wants to avoid. Nicholson is good in these later scenes showing Garrett a very much confused man who wants to be there for Aurora to some extent yet at the same time does not want to become too involved either. It is certainly a strange combination of emotion, but Nicholson brings to life wonderfully. He shows him as a man who is always contemplating his situation at almost all times, although Nicholson even in the most serious scenes keeps just the right glint of Garrett's more mischievous side.
All things considered this is a good performance from Nicholson. Creating an entertaining presence for the film and an effective foil for MacLaine's Aurora. I will say that I do not put it as a great performance, or as one of Nicholson's very best. It never achieves the greatness of his earlier work, and part of the reason I would say is his overuse of his trademark mannerisms early in the film, when he could have shown as more of Garrett at that point. Instead too many of his early scenes feel like Nicholson just doing his thing rather than a full fledged character. Nevertheless he does find his character as the film progresses that I would still say this is an enjoyable somewhat standard performance by a great actor.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983: John Lithgow in Terms of Endearment
John Lithgow received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Sam Burns in Terms of Endearment.
Terms of Endearment is about the complex relationship between the strong willed Aurora Greenway (Shirley Maclaine) and her daughter Emma (Debra Winger).
Lithgow's nomination here might be a bit of a head scratch due to his very limited screen time, and the face that perhaps he would nominated over Jeff Daniels. I would say though he probably was held I think by the success of the film, possibly some residual love for his first nomination, and the fact that Jeff Daniels maybe suffered from category confusion, even though he is indeed supporting, and I would say Daniels probably was not favored since he plays a character that is truly despicable yet he has not style in being so.
John Lithgow portrays a small town banker who eventually becomes the lover of Emma largely due to her troubled relationship with her adulterer of a husband Flap (Jeff Daniels). Even though it is a small role Lithgow is actually quite good in it, as the simple man Sam, who has a good heart. Lithgow's performance is fitting as he has a really quiet charm in the role as the descent Sam who wants to try to help out Emma. Lithgow shows that really the idea of having an affair with her is not the first thing in Sam's mind, he genuinely does want to try to be a good man first.
Lithgow has a low key chemistry with Debra Winger that works quite well. It is not that these two are finding the loves of their lives, but rather both are finding someone to bring that some happiness instead. Lithgow is very likable in the role even though his character is an adulterer. Lithgow makes it work though because he has a certain hesitation in his performance that appropriately establishes that Sam has not take the issue like, as well as the fact that Lithgow only ever portrays that Sam honestly has fallen in love with Emma.
Lithgow is good in all of his scenes bringing both heart and humor to his performance. His character's stay in the film is incredibly short, and even his longest scene I would say still is short. I wish Lithgow had been given more time actually, because I liked him in all of his scenes. I especially wish he had been given a more fulfilling final scene than the one he has in the film, the scene is so brief before watching the film again I had entirely forgotten about the scene. This is a good performance by Lithgow, but unfortunately it is limited by the fact the film really is not at all interested in his character.
Lithgow's nomination here might be a bit of a head scratch due to his very limited screen time, and the face that perhaps he would nominated over Jeff Daniels. I would say though he probably was held I think by the success of the film, possibly some residual love for his first nomination, and the fact that Jeff Daniels maybe suffered from category confusion, even though he is indeed supporting, and I would say Daniels probably was not favored since he plays a character that is truly despicable yet he has not style in being so.
John Lithgow portrays a small town banker who eventually becomes the lover of Emma largely due to her troubled relationship with her adulterer of a husband Flap (Jeff Daniels). Even though it is a small role Lithgow is actually quite good in it, as the simple man Sam, who has a good heart. Lithgow's performance is fitting as he has a really quiet charm in the role as the descent Sam who wants to try to help out Emma. Lithgow shows that really the idea of having an affair with her is not the first thing in Sam's mind, he genuinely does want to try to be a good man first.
Lithgow has a low key chemistry with Debra Winger that works quite well. It is not that these two are finding the loves of their lives, but rather both are finding someone to bring that some happiness instead. Lithgow is very likable in the role even though his character is an adulterer. Lithgow makes it work though because he has a certain hesitation in his performance that appropriately establishes that Sam has not take the issue like, as well as the fact that Lithgow only ever portrays that Sam honestly has fallen in love with Emma.
Lithgow is good in all of his scenes bringing both heart and humor to his performance. His character's stay in the film is incredibly short, and even his longest scene I would say still is short. I wish Lithgow had been given more time actually, because I liked him in all of his scenes. I especially wish he had been given a more fulfilling final scene than the one he has in the film, the scene is so brief before watching the film again I had entirely forgotten about the scene. This is a good performance by Lithgow, but unfortunately it is limited by the fact the film really is not at all interested in his character.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Best Supporting Actor 1983
Sam Shepard in The Right Stuff
John Lithgow in Terms of Endearment
Jack Nicholson in Terms of Endearment
Charles Durning in To Be or Not To Be
Rip Torn in Cross Creek
