You’re lucky if you’re a white male. You get to sit down each time in a movie theater and watch yet another man work through his problems, chase down his goal, implode, explode, seduce, say nothing, say everything, save the world, save humanity, paint his masterpiece, survive a POW camp, become an unlikely saint, drift in and out of reality and life. But if you’re a woman, or any person of color, you get to sit down and watch white men (mostly) do all of these things while applauding from the sidelines. I don’t know what that feels like for other people but for me, this year, when I sat down and there was some guy yet again, I wanted to scream. Really? This? Again? For every Gone Girl and Wild and Obvious Child, there are five times as many boys, men, birdmen and foxcatchers.
However we found ourselves here, we are here. That meant you really had to scrounge around for good films about women but films about men? They were everywhere. This year produced a multitude of memorable male performances, with the top three to win the most unforgettable so far – Michael Keaton in Birdman, Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game, and Eddie Redmayne in The Theory of Everything. That’s just the tip of the iceberg in a year that also showcased the work of Timothy Spall as Mr. Turner, Jake Gyllenhaal as the Nightcrawler, Steve Carell as the Foxcatcher, Thomas Hardy in Locke, Ben Affleck in Gone Girl, Oscar Isaac in A Most Violent Year, Ellar Coltrane in Boyhood, Miles Teller in Whiplash, Bradley Cooper in American Sniper, David Oyelowo in Selma, Jack O’Connell in Unbroken, Bill Murray in St. Vincent, Joaquin Phoenix in Inherent Vice, John Lithgow in Love is Strange, Mark Wahlberg in The Gambler, Brad Pitt in Fury, and Ralph Fiennes in the Grand Budapest Hotel.
1. Michael Keaton in Birdman
He doesn’t have a disability and he isn’t saving the world. He isn’t a world famous hero, nor a sociopath. He’s a last man standing, a real actor trying to squeeze out a bit of dignity in a world gone rotten. Birdman the film is a pleasure to watch, bravura directing, a well-rehearsed cast with actors hitting the exact right notes. But Birdman is mostly style – breathtaking, dazzling style but style nonetheless. What gives it its depth, its meaning beyond the dazzle is Keaton’s performance. It is so moving, so surprising in its vulnerability, one is taken aback by it.
Part of this is due to the camera coming in close and intimate with Keaton’s inner world, where it doesn’t so much with other characters who come off as cartoon-like. If Birdman himself is dwelling in a world of magical realism, where he may have super powers, and maybe can fly, he is surrounded by other action figures who represent various aspects of what might be called his life. It is only Keaton’s face where we can find any truth, any reality.
I will admit to being unprepared for Keaton’s performance. I will also admit to not thinking he had it in him. I’d seen him in every movie up to now and he’s always been Michael Keaton to me. But he’s transformed here. So much despair and desperation in a simple look, giving us so much emotion that he doesn’t share with the other characters on the screen. We’re watching him sink into failure while rising to the exact kind of success he doesn’t want: unearned celebrity via viral kitsch.
His character has more in common with Jennifer Aniston in Cake than almost any other character we saw on screen this year. He doesn’t really want to live anymore because there isn’t much to live for. He finds some kind of connection with his daughter, still trusts his ex-wife and has an active sex life with his mistress. But does he have any real love? What he seems to yearn for is what he sold out years ago: an authenticity in art. Maybe it seems like a joke, saying it out loud, but for this character it means everything.
Keaton’s stands out because he’s doing the harder job – he hasn’t an easy mask to hide behind because he’s playing someone who isn’t as clearly defined as, say, Stephen Hawking or Alan Turing. Those performances are beyond reproach but it’s Keaton’s that has stayed with me all of these months later.
At the same time, the real life Keaton is far too humble to really do much of the dog and pony show although he’s showing up here and there. He doesn’t have youth on his side anymore, and it’s been a long time since he was the headliner. Oh, but the beauty in his command of his face. The beauty is how he disperses emotion. His fearlessness in showing fear. It doesn’t get better than that. Birdman succeeds, ultimately, because of Keaton’s central performance.
2. David Oyelowo, Selma – Oyelowo’s screen presence was obvious from his early work, especially his small part in Lincoln, but also with director Ava DuVernay in Middle of Nowhere. He’s been working for decades in Hollywood, a cop here, a guard there. His slow trajectory to greatness is earned. As Martin Luther King, Jr., Oyelowo commands the screen with a palpable charisma, without ever letting the role devolve into a one dimensional portrait of a hero. His is the next generation of Daniel Day-Lewis’ Lincoln, and indeed, the two films could be watched back to back. He lends so much humanity to the icon you can’t take your eyes off him.
3. Eddie Redmayne in Theory of Everything and Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game – it’s nearly impossible to choose between the two of them. That is, perhaps, one of the reasons Keaton stands out so much this year. Redmayne embodies Hawking so that you forget you’re watching an actor at some point. He conveys emotion and wit without moving a muscle. By the end of the film, you’ve fallen in love. Cumberbatch is also great, managing to balance his obsession and prickly personality a passion to invent, to solve puzzles, to progress within a culture that opposes progress. We don’t see him wrestle with his sexuality because that isn’t part of the film, but does it have to be?
5. Steve Carell, Foxcatcher – Carrel disappears into John DuPont, though weirdly enough, he’s not that far off the character he plays in The Office, except not funny. He’s the guy who never makes the best joke. He’s the guy people feel sorry for and dread his presence. He’s the loser who doesn’t fit in. It’s a breathtaking work and an unlikable character.
6. Timothy Spall, Mr. Turner – Spall inhabits and embodies the artist. Perhaps he’s Turner-like but that’s really less important than what he’s trying o convey which is, the art does not necessarily make the artist and a commitment to art often comes at the expense of everything else. The beautiful paintings he makes sharply contrast the slug of a human he was. The sense of nature, light and God contradict his pragmatic approach to life – no connections, moving through women. Only Mike Leigh can get these kinds of performances out of his actors.
7. Jake Gyllenhaal, Nightcrawler – in the tradition of other charismatic psychopaths, Louis Bloom is less like Travis Bickle and more like Rupert Pupkin as he seems to accidentally find himself talking his way into people’s lives which eventually turns into threatening behavior all hidden behind a goofy veneer. So many of this generation are not familiar with De Niro’s incarnation of Pupkin but truly, Nightcrawler should be watched alongside it. Both films are more about an average Joe breaking the rules to achieve something people take lifetimes to accomplish. Why shouldn’t they have it too? They enter a world of crime and dwell in their own world of fantasy.
8. Bill Murray, St. Vincent. I know that the movie isn’t in with the cool crowd – probably because it has some strong female characters or because it’s schmaltzy but whatever the reason, Murray quietly delivered the performance of his career. Were it not for Cumberbatch, Weinstein Co. could easily push Murray into the race. St. Vincent got to me. Sure, it’s old school but I loved all of the characters. For the first time, Murray really digs into character acting in a way he hasn’t quite before. His is one of the most underrated performances this year.
9. Joaquin Phoenix, Inherent Vice – the director/actor relationship between Paul Thomas Anderson and Phoenix is fascinating to watch, especially if you put The Master and Inherent Vice side by side. Phoenix is probably most like Anderson of all of the actors who have played the leads in his films. Here, Phoenix is silly where in the Master he was morose. In both films he’s haunted by love.
10. Ben Affleck, Gone Girl – while Affleck is more concerned with directing these days, his performance is deceptively simple in Gone Girl. He’s playing a guy whose mask is being a nice guy. He is able to fool people, women especially, with his charm. In the hands of a lesser actor the satire might have been lost – play it too seriously and the whole thing collapses. Play it too comedically and the creepiness is lost. He hits just the right note, while allowing Rosamund Pike to steal the movie.
![2025 Oscars: Can a Late-Breaker Still Win Best Picture? [POLL]](https://www.awardsdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/gladiator-350x250.jpg)
Somehow, I can just feel it. This is Michael Keaton’s year. Is it for certain? Of course not. But after a long and impressive career, I think Oscar will finally recognize him for his brilliance and talent as an actor. The only real spoiler I can see overtaking Keaton is Benedict Cumberbatch for ‘The Imitation Game’ – with David Oyelowo serving as the tie-breaker. It also looks as though we will get a comedic performance or two in the mix this year, too. Though, Michael Keaton’s role is certainly comedic, Ralph Fiennes could be the other funny man in this year’s Best Actor batch for ‘The Grand Budapest Hotel.’ Here’s how I think the field will look on Oscar Nomination Day:
BEST ACTOR:
Steve Carell – ‘Foxcatcher’
Benedict Cumberbatch – ‘The Imitation Game’
Michael Keaton – ‘Birdman’
David Oyelowo – ‘Selma’
Timothy Spall – ‘Mr. Turner’
Personally, I think Timothy Spall would be a great addition, and a deserving one at that, this year. He has proven himself in numerous character parts and finally has a leading roll to showcase his talent. Though, if Spall should win an Oscar, I think it would more likely be in the Best Supporting Actor category. And of course, watch out for David Oyelowo. Dr. King was arguably the most influential and important man in the civil rights movement. Characters of this stature are not easily overtaken during Oscar Season. For me, I believe that comedic roles are grossly underrated by Oscar voters. Only a handful of these performances have garnered the statue in the end. Oddly enough, comedic performances tend to fare better in the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor categories. If I’m not mistaken, the last Leading Actor to win for a comedic role was Jean Dujardin in ‘The Artist.’ Just a few years ago, yes; but before that, it was back when Kevin Spacey took Best Actor for ‘American Beauty’ back in 2000. So, I’m seriously pulling for Michael Keaton this year.
Gyllenhaal’s work is assured and fearless. Most deserving of a nomination. Even a win, for that matter.
Sasha has a great point that there are not enough movies about women. It’s obvious, I don’t know why people are offended.
Thanks for mentioning Mr. Affleck. I think he will be one of the nominees. But I think Mr. Keaton has this in the bag.
I’d also like to shout out : Andy Serkis, Channing Tatum, Miles Teller and Mommy’s Antoine Olivier-Pilon.
And though they wouldn’t make my top 5 : The Guest’s Dan Stevens, Lilting’s Ben Whishaw and Force Majeure’s Johannes Bah Kuhnke.
Love the inclusion of Bill Murray. His best performance perhaps, even over Lost In Translation (maybe). I LOVE that film. But alas, I’ll just stick to my love for it without needing Award Voters to validate my choice on that one.
I don’t know why you do this anymore. You come across as utterly miserable having to write this article, which is a shame. You have great observations and are a talented writer but your opening essentially dismisses the entire category. I don’t come here as often as I used to because bleakness hangs in the air of this place. By the way, I’m rooting for Selma. You know you can celebrate the films and artists you love while not being an utter drag.
This is the time of year before the noms are released where I play catch up lol. ..i just saw theory of everything and am in shock. What a fucking amazing performance by redmayne. . Holy shit. Words can’t even describe. I also thought felicity Jones did her thing as well but good god redmayne should be sweeping the awards but then again I haven’t seen birdman or selma or imitation game yet. Oh and Robert Duvall fucking owned in the judge too. Very deserving of a nom. Globes and sags got it right.. He was brilliant. .. I think I’ll see into the woods tomorrow. . Still don’t like many of the movies from (last) year tho lol
My wishing list:
1) Gyllenhaal
2) Cumberbetch
3)Carrell
4)Keaton
5) Fiennes
And I’m going to delete that wierd “If you’re a white man” from my mind…
I, for one, dont love sex scenes in movies. Sex is a very personal thing and, watching them on tv/movies does very little for me. I am not a prude, either. I just dont care to watch it; especially if it doesnt serve the narrative.
You know, I’ve seen about 40 movies from 2014 and next to none of them have sex scenes. A few have that fade to black implied thing, and then it’s ST. VINCENT, ENEMY, GONE GIRL… do we count UNDER THE SKIN? I didn’t even realize that. What prudes we’ve all become.
Bravo to Ryan Adams and his terrific posting about the need for more diversity in movies.
Also, bravo to Arjecc and his great posting about Latinos on film and why Turing’s ”sexless” depiction matters.
Arjecc, did you get a chance to see ”The Book of Life,” Jorge R. Gutierrez’s animated movie with voices that included Diego Luna and Zoe Saldana?
Anyway, too often in this country, race is seen literally just in black and white terms. Latinos get left out. Asian-Americans usually aren’t included, let alone Native Americans or Muslim Americans. I love the Oscars, but it’s basically older white men voting for movies about white men. We need more diversity everywhere: in the boardrooms, where movies get greenlit; behind the camera, as writers and directors, and in the Academy, as Oscar voters.
As an Asian-American, I’d like to point out an odd blindspot of the Academy: They can appreciate everything about Asian-themed movies, except the acting. Examples: ”The Last Emperor” won Best Picture (1989) among its 9 Oscars, but didn’t get a single acting nomination, even though John Lone was up for Best Actor at the Golden Globes. ”Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” (2000) got 10 Oscar nods and won 4 of them, but didn’t get a single acting nomination, even though Michelle Yeoh and Ziyi Zhang were both up for BAFTAs. ”Memoirs of a Geisha” was up for 6 Oscars, and won 3 of them, but didn’t get a single acting nomination, even though Ziyi Zhang was nominated for a Golden Globe, a BAFTA and SAG Award. ”Slumdog Millionaire” (2009) wins Best PIcture, along with 7 other Oscars (among its 10 nominations), but didn’t get a single acting nomination, even though Dev Patel got nominated for a BAFTA and a SAG Award. It’s mindboggling that Academy voters watched these award-worthy movies and fail to nominate a SINGLE Asian actor.
Antoinette:
Thank you for your response and for your support for Latino entertainment, its encouraging; especially since, I’m assuming you’re not Hispanic yourself. In my post, however, I was referring more specifically to the lack of Latinos in film. I can’t really complain about the TV market, although there’s a battle there too for better roles, etc., you’ll find a lot more working actors there and behind the scenes talent. The Hispanic community is far better represented on television; we have our own networks and actors and more directors, writers and producers, although not household names, nevertheless, working.
In the case of George Lopez, of course I rooted for him like I do for anyone in my community trying to make it in Hollywood but to be honest, one of the reasons, I think, he doesn’t really resonate with some of us is because he tries a little too hard to be the stereotype of a “Latino”. Although you can argue Sofia Vergara does the same in Modern Family, its works better for her show; the George Lopez show was supposed to be our Cosby-like version and yes it was occasionally funny but the “stereotype” shtick gets old quick and his Tonight show just didn’t work. However, I do applaud his efforts and I understand many actors have to behave “latino”-like to get roles and opportunities, so they tend to exaggerate the accent or their features or whatever it is; Sofia, for example, is a natural blond and for years she wouldn’t get cast for not looking “ethnic” enough until she dyed her hair darker. Of course, there’s also cultural differences among Hispanics in terms of what they find funny. Mexican comedy, which is more familiar to american audiences, tends to be more over the top whereas in other nations humor is more dry and in some places its even crude or sexually-charged; so its quite a hurdle to get all Hispanics behind a comedian. Every kind of comedy is great if executed well, of course, but they are different. However, like I said, he had, at least, the opportunity to star in his own show and like any comedian or actor of any race some succeed and some flop. There are successful Latin actors in many other shows, however, like Ugly Betty, Jane the Virgin, Glee, Modern Family, Orange is the New Black etc. In film, it’s a whole different story…
In a recent article of the Huffington Post:
Hollywood studios appear to be missing the mark when it comes to representing one of their biggest consumers on the big screen. Latinos go to more movies than any other group, including whites, and yet they play only 4 percent of roles onscreen, according to a new study by the University of Southern California…. Across the 100 top-grossing films, Latinos (who constitute 17 percent of the U.S.) are the most underrepresented group, with only 4.2 percent of speaking roles, according to the study. And yet Latinos, on average, attended 9.5 movies a year, more than Asian (6.5 movies), African-American (6.3) and white audiences (6.1), according to Nielson’s market research…. The lucrative “Fast & Furious” films, set largely in Latino East Los Angeles, have been cited as evidence of the kind of revenue that a dedicated Latino fan base can generate. Latinos were credited for almost a third of the earnings for the latest in the series, this spring’s “Fast & Furious 6.”And what few roles do exist often perpetuate stereotypes, the USC study claims. For example, it found that Latina actresses are more likely than African-American, white or Asian actresses to be depicted in sexy attire or partially naked.
As with “Fast & Furious,” Sanchez said, “even if there are Latino roles, the movie’s generally told through a white person experiencing a Latino environment. You don’t see stories truly told from a Latino perspective.”….
AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc., the second-largest cinema chain in the U.S. by locations, is looking at where Latinos live when deciding where to build theaters, The Wall Street Journal reported. One such theater is currently under way in San Antonio, Texas.
“Your certainty of return on your investment is greater in a Hispanic-populated area than anywhere else,” AMC Chief Executive Gerry Lopez told the Journal.
Sanchez contends that that return on investment could be even greater “if films had individuals that Latinos could connect to.”
As you can read or research for yourself, Antoinette, it is a misconception that Hispanics have a “type” of film they watch or that we prefer white entertainment. We just don’t really have many movies being made about our experience. In Chavez’s case, that film was barely marketed outside California, it wasn’t distributed nation-wide and word of mouth was very bad even before the film was released in the US and many of the few who had access to it hesitated to watch a “bad” movie about an important figure. If you couldn’t follow it, probably, the film was not engaging enough and that speaks for the movie, not you or the story of Cesar Chavez.
The blame is really, like it is the case for the lack of any other minority in film, on the producers and studio heads and writers and directors for not creating stories with or about or casting more Hispanics, not on audiences and certainly not on Hispanic movie-goers. Also, I can’t only blame white folks, the “three amigos directors” have made many movies where they haven’t cast at least one Latino actor and Birdman directed by Alejandro G. I. doesn’t even have any Latinos in the ensemble. Of course, I know the money has to be made but, like you said, there’s talent out there and there can be room at least in supporting parts; with a majority of Hispanics purchasing movie tickets I’m sure it wouldn’t be a stretch to make business with Latinos in leads too. There is hope, of course, with Oscar Isaac, del Toro, etc. but it does need to get, significantly, better….
In regards to The Imitation Game, although it is a good film and a great performance by Mr. Cumberbatch and, ultimately, it is all subjective, I have to say that, to me, removing Turing practicing his sexuality, when he was open about it and he was discriminated against for it, felt incomplete. Every bio-pic where straight characters are concerned, always include the central figure’s love interest(s) and their sexcapades even, unless, of course, they’re in a concentration camp or at war, etc., and I would argue Imitation Game is a lesser film for not doing so as well.
The purpose for a successful bio-pic is to highlight whatever the extraordinary contribution or ordeal of the protagonist through attempting to provide some insight into the essence of that person. I am straight and I’m not necessarily expressing resentment or pushing an agenda here, but as a lover of films based on true stories for the sake of inspiration, we can all agree the way we conduct ourselves romantically or sexually is an undeniable revelation of who we are and our identity. The film, perhaps unintentionally, further stigmatizes Turing’s sexuality by making the film “sexless” or “passionless”. Without seeing him in romantic or sexual “action” in a scene, which would make the viewer understand or experience or share his lust or desire or love like any love or sex scene intends to, it is impossible to give his plight the proper emotional gravitas, particularly to straight people who don’t really know a gay person closely. It is in showing that contrast between watching a man in his intimacy be an ordinary living thing expressing his sexual nature and then having to endure an extraordinary ordeal for it, that one can REALLY sympathize, make the contrast and understand the injustice of it all.
I think it is important to voice these things and have a conversation about it because even though the film’s subject matter was not the sexuality of Alan Turing, it was a part of him and it is a part of any person, regardless of sexual orientation. Why is it still “politically correct” to omit any sexual behavior that is not straight on film? Would the filmmakers have omitted Turing’s sexuality if he had been a playboy or had a female partner? Remember film is a voyeuristic experience and we need to see to understand and even in the beginning days of cinema, at minimum, the screen would fade after a stylized kiss to imply sexuality or depict romance.
If there’s any justice in this world, Benedict Cumberbatch should take home the Oscar. As brilliant as Keaton is and as difficult a portrayal Eddie Redmayne showed on screen – Cumberbatch was absolutely brilliant as Turing. The performance was fucking flawless.
julian the emperor,
Mads, Just be assured that there are not that many people whose opinions I value as much as my own — and you’re one of those people.
Just please be assured that all your discontent registers with me at the highest level of my tortured conscience, and I take all your suggestions very seriously.
You and I can both be stubborn goats but I’m glad we know how to butt horns and remain friends all these many years. Happy New Year, my friend.
The site is called Award Daily and was once called Oscarwatch. It’s not entitled Finest Performances of the Year or Best Film. It’s that simple. Ryan explained it clearly. Sasha is writing about movies in relation to their Oscar potential and amongst those she offers up what she considers the best.
How do you think a list of the ten most likely Oscar nominees on a list of the years’ best performances reflect on the state of an overall discussion of the movies of 2014? It don’t exactly bring any sense of fresh perspective, does it? It only reiterates the painfully obvious path to Oscar once again.
On January 1, that painfully obvious path is the path we’re on. It’s the path that thousands of people have put us on. It’s the undertow that we’re all swept up in right now.
January 1st is a little late to be talking up the chances or achievements of Mathieu Amalric
In fact, I have no idea which of these movies you even have in mind, Mads
Les jours venus (2014)
Bird People (2014)
The Blue Room (2014)
If You Don’t, I Will (2014)
which one is Amalric’s ticket to global acclaim this year? I have no idea.
for 2015, try bringing up your neglected favorites in September or October. Instead of playing “haha gotcha, silly Americans, look what you missed!” 10 days before Oscar ballots are due.
And also, help us figure out a way for me and Sasha to fly to Europe to see movies like Les jours venus, Bird People, The Blue Room, If You Don’t, I Will because we sure as fuck don’t have handy access to any of those movies through our normal channels.
Nobody is more hellishly depressed this time of year than I am. Ask Sasha how gloomy I get when I turn around and realize that every one of 20 major Oscar bloggers are all talking about the Same Three movies all through December every year.
I’m guilty this year more than usual, and I APOLOGIZE. because nobody even sent me screeners for THOSE THREE MOVIES THAT EVERYBODY ELSE IS HARPING ON. So if I can’t even see Birdman, how the hell do you expect me to watch every movie Mathieu Amalric makes?
I want to do better at covering more. I swear to you, I want to, I swear to you I will do better in 2015.
True confessions. Full Disclosure. My mother has a had a series of debilitating cerebral hemorrhages this year, she collapsed with a stoke and broke her spine this year. So I’ve been a little bit wrapped up in keeping my mother out of a nursing home and didn’t devote as much time as I wish I could to chasing after Mathias Schoenarts and Mathieu Amalric. Sorry sorry sorry.
Let me try to get my pathetic hands on a screener of fucking Imitation Game first, before I worry about Alfred Molina in a movie that NOBODY in all of America has given him any awards for and never will.
I have no doubt that Love is Strange is terrific. If you wanted to see Love is Strange mentioned on this site, you could get yourself a laptop and write about it in the comments here. Or maybe you’ve been busy with life too. I’m not going to harass you about your failure to ever once bring it up till now. Now, when it’s ridiculously way too late.
Ralph Fiennes wouldn’t be on my list.
Tom Hardy wouldn’t be on my list.
Macon Blair wouldn’t be on my list.
Eat it.
how Fiennes isn’t listed is beyond me.
He totes sucks is why. He needs to go the School of Ultra Thespianness where Professor Affleck teaches a master class.
For the record. I’ve said for months that it doesn’t bother me either. For this movie, it makes no difference to me.
At least in this case, there is an epilogue letting the audience know how tragic his life ended, and just perhaps his persecution as a homosexual did lead to that. So, for those who still think his orientation had nothing to do with his motivation, development and eventual unhappiness, I say it does. I wasn’t looking to see some seedy little anonymous encounter, or a stiff upper lip denial, but some acknowledgment of how we lost one of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century to societal prejudices that still rage today, and still lead LGBT teens to untimely ends. One needs to only open today’s newspaper so see such tragedies.
how Fiennes isn’t listed is beyond me.
I woiuldn’t waste time arguing about the absence of Ralph or Jake being too low because in the end, you have the right guy at #1 IMO. Plus, it’s your list.
And this:
“He’s playing a guy whose mask is being a nice guy. He is able to fool people, women especially, with his charm.” That hit me in a strange way, I’m afraid to admit.
Great piece, great list. Happy New Year!
Ryan:
You fail to address the point I was trying to make. But. I guess, you were too busy getting worked up about that word ‘discouraging’ to notice it? So, first of all, let me try to make my point more easily digestible, by saying this: That word (‘discouraging’) was harsh. Ok? I admit it. And harsh (especially at this time of the year) is unnecessary.
Ok, let me try again one more time:
How do you think a list of the ten most likely Oscar nominees on a list of the years’ best performances reflect on the state of an overall discussion of the movies of 2014? It don’t exactly bring any sense of fresh perspective, does it? It only reiterates the painfully obvious path to Oscar once again. Sasha often likes to come across as a voice of dissent with regards to how she perceives the whole movie business, which is why naming the ten most likely nominees (except for Cooper and Fiennes, the latter a glaring omission, btw!) as the ten ‘best’ is a tad, not discouraging, but disappointing. Ok? That’s how I feel. I’m sorry if that makes me arrogant or a snob or however you want to portray me. I really don’ think that’s the case, though. I’m just advocating for a sense of diversity (I, myself, would have included Keaton, Spall and Gyllenhaal as well, so I’m not saying that this is a shit list by any means, it’s just not representative of the diversity of what cinema had to offer in 2014).
So the point is: Sasha often says things like ‘Oscar is – sadly – not about honoring the best, but the most popular (for whatever reason)’. And then when she has the chance to show that the world of cinema is about more than merely usual business, she instead conforms to EXACTLY the movies and performances that are on the Oscar radar.
What you’re saying is that I’m arrogant for pointing out the discrepancy between Sasha’s claims about the Academy’s lack of sophistication vs. how – in reality – her own tastes seem to conform to and mirror the Academy (and business) template. If that’s arrogance, so be it. I was merely disappointed in Sasha not using her power and influence to point to something besides the already downtrodden path.
OT: Arjecc,
Benicio Del Toro is one of my co-favorite actors. (The other is old white guy Val Kilmer.) The first poster I ever had on my bedroom wall was Erik Estrada. I used to wonder why Hispanic entertainment doesn’t do better in this country with the population as it is. Then I saw TV shows with people like George Lopez not getting ratings. His talk show was very good. I feel like it has to be that Hispanic people choose white people entertainment over movies and TV shows starring Hispanic actors. I think I read that the action movies audiences are usually mostly Hispanic. You know like the Stallone/Schwarzenegger movies.
I watched CHEF just the other day and I’m looking at John Leguizamo, thinking “why’s he off to the side, still?” I don’t really pay attention to the Emmy race but I thought GHETTO KLOWN was great. I don’t know why it got passed up if it did. I don’t even know. But he should be starring in movies, not being the buddy. He has it in him obviously to generate a great role for himself if need be, but he should be getting offers as well. I don’t know if he does or doesn’t. I would also really like to see Rosie Perez in the movie they’ll eventually make about Griselda Blanco. I think old white lady Catherine-Zeta Jones was going to do it after J.Lo wanted it for a long time. But Perez should just do another one. I absolutely love CZJ, but she and J.Lo should be doing a musical a year. I actually tweeted to old white guy Harry Connick, Jr. that he should write a musical for he and J.Lo because he clearly likes her. A lot. But you know, I don’t know if people are waiting for someone to offer them something or what. The talent’s there. It’s just not happening. One of my other favorite favorites Gael Garcia Bernal was in ROSEWATER, which completely disappeared somehow. I almost forgot about it. I don’t know. You tell me. I watched that Cesar Chavez movie, but I couldn’t follow it. I’m not familiar with that history. I don’t know if it’s because I’m not from California or what. But it wasn’t user friendly for noobs.
As a gay man, I find the whole uproar about Turing being “sexless” or “passionless” in The Imitation Game remarkably stupid.
For the record. I’ve said for months that it doesn’t bother me either. For this movie, it makes no difference to me.
But Bigger Picture: I’m talking about the cumulative weight of 10,000 movies that show straight people relationships in every possible permutation — from chaste to raw, from 10,000 straight kisses onscreen to 1000 scenes of hot boy/girl fucking in all their sexy intimate naked glory. And meanwhile we get maybe 5 mainstream gay movies in 100 years that barely have the nerve to show two guys kissing.
As a gay man, I find the whole uproar about Turing being “sexless” or “passionless” in The Imitation Game remarkably stupid. None of the other characters were portrayed any differently. The film wasn’t about these people’s sexcapades; it was about their work. Furthermore, the film didn’t sweep his sexuality under the rug. Everyone left that theater knowing that Turing was gay. The thing that SHOULD piss everyone off is the suggestion that Turing was accused of being a Soviet spy or was bribed by one. The spy in the film didn’t even work in the same facility as Turing, and Turing probably never even met him. The thought that people will walk away from this utterly conventional movie thinking that Turing was successfully bribed makes me seethe. It’s fucking slanderous. It’s one thing to use misinformation that’s available to make a movie (like Zero Dark Thirty), but an entirely different and more despicable thing to make character-damaging shit up to make your story more interesting. That’s Hollywood for you.
Ben Affleck does NOT belong in any best actor discussion. Sorry. I’m happy for him that he wants to keep trying and improving slightly every time, but there are too many great actors out there making movies every year for him to have any acting buzz. Jon Favreau was better in CHEF for cripes’ sake.
I also have to say how lucky I felt to be a mixed race female watching white guys play characters that are supposed to look exactly like Idris Elba, or so the internet tells me. I love great actors. Christian Bale and Joel Edgerton were the bomb as brotherly adversaries in EXODUS:GODS AND KINGS. But prejudice conspires against us all once again.
Tom Hardy, I think he is credited that way, had a fantastic turn in LOCKE and an I-don’t-know-what turn in THE DROP. It’d be great if he got in for LOCKE. There are a lot of people this year who need a cumulative nomination.
And let me just say that with 10 days to go before the Golden Globes, sitting here in East Bumblebutt, USA, I’m going to be forced to find these performances however I can. They had all this time to stop me from turning to a life of crime. I have yet to see INHERENT VICE, THE IMITATION GAME, SELMA, THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING, MR. TURNER and FOXCATCHER. Not my fault. They have not appeared in my neck of the woods. I’m going to be super fucking pissed if anyone from these movies would have been someone I’d champion but was made unable to do so.
I assume one of those would have been Joaquin Phoenix. I watched THE IMMIGRANT yesterday and I thought it was great. I have no idea what happened with that. Was it released? I love the three lead actors. It’s my fault that I didn’t see KILL THE MESSENGER. I think it was released here but I wasn’t able to go at the time. I wouldn’t know how Renner performed in that. But these are people on my short list of favorite actors. If they’ve all done more than one great performance and I don’t find out until this late, it’s just not fair.
Jake. Love Jake. Another double shot at best lead performance. That Scooby Doo ending of ENEMY kinda ruined it for me but Jake was fantastic in that as well. Maybe even better than NIGHTCRAWLER, which is what everyone has to mark him down for, regardless.
But. I’m rooting for Michael Keaton. Have been since I heard he was making a comeback. When I saw BIRDMAN I thought there was no other who could have played the part. Not because of the whole life imitating art thing. There’s just no one else who can walk on the edge like that. I always thought he had it in him. MR. MOM, JOHNNY DANGEROUSLY, BEETLEJUICE, BATMAN, PACIFIC HEIGHTS, ONE GOOD COP, MULTIPLICITY. All awesome performances in my book. And all different from each other.
However, if I could give my own special award for the unsung performance that’s last chance to be recognized was this year, I’d like to give that to Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins in THE HOBBIT trilogy. I’m a huge fan of the LORD OF THE RINGS movies. Haven’t read any of the books. I saw the animated movies way back. When they cast the guy from “The Office” to carry these films I was like “WTF? That guy? Ew.” I came out of the first film astonished. He was absolutely perfect. Just brilliant. I couldn’t believe it. Did he get nominated? No. Did he get nominated last time? No. Does he deserve it for THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES? No. They did some weird thing where he was barely in this last installment. Everyone was barely in it. Except Luke Evans, which isn’t a problem either. I can stare at Luke Evans with that mullet all day long if you want me to. But the point is, THE hobbit should have been the star of every movie named THE HOBBIT. Same thing happened to Viggo Mortensen with RETURN OF THE KING. But in this case I felt really bad that Mr. Freeman had put in such a great performance carried over three movies, which should have been two, but that’s not his fault. He’s going to end up with nothing. And that sucks in my book. So since there’s no room for him in this year’s race, I’m going to ask people who know him to give him a hug or bake him a cake or something. And if anyone has an award worthy role coming up for someone of his type, please consider him. He clearly knows what he’s doing.
arjecc
I’m glad to see you comment. Hope you make a habit of it.
You express the important distinction better than I did. It’s one thing for a moviegoer to be able to relate to all kinds of characters in all kinds of movies. Hopefully we can all do that. But it’s another thing altogether when some of us feel that we watch all kinds of movies all the time and some of us rarely get to see characters that we can identify with.
Your wording is perfect. Being able to relate to characters is a not the same as having an opportunity to identify with characters.
Apparently lots of white straight guys don’t understand what it feels like to be a movielover all your life and hardly ever get to see heroes onscreen (or even villains) whose gender and race are the same as the viewer. How would these straight white guys ever know what that feels like? They get to see hundreds, thousands, of movies about white straight guys. “What’s the problem?” they wonder.
In order for them to understand what it feels to live a lifetime and never see as many as 5 Hollywood movies that reflect their own lives, they would need to relate and identify with REAL people like me and Sasha and arjecc. If they could see Hollywood movie history through our eyes, maybe they would understand our frustration and impatience.
Instead, we get to hear that we’re stupid for not being able to feel satisfied with 5,000 movies about white straight guys. We get to hear that we’re “anti-cinema” for wishing we could see people like ourselves onscreen more often.
That’s not only false, it sort of sadly proves the point: the sad reality that a lot of white straight guys really have very little capacity for sympathizing with people who are not white and straight and male like they are.
Great list, but Ralph Fiennes most definitely belongs!
BAFTAS is going to have hard time to decide which Brit is the winner. I heard when David Oyelowo was screening with BAFTAS, he got stand O.
Awardsdaily,
I’m a big fan of this site for many years now and I applaud it for pointing out diversity issues in Hollywood cinema and emphasizing the works of minority filmmakers. I believe it is an exciting time for minorities in film and in some way, venues such as these are responsible for it and, although not always taken well, we need more voices that engage in important, more relevant matters that go beyond traditional film criticism and the Oscar “race”.
As a Latino regular at Awardsdaily, I’d like to ask this site for the new year to, perhaps, add an extra eye out for Latino-related films or rising Latino filmmakers and bring awareness of them to their readers. I agree with Ryan and it was an earlier post of his on this thread that inspired me to write thist; relating and actually identifying with a character is not the same. We are the biggest minority group, aside from women, of course, in this country and we barely have any classic characters or films where the Latino experience is a subject matter or examined or even depicted and much less represented at the Oscars other than West Side Story, Babel and Benicio del Toro’s character in Traffic, at the top of my head.
I’m not saying there’s enough and, obviously, there’s still quite a road ahead but AT LEAST the black community, for example, have some films that come out each year, regardless of quality and box-office and all that stuff, where black characters are the focal point or are somehow involved in the story. Then there’s of course The Color Purple, 12 Years a Slave, The Help, Django Unchained, Selma, Ghost, Coming to America, The Butler, Sidney Poitier’s films, Monster’s Ball, Coming to America, Training Day, Precious, Tyler Perry movies, Lady sings the Blues, Beasts of the Southern Wild, the Friday/Barbershop/Eddy Murphy movies, Sounder, Do the Right Thing, Driving Miss Daisy, Pariah, Lincoln, Glory, Crash etc. where regardless of opinion of quality and, again, I’m not saying there’s enough but films such as these involve black actors in an interesting role(s), or have garnered Oscar attention or nominations or has made good money and become a pop culture reference and/or even dealt with the subject of racial inequality or the black experience.
Although to a lesser extent, In the gay community, there has been some progress in the last two decades or so with important and acclaimed films like Milk, Philadelphia, The Hours, Pariah, Brokeback Mountain, A Single Man, Capote, Imitation Game etc.; and when it comes to women, particularly white, despite the lack of rich roles compared to their white, male counterparts have AT LEAST some interesting characters to identify with every year and a rich history of films in yesteryears when women stories were more popular, for reference. Latinos, despite being very populous not only in the US, but among the world’s population and our language among the most spoken globally, are egregiously disadvantaged in US mainstream cinema. We have far fewer characters or films that even include any Latino; I still get happy with JLO, Salma Hayek or Zoe Saldana being in a movie and, probably, only the performances by Catalina Moreno and Fernanda Montenegro have ever even been nominated for a latin-american film.
Of course, I’m not blaming anyone in particular, I realize the film industry is a business like any other but I just worry our (latino) stance in the industry is not growing up to par with our population growth even worse so than the other minorities. I guess I’m asking this site to add us too, with a little more emphasis, to the cause.and help us not get left behind in these important, exciting times for the diversification of the art we love. I know there’s not much to talk about since the films are not being made but just keep mention it every once in a while, as you have in the past, at least to me, the most influential aspect and what distinguishes this site from the rest is the passionate support for inequality causes in films produced. Thanks for the read!
julian the emperor, If you can take a break from feeling discouraged, notice what lots of other readers do.
They have their own favorites. They write down those favorites. They share their favorites with us in the comments. And they don’t tell us how simpleminded we are for not having the same favorites as they do.
Try that sometime. See if your discouragement dissipates when you stop lecturing people on how to make their lists, and how to write a more precise headline, and how to run their websites.
I guess part of the point is to give you a place where you can come show us how much more sophisticated you are than the rest of us, Discouraging as that might sound, I suppose that’s part of the point of running a website: to make a place where people can come visit and scold us every day.
It’s weird because I really did not like Foxcatcher. I could barely look at Steve Carell. At the same time, that’s the movie I can’t stop thinking about. I’ve always been a big fan of Steve and his comedy. ANd now I realize, how he made me feel during that film and the fact I can’t stop thinking about it is a tribute to his performance. After I saw Birdman I was all about Michael Keaton. After I saw The Imitation Game I was all about Benedict Cumberbatch. After I saw Foxcatcher I was not all about Steve Carell, but the slow burn has worked and I have to bump him to the top now. I have many more performances to see, but Steve really deserves that Best Actor nomination, at the very least.
My faves this year:
Michael Keaton
Benedict Cumberbatch
Eddie Redmayne
Jake Gyllenhaal
Tom Hardy (The Drop)
Timothy Spall
Ralph Feinnes
Channing Tatum
Tom Hardy (Locke)
Brendan Gleeson
Matthew McConaughey
Jack O’Connell
(Have yet to see – and can’t wait to see – Oyelowo, Osaac, Cooper).
Another vote for Tom Hardy in Locke. I haven’t been impressed with the frontrunners (except for Oyelowo and Redmayne). Carell’s makeup does his acting. Keaton’s playing Michael Keaton. Cumberbatch recycles Sherlock.
“Why doesn’t it say so in the headline, then: best Oscar performances of the year?”
Because it would be fucking redundant to put “Which Might Win An Award” in every fucking headline of a site called AwardsDaily.
Tom Hardy, Brendan Gleeson, John Lithgow/Alfred Molina, Mathieu Amalric, Macon Blair, Jesse Eisenberg, Mathias Schoenarts…. nice performances. HOW MANY CRITICS are paying any fucking attention to them? How many prizes crowd the mantle at Macon Blair’s house?
You must keep pretty busy going to to 100 movie websites asking why they don’t talk more about Macon Blair as one of their favorites.
“Discouraging”? Here’s what’s discouraging: writing for a website and getting comments that say “I am tired of hearing about what YOU think. If you don’t write about things that I think are best then you must be dumb or lazy or something. Dumb ol’ lazy incurious person, you discourage me with your list that is not the same as mine.”
I only had money to buy my millionaire sister one scummy little DVD for Christmas this year and I bought her BLUE RUIN because it is something so rare, I can be certain that she and her rich family will never have seen it. That is seriously the only thing I could give them that they don’t already have or would not have discovered on their on. I swear to you this is true. I bought them Blue Ruin because it’s great and I bought them Blue Ruin because their chances of seeing the title Blue Ruin in any newspaper or magazine in all of America this month is virtually ZERO Chance.
And yet Sasha and I are discouraging to you because we fail to pick up the slack that 5000 other movie writers also fail to pick up.
See you in a couple of weeks after you finish writing your sad little messages to all 5000 movie writers who didn’t put Macon Blair on their list of actor favorites. Your life must be hella packed with discouragement as you look around and see how 5000 writers constantly fail to like everything you like.
Go scold all of them. Go roll your eyes at everybody who liked St Vincent. (St Vincent is movie that I’m not in any big hurry to see, but I don’t lord my disdain for it either.)
[Certification from Amazon that we’re not as dumb and lazy as julian the emperor likes to insinuate we are]
I saw Blue Ruin, I liked Blue Ruin. I bought Blue Ruin for my sister last week.
Macon Blair is still not on my Top 10. Sorry to discourage you again.
Oscar Isaac should be on the list for A Most Violent Year. Just saw it last night – my favorite male performance of the year. This guy is masterful.
Too funny about Ben Affleck having one of the best performances of the year. This is more like Best Casting of the Year for Fincher as Affleck essentially playing the same part he’s been playing all of his career, the emotionless jock not knowing what’s going on.
I agree with everyone else saying Ralph Fiennes should be on this list. He certainly deserves to be here more than stupid Ben Affleck. Other than that omission, I agree with your choices Sasha, particularly your number 1. Although, I always thought Michael Keaton had it in him. I knew with the right director he could give one of those performances that just changes everyone’s view of him as an actor. I will certainly be rooting for him on Oscar night.
Another angry feminist rant by Sasha – surprise, surprise…
Why doesn’t it say so in the headline, then: best Oscar performances of the year? Sasha often complains about the narrow-mindedness of the Academy, so why not at least try to challenge the readers with mentioning someone outside of that comfort zone? What’s the point of listing the 10 most obvious Oscar contenders and labeling them as ‘the best’, when often AD refers to the problem with Oscar being that it’s not about honoring the best, but the most visible or prestigious etc. I fail to see the logic or consistency of those complaints when reading this most predictable of lists.
Bill Murray for St. Vincent?? Come on! A lazy performance in a terrible film. But, yes, sure, it fits the Oscar angle just fine. But a BETTER performance than, say, Tom Hardy, Brendan Gleeson, John Lithgow/Alfred Molina, Mathieu Amalric, Macon Blair, Jesse Eisenberg, Mathias Schoenarts,……? OR countless examples outside of the confines of English-language movies….?
It’s just discouraging, really.
Also surprised not to see Chadwick Boseman.
This is what happens when there are so many strong contenders, someone like Tom Hardy (brilliant TWICE this year) slips through the cracks.
^ What Corvo said.
I know Hardy is outside the realm of the possible according to those who determine such things, and therefore should not be discussed/advocated for, but it has to be said… ridiculous
Putting Affleck on that list instead of Hardy is beyond ridiculous.
Call me an alien. Call me whatever you want.
When I watch any movie, it doesnt register to me if Im watching a 64 yr. old white man, a 22 yr. old black woman, a 46 yr. old gay man, an 86 yr. old German woman, an 18 yr.old Asian man. I watch them. I experience them. I like/loathe/empathize with them.
I never put myself in their shoes like so many people seem to do. I dont think of them as a mirror. I dont say, gee, could that experience be happening to ME? Im always watching and considering and feeling for THE PERSON no matter what gender, race, or age they are.
I consider the story, the situation, the person. Is there something wrong with me that when I watch a film, a tv show, whatever — that I dont seem to do what so many people are complaining about?
Im serious, is there something wrong with me that I innately separate and watch and enjoy or experience in agony for someone else without ever putting MYSELF in the situation?
to Ryan: word
julian the emperor, you know this is primarily an Oscar site, you know that, you know that.
name 5 actors who gave 5 brilliant performances that will never come within 10,000 miles of the Oscars. Go ahead, name them. I want you to. Tell us. I know you’re dying to.
Just name them. I’ll put them all on my do to list. The list that I’ll have time to get around to in March. I trust that you have some great names in mind. Just name them. Do it. You have great taste, the actors you name will be all be great, no doubt. Tell me, tell us. Who are they.
Right now though, and for the next 8 weeks, we’ll be talking about movies that are in the Oscar comfort zone. Hold your nose and try to deal with it, ok? please?
Please…Gyllenhaal has to be nominated, why did you put so lower?? I saw Nightcrawler and this performance is remarkable, it will be a shame if he gets snubbed. And am i the only one who thinks Redmayne is a truly overrated actor? I mean, just because it’s a transformative character they have to nominate? I don’t like him, sorry but i think he doesn’t give the necessary strength for these characters…I didn’t see Selma and The Imitation Game yet, not even Birdman (i’m a great fan of Keaton, he’s soooo underrated in these days) but i saw The Grand Budapest Hotel and Foxcatcher and both Fiennes and Carell gives us fantastic performances and better than Redmayne, and i couldn’t agree more about Murray, a very lovely performance but with this year he will be quickly forgotten. This category is the opposite of Best Actress, one of the most competitive years by far, let’s see what Globes and Critics Choice will bring to us..
This list begs the question: Did you see any movies outside of the established ‘Oscar comfort zone’ this year?
The notion that a viewer can relate only or mostly to his/her own gender, skin colour, sexual orientation or nationality, or language, or hairdo… or whatever whatsoever, it’s just so anti-cinema, short sided and plain stupid in my opinion.
That’s not what Sasha is saying. Sasha knows and everybody knows that we can all relate to all kinds of characters onscreen.
But everybody also knows this: Close to 80% of all the major movies revolve around men. Maybe 20% revolve around women. Hardly any Hollywood movies ever revolve around people of color. Seriously, we all know that, right? Fewer than 3% of Hollywood movies revolve around central characters who are Black, Latino, Asian. Is that not true?
So YES, YES, We can ALL relate to all kinds of characters. But don’t you ever consider that it would be NICE for women, black people, gay people if we could see more people like US represented by interesting characters more often?
What’s your advice to those black gay women?
“That’s ok sweetie, go watch Raging Bull. It’s awesome! You can relate somehow. Why do you need to see a movie about anybody whose life is like yours? Don’t you black lesbian girls have any fucking imagination? yeesh, go watch Orange is the New Black 1000 times while I watch my 99,000,000,000,000,000 hours of TV about white guys. There’s some Poussey for you. Happy now?”
As a gay guy, am I supposed to be happy and satisfied that we get maybe ONE major movie every year with a central character who’s gay? And this year we get a gay guy who never actually gets to touch another guy — we just get to see how being gay turns his life into a living hell. so, yay! I’m supposed to be satisfied by that and just shut up and go RELATE to 350 other movies?
Yes, I can relate to those 350 other movie, no problem. But I would like it better if 5% of people in movies were gay — like we are in real life.
So yes, it is lucky for all you white straight guys who always get to be the heroes in movies. Lucky for me, I’m able to relate to those movies.
But those are two very different kinds of lucky. You’re lucky to get to see movies about people like you. I’m lucky that I can relate to movies about people like you.
Because movies featuring heroes UNLIKE MYSELF are all the fucking movies I’m ever gonna get, so I better learn to love ’em, right? You, you get to see lots of movies with heroes like you. Lucky you.
You get to see stories about yourself once in a while. I don’t. I DON’T. Do you get it now? Can you see how I feel? Can you relate to how I feel?
Because it’s ALWAYS us non-white, non-male, non-straight people (and there are FUCKING BILLIONS OF US) who always get to cheer for the straight white men. Is that not fucked up?
Akumax, I have no doubt that you would be able to relate to a movie about a Black Gay Woman. BUT THERE ARE NO MOVIES LIKE THAT. So you don’t get to relate to that and you don’t have to.
So listen up. If you want to say Sasha is stupid for wishing there were more movies about women then you need to be prepared to tell ME that I’m stupid for wishing there were more movies about gay guys. And then you get to tell all the black people in America that they are stupid for wishing they could see more movies about black people.
I know you don’t mean that. So please don’t say it, dude.
Please TRY to understand what it’s like to live your whole fucking life and see maybe 3 movies in movie history that ever feature a gay hero. I’m talking big $150 million 10-Oscar-nominations type of movies. Because that’s my life, Akumax.
Out of 85 Best Picture winners, I get One Goddamn BEST PICTURE with a gay hero. Braveheart. (Braveheart was gay, right? He sure looked gay the way Mel Gibson played it. Mel Gibson is gay, right? I probably need to factcheck this stuff.)
Yes, Akumax, I can relate to all kinds of movies and so can Sasha. So can everybody.
But if you don’t see how LUCKY you are to see people of YOUR RACE and YOUR GENDER onscreen ALL THE TIME…. then you don’t have have a fucking FRACTION of the empathy for gay people or empathy for women and for empathy black people that you claim you have.
Because, dude, maybe you can sit for two hours and watch a movie about a black woman and relate to that character. and be rightfully proud of yourself.
BUT listen, if you can’t relate to the BILLIONS of us sitting beside you who WISH in vain for movies that We NEVER GET. Then you FAIL the real test of “relating.”
Fuck relating to diverse characters in movies. That’s EASY.
Now try RELATING to the billions of us who want MORE diversity in movies. That’s the hard part. Try that.
I know you can do it.
“You’re lucky if you’re a white male. You get to sit down each time in a movie theater and watch yet another man work through his problems, chase down his goal, implode, explode, seduce, say nothing, say everything, save the world, save humanity, paint his masterpiece, survive a POW camp, become an unlikely saint, drift in and out of reality and life. But if you’re a woman, or any person of color, you get to sit down and watch white men (mostly) do all of these things while applauding from the sidelines.”
The power and beauty of the cinematic language is exactly that of making you relate to whatever and whomever imaginable, it makes you transcend your little world and you limited life beholding a wider and enriching understanding of yourself and the universe around you.
The notion that a viewer can relate only or mostly to his/her own gender, skin colour, sexual orientation or nationality, or language, or hairdo… or whatever whatsoever, it’s just so anti-cinema, short sided and plain stupid in my opinion.
I, and millions of other individuals on this planet, get to sit down each time in a movie theater and watch, and relate, to a magnificent never ending parade of characters and stories. I’m just a human being in a theatre having my eyes, my heart, my brain completely inside Wall e and Eve, Snow White, Scarlett O’hara, Mamy, Dorothy, Toto, Frodo, the wicked witch of the west, Jack Twist and Ennis del Mar, and Alma , Joker and Batman, Clarice Starling and Dr Lecter, Robocop, Rambo, Thelma&Louise, Jack and Rose on the Titanic, Michael Corleone as well as Maria Von Trap, Mia Wallece, Mary Poppins, George Banks, Winnie the Pooh, Hoke Colburn and Daisy Werthan, ‘Beat’ Takeshi, Filomena Marturano Domenico Soriano, Raimunda, Gandhi, Celie Johnson, Annie Johnson, E.T., Malcom X, Agrado, Maya, Adele, Maggie Fitzgerald, Guido Orefice, John Keats, Jesus Christ, Barabba, Barry Lindon, Oscar Schindler, Bernadette Soubirous, Jasmine, Oda Mae Brown, John Prentice, Matt & Christina Drayton, Rocky, Precious and Mary her mother, Frost/Nixon, Bree Daniel, Cabiria, Ponyo, Fanny Brice, Pinocchio, Zampano, Cinderella, Harvey Milk, Kikujiro, Keyser Söze, Wladyslaw Szpilman, Margaret Thatcher, Simba, Vincent Vega, Peppy Miller and George Valentin, Anton Chigurh, Derek Vinyard, Forrest Gump, Deloris Van Cartier, Sugar Kane Kowalczyk, THOUSANDS MORE… Daphne&Josephine/Jerry&Joe … after all, nobody is perfect.
This list is too Oscar-y. I would add Channing Tatum, Jake Gyllenhaal, Ralph Fiennes, Miles Teller. Michael Fassbender, and Jesse Eisenberg.
I’m in the minority on this one (as always) but no performance this year was as striking as Gyllenhaal’s. Absolutely amazing work.
Yes. I agree that Michael Keaton gave the best lead male performance of the year. (I say that while I still need to see Selma and American Sniper, so keep that in mind, but….)
I just want to add that I think Tony Revolori (The Grand Budapest Hotel) and Logan Lerman (Fury) gave lead performances, and therefore, deserve to be in the discussion.
Oh dear the Oscars are near……again. Another opportunity to set aside a great performance,this time it is Russell Crowe as Noah. I wonder why. Hollywood and generally most film critics resist religious films But this performance will outlast all the others. You know like O’Toole in Lawrence of Arabia or Richard Burton in Virginia Wolfe. Making mistakes is a common feature of the Oscars.
Correction: Mark Schultz was tweeting those sentiments. Oddly, until recently, Schultz had been praising Miller.
Or did Schultz’s Twitter account get hacked? Meantime, Variety reports that Sony Classics has no comment.
And that Schultz is out of the country and cannot be reached for comment.
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/foxcatcher-wrestler-mark-schultz-slams-movie-director-i-hate-bennett-miller-1201390101/
I saw Birdman more than two months ago and I’m still here thinking “How did Keaton pull that off?”. Ridiculously good.
Uh-oh! Now it’s ”Foxcatcher” that catching some controversy. Mark Schultz, the former Olympian wrestler (played by Channing Tatum) who’s the subject of that movie, is slamming the film and its director. On Dec. 18, Schultz wrote that ”Foxcatcher” ”couldn’t have portrayed me more inaccurately if they tried.” Yesterday, he posted on his Facebook: ”I HATE BENNETT MILLER. I HATE EVERYTHING THAT SCUM TOUCHES. EVERYTHING!” At issue is a scene that he believes suggests a sexual relationship between himself and his benefactor, John Du Pont (played by Steve Carell). For more of Schultz’s mean tweets:
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/12/31/mark-schultz-foxcatcher/
That’s an excellent and very cool point about Du Pont being somewhat like a billionaire psycho version of Michael Scott. Carell was a brilliant casting decision. The weird thing is, the premise of “Steve Carell is a sheltered billionaire hoping to fund a wrestling team led by dim but well-meaning wrestler Channing Tatum” also sounds like it would completely work as a comedy.
Chadwick Boseman is a glaring omission from the list. I thought he was astonishingly good in “Get On Up.” When you talk about all of the biopic actors ‘inhabiting’ their roles, several* had something of an advantage in that they were playing people whose personalities weren’t well-known to the public at large (Turing, Turner, Du Pont), whereas Boseman had to play one of the most well-known and charismatic people of the last century. It’s very easy to play James Brown as a caricature and equally easy to sidestep the “James Brown persona” entirely, but Boseman tackled the role head-on and completely personified Brown. It was a mind-blowing performance, and if I had to pick a Best Actor Oscar between Keaton and Boseman, I’d hem and haw for an hour and then just flip a coin.
* = I haven’t seen Selma yet so I can’t comment on Oyelowo, but obviously he had an even bigger challenge than Boseman did in portraying an iconic figure in a unique way.
”We don’t see [Alan Turing] wrestle with his sexuality because that isn’t part of the film, but does it have to be?”
That’s one of my problems with ”The Imitation Game”: Spoilers ahead! … It wants you to recognize what an injustice was done to Alan Turing, as a gay man. We are shown his chaste boyhood crush, Christopher, and Turing tells a colleague that he’s been with men. One guy tries to blackmail Turing for being gay. We are shown how he was arrested for ”homosexual acts” in the ’50s. We are shown Turing and his shaking hands, affected by his chemical castration. Wrestling with his sexuality HAS been part of his life, but the movie is too cowardly to allow any display of gay intimacy or affection. Not a kiss. Not an embrace. Nothing. No one is asking to turn ”Imitation Game” into gay porn. But is it too much to show a brief gay encounter from his past? Even as a flashback? Or what about a glance of Turing with the young man who got him arrested?
In 2014 (now 2015), this antiseptic depiction seems so prudish, as if the movie were afraid to turn off any viewers who find male intimacy ”icky.” By the way, Turing didn’t keep his sexuality a secret among friends; nor was he ashamed. When he was arrested for ”indecency,” he didn’t deny the charges; he felt being gay should not be illegal. At the end of the day, ”Imitation Game” asks us to recognize a gay hero who never got his due in saving his country and never got to truly express who he was. But in its own way, the film keeps Turing closeted more as a symbol than a fully realized human being.
Eddie Redmayne absolutely slayed me in The Theory of Everything. I think he had one of the hardest tasks as an actor…portraying someone who is still alive and operates with such a debilitating disability…learning mannerisms without mimicking and providing the essence of someone while still bringing pieces of yourself to the role. What impressed me the most about Redmayne was how he was able to say so much with just the shift of his eyes or the elevation of his smile. It truly haunted me and I think he more than deserves to win the Oscar for his performance.
Michael Keaton would be second on my list. I pretty much love everything about Birdman and he as the anchor is whimsical yet real and raw…so utterly compelling to watch. I’d be happy to see him win especially after the career that he’s had.
I just saw Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game and he was every bit as good as I expected him to be. I just think he’s a great actor. Steve Carell in Foxcatcher was a revelation. So, as was true last year, there are so many great leading male performances to choose from and I still have yet to see Jake Gyllenhaal in Nightcrawler and David Oyelowo in Selma.
With all the Brits in the running, I can’t wait to see what Bafta will do!
PS. I know Matthew McConaughey just won for Dallas Buyers Club but I also thought he was really great in Interstellar…the scene where he’s watching his video messages just about did me in. He’s been lost in the shuffle but I think he turned in another wonderful performance.
Way to disrespect the work these actors did this year. What an awful way to start an article and what a terrible outlook. That would be like someone saying, ” this race thing AGAIN” by watching “Selma,” or “12 Years a Slave,” or “Fruitvale Station,” etc.
It’s a very, very, very competitive year in this category. Several great performances will not be nominated for the Oscar, but my ranking of most deserving is:
1. Bradley Cooper
2. Ralph Fiennes
3. Benedict Cumberbatch
4. David Oyelowo
5. Michael Keaton
Ralph Fiennes from “Grand Budapest Hotel” and Tom Hardy from “Locke” should be included on this list. Fully agree with you about Keaton
Yes Monica! Even though I didn’t love Grand Budapest Hotel as much as most people, Fiennes definitely is the best thing in the film and one of the best performances in any Anderson films.
For me, the duo of Miles Teller and J.K. Simmons is electrifying. I’m surprised by how much growth Teller (as an actor) has every time he’s on screen. Personally, I think he’s miles ahead of Zac Efron and actors of his generation. Just saw “Foxcatcher” today, Steve Carrell is excellent, but Mark Ruffalo provides the heart and emotion in the icy cold film.
Where is Ralph Fiennes? He gave one of my favorite performances of the year. I fell in love with The Grand Budapest Hotel.
I’m yet to see a number of the headliners, but one performance that broke my heart in 2014 was Eddie Marsan in Uberto Pasolini’s ‘Still Life’.
I hate ties. Not fair.
Michael Keaton’s performance in Birdman is brilliant, so is David Oyelowo in Selma. I think it is harder to play a convincible legendary figure like MLK Jr. David Oyelowo absolutely disappears in the role. He becomes Dr. King.
“…You’re lucky if you’re a white male…”
Shouldn’t that be “You’re lucky if you’re a straight white male?”
“We don’t see him wrestle with his sexuality because that isn’t part of the film, but does it have to be?”
If you replaced “sexuality,” with race, or gender, would that sentence still makes sense?
I just read the tagline for “about the author” Sasha. So funny.
Just saw foxcatcher as well. .carrell was fucking amazing omg. Very impressed. Critics choice madea mistake and it would be a shame if he got snubbed.
no disagreement with your analysis. Keaton’s a lock, IMO.
Re: Cumberbatch and The Imitation Game. I liked the movie and am pleased its doing so well. If that’ the movie they felt they could make and wanted to make, bravo. I understand all that, but still have to say the Ken doll portrayal felt shallow, or false, to me, not because I’m supposed to feel that way. Just do. Maybe it does have to be part of the film, not because of politics, but just because.
That said, the portrayal of Turing’s loyalty to his first love was spot on and very moving.
Wow so many amazing performances. I just saw Foxcatcher on Monday and Steve Carell was mesmerizing, i seriously couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It’s really hard to pick a winner in this category but for me Keaton is still the best but yikes everyone else just killed it.
Happy New Year to you as well. So nice to see your pleasant self shining through
Jake should be number one. #justsayin
Nicolas cage in “Joe” was very underrated performance
“You’re lucky if you’re a white male”
As always such a lovely way to start an article.