You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Stanley Tucci’ tag.

John’s a good man and got this up before the nominees were announced.  I’m gonna see how many categories I can get through before Oscars.  Now, I’ve seen probably more 2009 movies than I should have, but I’m still slogging my way through some, so between that and the game theory of the ballot, I reserve the right to have my best of 2009 list look a little different, though ballots are due when ballots are due.

1.  Stanley Tucci, Blind Date

A remake of the same-named Theo van Gogh film, Blind Date slipped into a few theaters rather quietly, and I have no idea how it came across my radar.  Little more than Tucci, Patricia Clarkson, and a single room, it blurs the line between film and staged play.  Revolving around a husband and a wife who set up blind dates with each other as they deal with a tragedy, the role requires tremendous range and depth, and I can’t really imagine too many actors pulling it off successfully.

2.  Joseph Gordon-Levitt, (500) Days of Summer

He’ll have turned 30 around next year’s Oscars, so maybe he’ll finally be old enough for some Academy love.  He’s certainly built an impressive resume.  The male lead in a romantic comedy of this sort is difficult to play, in my opinion.  It is very easy to veer off into sheer whininess, but Gordon-Levitt is eminently relatable.

3. Sharlto Copley, District 9

In traditional hands, this role is played by someone like Vin Diesel.  Which would have been interesting, sure.  But instead, one of the most unlikeliest action heroes turned in something quite memorable.

4.  Daniel Day-Lewis, Nine

The movie wasn’t great, sure.  But Daniel Day-Lewis was his usual crazy impressive self.  If he had been billed as, say, Baniel Bay-Kewis, I would have had absolutely no idea that this actor was the same one who played Daniel Plainview.  His ability to morph from role to role is just staggering.

5.  Colin Firth, A Single Man

Another performance hampered by a subpar film.  It tickled me pink to see Colin Firth get a nod, because he’s been so consistently great.  Given about as much to work with as Jeff Bridges, for example, Firth creates a much more textured character, one who felt more like a real person than a caricature.

Just off the ballot: Michael Sheen (The Damned United) and Patton Oswalt (Big Fan)

Advertisements

Well this morning the Official Mistress of the Golden Grouches (c), Anne Hathaway, announced the nominations — and there were few surprises among the acting nods, a couple shockers in the Best Picture, but overall things went according to plan. Nonetheless, we still pulled together our thoughts for a short post.

Brian: My biggest disappointment is that with Penelope Cruz’ nomination, I now have to see Nine, something that I had been avoiding doing. No real desire to see it at all, but it can’t be nearly as bad as Lovely Bones, which fortunately, did indeed garner Stanley Tucci a nomination. It would have been tragic had we had to sit through that dreck for no reason whatsoever.

With the best pictures, I was quite happy to see District 9 get the nod there and in screenplay — I held out hope for director until getting slapped in the face by Lee Daniels name being read. As Jared says below, Blind Side is the only real WTF here, and even that it’s rather pointless since it has no shot at winning. This batch of nominations also has me quite excited to see A Serious Man when it comes out on DVD next week.

Other thoughts: disappointed that Damon got nominated for the wrong role and left Molina in the dust. Happy to see Moore get snubbed for A Single Man as her role was more or less the same as Susan Sarandon’s in Lovely Bones and was less funny. I had forgotten all about In the Loop until John started his well-deserved campaign for it, and I’m happy that John got something to gloat about. By far my biggest disappointment though was Marvin Hamlisch getting crapola for The Informant. His score was such an integral character in the great movie that it deserved to win the award, not just the nod.

Looking forward to stewing over these races in the “should win” discussions — especially the screenplays. Lots to ponder. And I think the 10 films for best picture was a wild success — good job…academy?

Adam: Editor’s Note: Adam did not submit anything so I wrote it for him. Inglorious Basterds: Yay. If only It’s Complicated were nominated, then I could make fun of Brian more. I’ll find other ways.

Jared, via iPhone in the DFW airport: Most surprising to me is the relative lack of true surprises. There were some, of course, but I’d guess most Oscar prognosticators did pretty well, especially if they stayed conservative.

People will hate on The Blind Side, and sure, it probably isn’t a top ten film. However, in my opinion it is miles better than Crazy Heart, Invictus, and The Messenger, all of which now appear to have been viable contenders. Like, it just isn’t close at all. So while I would have preferred Star Trek, The Hangover, or In The Loop, I can settle for the middle ground.

I’ve heard people claim this is the wrong year for ten nominees. But you know what? This a very strong lineup, and for me, stacks up against much of this decade’s best picture groups. And really, assuming the expansion got District 9 and Up into the group, I’m fully prepared to call it a success.

I’m a little surprised we didn’t see something crazy in Supporting Actress. Sorta seems like the Academy threw its collective hands in the air and gave up. There was definitely room for another film to have made a play here. No Basterds is a surprise, I guess, but there seemed a very unWeinstein-like unfocused campaign.

Finally, the screenplay categories were a general success. My efforts to not jinx them went mostly rewarded. In the Loop getting a nomination is such a good thing. But, of course, the one nomination I really really wanted to see, (500) Days of Summer, missed. Probably at the hands of The Messenger, which I interpret as a direct, intentional, personal slap in my face.

John: Before going to bed last night I nearly made a quick post amending my earlier “biggest hopes” declarations. But I decided not to and both of those hopes came true!

I had been surprised at the amount of In the Loop predictions prognosticators were making yesterday, which gave me hope for an Adapted Screenplay nomination, whereas before I thought of it as only a longshot. But then it happened! It was my big fist pump moment of the morning. It really has made my day.

My other hope was that Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs would get left off the Animated Feature slate in favor of some of the more interesting films that came out this year. When Coraline was announced first (nominees are announced alphabetically) it was obvious this wish had come true and it was fun to see what would take its spot. The Secret of Kells is an interesting choice, although not the one I would make.

A few other quick thoughts:

  • A boring slate of acting nominees. Very by the numbers. Penelope Cruz was a surprise, but only because her long-presumed nomination seemed derailed by Nine‘s failure.
  • No Avatar in Original Screenplay. Not a problem for most of the Grouches, but interesting that such a juggernaut would miss. 500 Days of Summer also missed and that had seemed like the indie that would break out in a writing category. I suspect not being in the picture for Best Picture hurt it.
  • Hooray for Invictus not making Best Picture even though it appears to be supplanted by the awful The Blind Side.
  • No Makeup nod for District 9 despite the film’s heavy use of prosthetics. Instead the aging makeup for Il Divo and the hairstyles of The Young Victoria get in, along side Star Trek.
  • No Score nod for The Informant! excludes that gem of a film completely.
  • I’m generally happy with the Best Song slate. Thankfully “See You” from Avatar was left off.

Is there anything better than being blown away by a film out of the blue? That “I can’t believe how great that was” enthusiasm as the credits roll? My latest surprise revelation was Julie & Julia. I had only middling expectations going in. I’m not really the target audience and the critical reaction had been mixed: Meryl Streep was supposed to be wonderful as usual but only her half of the film was worthwhile.

Well I found myself entirely enchanted. Yes of course Meryl turns in another terrific performance. But it’s an all-around entertaining time and I didn’t even feel like the “Julie” part paled significantly compared to the “Julia” part.

Sticking with Julie for a bit, I think it’s true to say that a story of one woman blogging a cooking challenge isn’t going to be a cinematic as the Julia Childs story of revolutionizing cooking forever. And while I would agree the script doesn’t develop Julie as well as it perhaps could have to make the viewer care for her more, the Julie story is not a notable let-down compared to Julia.

Maybe it’s a generational thing, but I related to Julie. We’re a hyper-connected and creative generation and that yearning to make a mark in the world – or at least to find a worthwhile outlet for expression – resonated. (I mean, here I am writing on a blog after all.) Maybe Julie’s need to create and connect and overshare just doesn’t have the same impact on people who didn’t grow up with Live Journal. One’s connection with Julie can vary widely, but I imagine it helps if the entire point of her story isn’t dismissed outright.

The fact that Julie isn’t necessarily a likable character doesn’t detract from the film. In fact I think it probably makes it more interesting. Without a dynamic character that’s allowed to have some large flaws I think the Julie story really would fall flat. And it’s nice to see Amy Adams in a role where she can dial down the chirpiness.

That said, it’s undeniable that the Julia story is wonderful and the real heart of the film. Streep is just delightful and I found the journey through Childs’ life fascinating and enjoyable. One of the more interesting elements is her marriage to Paul, played superbly by Stanley Tucci. Their deep devotion to each other is played straight and without false drama, which is refreshing and not at all boring. Even while sharing scenes with the marvelous Streep playing the larger-than-life Julia Childs, Tucci shines and their chemistry is sparkling.

It seems likely Streep will get a Best Actress nod here, and it would be well-deserved. I wonder if someone else gives the exact same performance, would even get consideration? On the other hand, who else could give the exact same performance? And Tucci would get a (again, well-deserved) Supporting Actor nomination if he wasn’t probably going to get one for The Lovely Bones instead. And I’d be happy with an Adapted Screenplay nod as well since the story is so infectiously enjoyable.

I caught Julie & Julia on a flight where I was already jet-lagged out of my skull and my previous two nights had been spent on an overnight bus hurtling down a Kenyan highway and on an airplane, so I’m looking forward to seeing it again while in a more normal state of mind. If it charmed me even while I was completely out of it, I’d call that a good sign. And this time I’ll be able to eat more than airline food while watching it.

June 2019
S M T W T F S
« Jan    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  
Advertisements