|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.92.218.141
the first time you watched the film....some that come to mind for me are:
1. Mary Tyler Moore- Ordinary People/Beth
2. Barbra Streisand- Funny Girl/ Fanny
3. Elizabeth Taylor- Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf/Martha
4. Judy Holliday- Born Yesterday/Billie
5. Deborah Kerr- Heaven Knows Mr. Allison/Sister Angela
6. Diana Ross- Lady Sings The Blues/Billie
7. Geraldine Page- Interiors/Eve
8. Jane Alexander- Testament/Carol
9. Cate Blanchett- Elizabeth/QE1
10.Hilary Swank- Boys Don't Cry/Brandon/Teena
11.Imelda Staunton- Vera Drake/ VeraWith the exception of the last two, these are all films that I have seen repeated times and each time I'm amazed at the nuanced performances by all the above actresses...
Follow Ups:
I'm not cynical enough to dismiss this movie. IMO it is an all time great. Toni Collette's performance stands up to any. Who even knew she was Australian at the time? While Joel Haley Osment recieved much acclaim for his performance (and deservedly so) IMO this movie fails without Collette's supurb, richly layered performance. Without her we don't see the depth of him. It was their relationship that made the movie something more than just a good ghost story with a great twist.
nt
Also in "Changing Lanes".
Hmm I'm usually irritated with who wins.I also agree with Swank for Boy's Don't Cry but I would also add her Million Dollar Baby performance.
Jodie Foster for The Accused. The thing that impresses me most about Jodie is that she has never taken acting lessons speaks fluent Italian and French and has an IQ of 160.
Hell this is the kind of person who should be president not the kind who escape from the zoo because they look human.
Others (no particular ranking, but listed earliest to most recent):Claudette Colbert (It Happened One Night)
Ingrid Bergman (Gaslight)
Barbara Stanwyck (Double Indemnity)
Gloria Swanson (Sunset Boulevard)
Betty Davis (All About Eve)
Sigourney Weaver (Aliens)
Frances McDormand (Fargo)
Helen Hunt (As Good As It Gets)
Gweneth Paltrow (Shakespeare In Love)
Julia Roberts (Erin Brockovich)
Renee Zellweger (Chicago)Some won; some didn't. Some great performances were never nominated for one reason or another and therefore weren't listed.
I gotta go look up the noms make mine :-)
Hilary Swank's Boys Don't Cry..It was my first ever encounter with Hilary on the screen..she's A M A Z I N G...!!!! and continues to be so..:)AP
# The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men # Samuel L. Jackson (Ezekiel 25:17)> Pulp Fiction < Current Set-Up..Plinius CD101-> M8-> SA-REF-> Genesis IM-8300 <-
Psych!!!
***
Moved me to the toilet...
By far one of the best performances by an actress of that or any year.Vera Drake took on a complex subject in a subtle and complex manner. It was not pro-abortion to my mind - ithe film did however pointedly illustrate the hypocracy of class disctinctions in obtaining them in 1950s Britain. The film also portrayed the emotional costs to all over the course of events in the film. No easy conlcusions should be drawn here. Thet leaves the viewer to form his/her own opinions.
when I said emotional impact what I was referring to was did the actor embody the character to the point that you believed that they had become the character. I believe at least for me that all the performances I listed did exactly that...
to care about the distinction between the actor playing a role and the role.If the work appears to glorify this woman's grizzly vocation i would prefer nobody found it a role in which they cared to excel.Unless it made her out to be the ghoulish butcher she was no feat of heroic acting could make me care to take it in.That wasn't your impression of the film was it?
unfortunately I find this to be prevalent among English films... I could see through Ms. Staunton's performance how a person who had experienced her life experiences would be driven to "help" other girls in need...Did I agree no...Could I feel empathy for someone in her situation....yes. There is a distinct difference...
i guide with reason.I can't,speaking for myself, empathize with someone who finds the course of action she chose acceptable.That there was desperation and suffering is clear.Extinguishing fragile, defenseless human life as a means of alleviating the desperation is, to me,not the best of any possible options.I simply don't agree there was no other option as though giving birth in deprived conditions is worse than the destruction of life.That just seems very short sighted and i would be unwilling to extend my empathy to her in making the choice she did so the whole story possesses,for me,the repugnant stench of selfish murder but hey,I won't listen to Wagner because he was an anti-Semite. It may be technically compelling music but it will not enter my hearing while i control my will.
when viewing "art" in any form be it film, music or any of it's other applications based on my political or personal opinions. IMHO you miss out on too much in life if you limit your options...As you have probably surmised I'm a liberal politically,but, if I limit my acceptance of art to only those things which I agree with politically or morally I limit myself as an individual...For instance, I like Bob Hope...a life-long Republican. Do I agree with his politics..no. Do I think he was funny? ABSOLUTELY! But I respect your opinion even though I may disagree with you...I wasn't aware of Wagner being an anti-semite...but I've never been a fan of Wagner and his bombastic style music either...I'm a RavelTchaikovsky/Grieg/ kind of guy....
To me simply calling something ,"Art" does not change its nature when it is of something to me very objectionable.That i am "missing out on too much in life" is exactly the point.I don't need to be reminded by a work of art that some people devalue innocence and life.It is inescapably the way of the world.The smörgåsbord of life may contain some spoiled meat.
***
Try picking up a 28 year old and check the reaction...
Can be a revelation. Not neccessarily a good one.
Teenage and young 20ish yo girls I work with come-on to me all the time...so I really don't think I'd have a problem with a girl who's 28 years old (if I was so inclined)....My wife might have something to say about that though....
Well it's a tough question because most of my favorite performances weren't nominated...For example - Renee Falconetti as Joan of Arc is my hands down #1
But in your criteria I would mostly agree with Elizabeth Taylor - Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? A great performance and what an ensemble. of Burton, Denis and Segal.
I recently saw Woolf here in NYC as a stage play with Kathleen Turner . Although Turner was good it really made appreciate E.T. even more. Taylor brought a sexuality and crudeness that was powerful and off-putting - but somehow while always earning our empathy. Burton was no slouch either!
...I was never quite sure Liz was acting. ;^)> > > "For example - Renee Falconetti as Joan of Arc is my hands down #1" < < <
Falconetti certainly deserved some recognition even though she wasn't nominated and probably wouldn't have met the Academy's American release criteria at the time.
on my list only 4 of the ten were winners notably Taylor, Streisand, Holliday and Swank. But there have been MANY instances where the Academy has overlooked really great performances in favor of more politically correct ones....
a
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: