Please enjoy this edition of the Gold Rush, after the jump.
Silver Screener: So our timing on this is excellent because I just finished watching THE JUDGE!
March King: And?
SS: I liked it!
MK: But was it Oscar worthy?
I
personally don't think it was. But it gets the Academy's goat because Duvall's
been around so long and they tend to get sappy as a community.
SS: Well, like, I get it. The
Courtroom Drama is a big draw for Best Supporting Actor categories. Like the
movie A CIVIL ACTION in 1998 -- the guy who played the defendant in that also
got a Supporting Actor nom! Also, it was Robert Duvall. But to answer your
question: I don't know if it would make it to my personal ballot, but I love
Robert Duvall, I thought he was strong in it, and I don't begrudge him the nom.
MK: Yeah. I suppose I can't think
of anyone else to fill that fifth spot off the top of my head... which is NOT
the case with the Best Actor category.
SS: Oh, I can think of three off
the top of my head: Josh Brolin in INHERENT VICE. Bill Nighy in PRIDE. Ben
Schnetzer in PRIDE.
MK: ...Jake Gyllenhaal in NIGHTCRAWLER...
Ralph Fiennes in THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL... considering they nominated
everything else from that flick.
SS: Oh mannnn.... I'm so sad
Gyllenhaal and Fiennes were left out… But filling the fifth slot in place of
whom? There IS a correct answer.
MK: I say Steve Carell because he
should be considered a Supporting Actor.
SS:
I say Steve Carell because he wasn't very good.
 |
| This was my face when his name was called on nomination morning |
MK: I suppose, as far as he's
concerned, I also think the excellent makeup crew really would deserve his
acting award along side their imminent makeup award (fingers crossed).
SS: Oh, agreed. That makeup nom is
damned deserving, and should win.
MK: That being said, I like that GUARDIANS
OF THE GALAXY got some love in the Makeup and Hairstyling category... I just
think at the end of the day, that's the only award I really truly want FOXCATCHER
to win.
SS: At the end of the day, it's
the only award it should be nominated for. Well, okay, I ain't mad about
Ruffalo.
MK: Yeah, Ruffalo was pretty
incredible. Unfortunately for him, JK Simmons decided to give one of the most
interesting performances I've seen in quite a while this year. Though, I don't
want to ignore what a wonderful job Edward Norton did this year either.
SS: JK Simmons was so good. But I'm sorry -- not a
supporting role!
MK: Wait... you think JK's in the
wrong category??
SS: It's a two-hand film!
MK: I almost agree. But he really
isn't in like a full half of the film. Miles Teller's just scampering around
with his dad and that girl... and busting his hands on that drum set the whole
time.
SS: There are scenes without him,
but the movie is about him and his
effect on Miles Teller. His presence is felt in every scene.
MK: True. But Orson Welles is
definitely a supporting actor in THE THIRD MAN.
SS: Well I've never seen it, so.
You know. I can't say.
MK: Oh... really? I just assumed
we would've watched that together like fifteen years ago or something.
SS: Guess not Caleb…
(Laughs.)
MK: Well whatever. What I'm saying
is, there are amazing roles like that that can still be considered Supporting
due to total amount of time on screen in spite of their tremendous and
sometimes overwhelming impact on the plot and/or emotional journey of the film.
SS: I give it the Bill the Butcher
test -- if the amount of screen time is the same, but Daniel Day-Lewis is cast,
would the role be Lead or Supporting?
 |
| Not quite my tempo |
But okay, yes, it's borderline enough that it's not quite upsetting
MK: Interesting. That's definitely
one way to come at it.
SS: I guess for me...I just want
Ethan Hawke to win that Oscarrrrr!
MK: Aw, that's sweet. I liked him
in BOYHOOD, but I'd be really surprised if he won. That being said, I think
Patricia Arquette's got Supporting Actress in the bag.
SS: Yes! Get it, Patty!
MK: She was so damn good. And
honestly her competition isn't that strong. Not saying Dern, Streep, Knightley,
and Stone aren't at the pinnacle of their craft... Just those roles that
they're up for this year aren't nearly as inspiring as... well taking two weeks
out of your life every year for twelve years so the audience can watch you age and
grow as a person.
SS: The time put into it aside...
it's just a great performance, period. I loved being able to see a terribly
flawed woman trying to get her shit together, getting it together, wanting to
get more of it together... And I 100%
agree: when you look at the other performances, they're fine... they just come
up short in comparison. I honestly think the only one who comes close is Laura
Dern.
MK: Agreed. She was good. Just not
BOYHOOD good. Damn that movie's good! Mm, but I really liked WILD too. That's
just all Reese Witherspoon for me though. Speaking of, after a slow start, Leading
Actress wound up actually turning into perhaps the strongest category of the
season. I could make compelling cases for all five of those ladies to get the
nod.
SS: I wouldn't disagree with that.
Ace performances across the board, and not your typical kind of roles/movies,
either. Working-class dramatics from Marion Cotillard; solo anchoring from
Reese Witherspoon; batshit insanity from Rosamund Pike; and Julianne Moore
being the frontrunner, which never
happens for actresses in their 50s! Even the most "typical" slot,
that of Felicity Jones as The Wife of the Famous Man, is made unique by the
marital circumstances and the way she plays it -- the subtle hints of aging
were splendidly done!
MK: Couldn't've said it better. I
really like how well THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING managed to give us the image of a
truly mature relationship between very intellectual people. It doesn't always
have to be a war zone... and sometimes people just outgrow their surroundings. Though
I don't think I want Eddie Redmayne to win Leading Actor.
SS: I think Felicity Jones is the best
thing in that movie, Eddie Redmayne is perfectly fine, the script is great, and
the movie itself is really borrrrring.
I'm going to be quite disappointed if Keaton doesn't win. I could live with
Cooper winning, though.
MK: Yeah, Michael Keaton ftw! But
that's an interesting point you bring up... that script was pretty solid, but
much like FOXCATCHER (which didn't get a best picture nom), the final picture
just didn't pack that much punch. So what does that say about this year’s
screenplays? Or does it say anything?
SS: I think it shows that people
have a difficult time separating crafts from the film. I mean, I guess that
can't be quite true, since INHERENT VICE is nominated, but it almost feels as
if they thought THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING must be Best Picture material since
the script is great; or the other way -- that THE IMITATION GAME must
be well-written since the movie all-around is great. And let me be clear – THE IMITATION
GAME is not well-written.
 |
| Sometimes it is the screenplay without imagination, that gets nominated for every award imaginable. |
MK: I would have to agree. Yet, I
wonder if FOXCATCHER's issues didn't come more abruptly from categories that it
is still somehow nominated for...
SS: I think people think it's
being ambiguous when really it's just muddled.
MK: I think people are thinking
it's got a point when really nothing much of value happens.
SS: Yes! Oh God, can we get off FOXCATCHER?
It's not winning anything other than Makeup.
Oh, but that was not the end of the conversation. For Part Two, visit Who is The March King here.
No comments:
Post a Comment