1995 is a very strange year, IMO, when it came to movies and also at the Oscars as well, but that was mainly in the Best Picture and Director races.
I am not sure what to do with this year’s Best Actor ranking.
I have not seen “Il Postino” so I cannot comment on Massimo Triosi. From the clips I have seen, it seems to be good, but I can’t really judge him.
I have nothing but respect and admiration for Anthony Hopkins, but none of that really stems from his work in “Nixon”. I am not big on most Oliver Stone movies, but I found this one to be one of his better efforts. As for Hopkins, I didn’t really see him as Nixon in the slightest, but despite this, the performance wasn’t bad, but not worthy of an Oscar….or maybe even a nomination.
Now come the contenders: Nicholas Cage, Richard Dreyfuss, and Sean Penn.
Nicholas Cage swept the awards this year, but I am not really sure if I was that into this performance as many seemed to be, plus I am not the biggest fan of Nicholas Cage to begin with. The movie was good, and I loved Shue, but Cage is always a mixed bag for me. Nonetheless, I don’t begrudge him his win.
Sean Penn got my vote for “Milk” and I know that he will be a popular choice here, but I don’t remember really liking “Dead Man Walking” outside of Sarandon and Penn’s work, and I just don’t really remember being that affected by Penn. This is one movie I really need to view again, because I only remember Sarandon from it.
I wouldn’t be surprised if I am the only person that goes this route. I can’t help but say that I really enjoyed “Mr. Holland’s Opus” despite its sappiness and its typical Teacher/Student relationship storylines and I really liked the subtle work done by Richard Dreyfyss in the title role. He gets some nice big moments but the little moments in this performance are so well done by him that it doesn’t seem like the same actor that chewed up the scenery in “The Goodbye Girl”.
Odd choice, perhaps, but whatever.
Richard Dreyfuss.
Posts: 1293 | Location: WV | Registered: October 23, 2005
I'll go with Penn, even though I voted for him for "Mystic River" and "Milk" too. But his work here in excellent collaboration with Susan Sarandon is too good to deny.
I've never liked Nicolas Cage in "Leaving Las Vegas." I've never like the film either. It is too dreary and melancholy. Cage's whole performance consists of him slurring words and moving shakily around the screen. It felt incomplete and too visual with little subtext underneath; it didn't explore the inner feelings of an alcoholic, just what it looks like to be one.
My grandmother loves "Mr. Holland's Opus" a lot but she also likes the "Horse Whisperer" too, so I guess she likes overly long, sappy, movies. Dreyfuss is fine, but one Oscar is enough.
I've never seen Massimo Triosi in Il Postino, and can barely remember Hopkins in Nixon, except for the fact that he looked almost nothing like Nixon.
I've only seen 3 performances here so, I'm not going to vote, but out of the ones I've seen I'd give my vote to Dreyfus. Hopkins doesn't make Nixon complex enough for my liking, though he is good, this is one of his weaker performances.
I'm surprised to see Penn getting so many votes. I have to say, this is the one time I could really tell he was acting, something I haven't really seen in his performances since. He is one of my favorite actors, but I felt like he was too artificial in this role. However, that may be because his co-star, Sarandon, gave one of the most grounded performances of the 90s, so anything anyone did opposite her in that film would look like acting.
Sean Penn gave a blistering performance in "Dead Man Walking", and in the great Oscars' domino effect, if he had won for this role, then the great need to give him an Oscar might have been lessened for his hammy and overblown performance in "Mystic River", and then Bill Murray and (maybe, probably not) Mickey Rourke would have had greater chances at wins. "Leaving Las Vegas" will likely be the best Nicolas Cage will ever be on screen given what he chooses now (give or take "Adaptation"). If Penn couldn't win here, I'm glad that Cage did. Anthony Hopkins was brilliant in "Nixon," and after the initial shock of Hopkins looking nothing like Richard Nixon, I got into the film fairly easily and got over the physical discrepancies, just like with Frank Langella. Richard Dreyfuss showed a lot of heart in "Mr. Holland's Opus," and as schmaltzy as the film is, it'll always hold a special place for me. We played music from this film in school, and ugh, how I loved playing "Cole's Song" back then. I haven't seen "Il Postino", so I can't judge Massimo Troisi.
Rankings:
1. Sean Penn, "Dead Man Walking" 2. Nicolas Cage, "Leaving Las Vegas" 3. Anthony Hopkins, "Nixon" 4. Richard Dreyfuss, "Mr. Holland's Opus" N/A Massimo Troisi, "Il Postino (The Postman)"
Congratulations, Primetime Emmy Winners!
Comedy Series: 30 ROCK Drama Series: MAD MEN Lead Actor in a Comedy Series: Alec Baldwin, 30 ROCK Lead Actress in a Comedy Series: Toni Collette, UNITED STATES OF TARA Lead Actor in a Drama Series: Bryan Cranston, BREAKING BAD Lead Actress in a Drama Series: Glenn Close, DAMAGES Guest Actress in a Comedy Series: Tina Fey, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Guest Actress in a Drama Series: Ellen Burstyn, LAW & ORDER: SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT
Posts: 24723 | Location: North Carolina, USA | Registered: April 11, 2005
Michael Douglas should be here. His work in the American President is easily some of his best. I thought he fleshed out his character nicely and was extremely entertaining. I actually think this is the turning point in his career when he started really acting and not just using charisma or good looks.
1.Sean Penn...great work for me, much better than Milk, where I felt he was retarded, not gay 2. Nicolas Cage: He has only given two good performances in his life, this and Adaptation, but I can't give him the win for either of them 3. Anthony Nixon: an interesting interpretation... 4. Massimo Troisi: Hammy, sappy, didn't do much for me, though it did have moments of charm 5. Richard Dreyfus: a man I love, but this could have been a Hallmark Hall Of Fame movie, and if it had been, I might have supported an Emmy nod, but not Oscar worthy for me...
FYC Oscars
Best Actress: Meryl Streep, "Julie & Julia Best Supporting Actress: Judi Dench, "Nine" Best Costumes: "The Young Victoria"
Perhaps the worst group in this category of the decade... 1. Penn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2. Troisi 3. Dreyfuss 4. Hopkins 5. Cage
"Notorious was nice, but it’s not in the color purple range" "Angels and Demons may get nominated for cinematography the imagery was profound" "District Nine will definitely win for best foreign film it made money and everyone loved it" ~ 8movies
Posts: 2714 | Location: nz | Registered: January 12, 2009
HAven't seen The Postman. Either one of them. 4. Cage. This guy is the cinematic Babe Ruth. He's probably got more home run (well, at least triple) movies of anyone around these days, he's also got more strikeouts than anyone around. That's because he swang for the bleachers for a lot of his career and now he doesn;t seem to be trying. Ah, well. here's a movie where he swang for the bleachers, but I just didn't care what happened to this drunken idiot. 3. Hopkins. Good movie, weird choice for Nixon. Maybe for revenge we can get some totally American actor to play Tony Blair. 2. Penn. OK, he was always a great actor, but the quality of his movies always seemed hit or miss for the first half of his career. To be honest, he seemed like a talented guy who wasn't really trying. For every AT CLOSE RANGE or Spicoli, there was a... I can't even recall anything else he did before this. We were always told he was great, but he wasn't really living up to the potential. Then he did this. Since then, he's been living up to his potential. He plays a death row inmate as a human, yet at the end, his death is necessary. Sorry, Tim, I know that wasn't how you wanted people to respond, but that's the downside of making a great movie about an issue rather than a polemic. It is a great movie. 1. Dreyfuss--This is a wonderful performance in a wonderful movie. I cried longer after this movie than any other film I've ever seen. (I don't know if it stands up to repeat viewings, I saw it once back when it came out.) But this movie has something most movies don't: It's 2.5 hours of getting to know an ordinary normal man. That is extremely rare in movies, because we generally need some melodrama or superpowers or serial killers to make good entertainment. And I love all three of those things in my movies. But this movie believes that a man who wanted to be something fantastically great and wound up being something really good is as interesting as spies and aliens, and I think it's correct. The final scene of this movie is really just a big retirement party, but it's also a man getting to do the thing he's always wanted, and it's an enormously powerful ending. Just because a movie is a tearjerker doesn't mean it doesn't earn those tears, and it doesn't mean it's false or phony. This movie and this performance don't have a false note in them. Mr. Holland gets my vote.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: cassius,
