Best Actress 1968

The next year I'll be doing a profile/ranking on is 1968 and the nominees were:

Katharine Hepburn in The Lion In Winter

Patricia Neal in The Subject Was Roses

Vanessa Redgrave in Isadora

Barbara Streisand in Funny Girl

Joanne Woodward in Rachel, Rachel



















Note: I couldn't find a good enough picture of Neal in The Subject Was Roses, so I just uploaded one of her instead. And speaking of her, I saw The Subject Was Roses on TCM in March or February, and since it's extremely hard to find, I won't be able to rewatch it. But I'll try my hardest to look for it at every video store I go to and it would be really great if I did find it. But odds are that I will most likely do her profile on memory, although I'll watch some of the trailer so I can remember more of her. But I can remember her really well though, so it probably won't matter.


Anyway, who do you predict? Who is your pick and who are you rooting for?

Best Actress 2003: Final Thoughts

2003 was an okay year. Charlize was easily the best of the competition although Keaton would have been a worthy winner too. The rest did not deserve they're nominations. Well, not really. I don't have a problem with Watts and Castle-Hughes nominations, although I probably wouldn't have nominated them. I don't understand why Morton was nominated, but it's nice to see a surprise nomination. A weaker year then 93, but more interesting and the films are overall better, though that doesn't say much.


My ranking of the films:

1. Something's Gotta Give

2. Monster

3. Whale Rider

4. 21 Gramms

5. In America

Best Actress 2003: The Resolution!

5. Samantha Morton in In America: Samantha Morton has some very good moments and is sometimes heartbreaking , but her role is very underwritten which really limits her ability to get an above-okay performance.








4. Keisha Castle-Hughes in Whale Rider: Keisha Castle-Hughes is very good for most of the film, and she's very real and convincing, but her approach to the character is wrong and she is very underwhelming at points.






3. Naomi Watts in 21 Gramms: Watts gives a great performance in the beginning, but loses her spark once the film starts becoming a mess, and starts to overract badly.






2. Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give: Diane Keaton's gives a luminous, wonderful portrayal which is totally enjoyable. Her chemistry with Jack Nicholson is superb.







1. Charlize Theron in Monster: Charlize Theron delivers a powerful, completely real performance which is haunting. An amazing achievement.

Best Actress 2003: Naomi Watts in 21 Grams

Naomi Watts received her first Oscar nomination for playing Christina, a woman who loses her husband and her daughters in a car accident in 21 Grams.


21 Grams is a very depressing film that has it's good moments, but becomes a huge mess. It's so confusing and honestly very unbeliavable. And Naomi Watts performance is a mixed bag. In the beginning, she is perfect. She subtly and beautifully shows her grief and depression over the loss of her family and when the doctors tell her that her daughters are dead, Watts makes us feel her pain and her delivery is excellent. Watts also makes us feel her loneliness and how she seems to be sleepwalking thorough every day. She is also great in showing how she seems to open up more once she meets Paul (Sean Penn), who wants to talk to her because her husband donated his heart to him after he died. In the scene when Watts finds about this, she is very angry and here's when her performance starts going downhill. On one hand, you can see why she is so upset, but she plays the scene too over the top and rings it false. And in the scene before that when she tells him that he can't like her a lot if he barely knows her, Watts feels a bit forced and again false. The film starts becoming ridiculous and this affects Watts because it makes her seem uneven and again, a bit over the top.


Like Debra Winger in Shadowlands, Naomi Watts starts out great, but stumbles in the second half, by overracting and the fact that her film is crumbling around her. But a good effort anyway.

Best Actress 2003: Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give

Diane Keaton received her fourth Oscar nomination for playing Erica Barry, a playwrite who falls in love with her daughter's older boyfriend (Jack Nicholson) in Something's Gotta Give.


Diane Keaton is simply wonderful in this movie. She adds a lot of charm and humor to this role and makes it work wonderfully. Keaton is so luminous to watch and she just makes you feel so happy! (I know that sounds stupid, but it's true!) . Keaton adds a lot of depth to Erica as well, as we see that she is a sad, lonely person who hasn't been with anyone in a long time, and Keaton really nails that. Her best scenes are with Jack Nicholoson though and they both have brilliant chemistry together. I loved watching their relationship grow and both have an intimacy that screen couples rarely have. Keaton also really gets a lot out of the crying scene, as it is so funny, yet over-the top, in a funny way.


After Erica and Nicholson have sex though, the movie starts being slightly ridiculous and that affects Diane Keaton's performance because sometimes it feels a bit uneven given that too much seems to be happening at once. But Diane Keaton certainly gave a great performance that is a joy to watch.

Twister's Smackdown

Hey, have all of you checked out Twister's blog, Moviemania? If you haven't, then go check it out! Because he is currently doing a profile/ranking for Best Supporting Actress 2000 and in the style of Stinkylulu (who has mysteriously vanished), is also going to do a Smackdown and the steps for one are: Rate each performance (Depending on how many you've seen.)from 1 to 5 and send it to Twister via email (moviemania55@aol.com). The 2000 nominees were:


Judi Dench in Chocolate

Marcia-Gay Harden in Pollock

Kate Hudson in Almost Famous

Frances McDormand in Almost Famous

Julie Walters in Billy Elliot


Participate! And we'll see the results at the end of July!


P.s: If you are reading this Andrew, I'm just going to say thank you. Because I wasn't sure how to write this, so I looked at your post so many months ago about Twister's 2002 smackdown and you made it easier. But I wasn't trying to copy you or anything, I just needed a few pointers.

Best Actress 2003: Keisha Castle-Hughes in Whale Rider

Keisha Castle-Hughes received her first Oscar nomination and became the youngest Best Actress nominee ever for playing Pai, a young girl who yearns to prove herself as a warrior, in Whale Rider.



Keisha Castle-Hughes was supposed to be put in the Supporting category for her performance, but instead was voted into Leading. I don't really see how she's Supporting, even though she doesn't fill every frame of the movie, because her character is indeed the main character and we see the story mostly from her point of view. Anyway, Keisha Castle-Hughes is very good in this movie. She plays Pai very subtly, showing her stuborness and longing to prove to her Grandfather that she could be a great warrior. She's very convincing and realistic in the role and considering how young she was at the time, that's saying something. Like Samantha Morton, Castle-Hughes uses her face to show what she is feeling and she does it beautifully as we totally see the raw emotion on her face. A big plus to her performance is when she is giving a speech at her school concert and is crying through it because her grandfather didn't show up. She is simply heartbreaking. Another highlight is when she and her father are talking about how they can't be what their father/grandfather wants and Castle-Hughes again plays it beautifully.


But her performance is not perfect. A character like Pai should have been played with more fire and sometimes she is too subtle and underwhelming. She stays like this for most of the movie and I wish the screenplay had given her more chances to shine. But she is still very good and I decided to give her

Best Actress 2003: Samantha Morton in In America

Samantha Morton received her second Oscar nomination for playing Sarah Sullivan in In America. Sarah and her family move to America from Ireland after the death of the youngest child, Frankie. But they discover poverty and suffer greatly though the two parents try to pretend to be happy for the sake of they're two kids.



In America is an awful movie that starts out alright, but gets worse and worse since it becomes unbelievable and heavy handed. Samantha Morton tries to get something out of her role, which is very thin , and she does somewhat. Morton uses her eyes and her face to show how Sarah is feeling and she does it beautifully. Morton also shows us the internal battle going on in Sarah, how she is afraid of dying but is determined to have the baby anyway and how she is struggling with her grief over her dead son. She is also quite good in her scenes with her husband, as both of them are trying to keep the family afloat, both emotionally and financinally. But the problem is that the script never delves deep enough into the character and we never know enough about her or about her relationship with her family. The focus of the film is mostly on the father and the two daughters and there is little development between them and the mother.


But Samantha Morton did to do her best with the material and delivered a subtle, and at times beautiful performance that gets

Best Actress 2003: Charlize Theron in Monster

Charlize Theron received her first Oscar nomination and won for playing Aileen Wuornos in Monster. Aileen is a street hooker who meets Celby Wall (Christina RIcci, who is much better then the first time I saw the movie), a lesbian who she falls in love with. But after being being raped and nearly killed, Aileen kills the man who tried to kill her and becomes a serial killer.

Monster is a very interesting, even entertaining film that might stumble a bit once Aileen is being tracked down by the police, but is still worth seeing, much thanks to Charlize Theron's performance. Theron plays Aileen so realistically- You never really see any acting at all, which why when I watched it, I thought well it isn't really a performance at all. It's that believable. Aileen is an ignorant, uneducated woman, but we feel sorry for her and care about her despite her horrible actions. Theron completely brings Aileen to life- She captures her anger, her bitterness, and her determination and how she grows to care for Celby. It's very clear that Aileen comes to love and as I've said, care about Celby very much and it's she above all that gives her the strength to survive.

Some of the best moments in Charlize Theron's performance is when she is in-voice over. Theron digs deep inside her character and never lets go, forcing us to see the world from Aileen's eyes, and I have to admit it, that there is some truth in what Aileen thinks. Her chemistry with Ricci is flawless, both actresses are completely convincing and play each other off perfectly. Also, both Ricci and Theron do an excellent job in developing how their characters feel about each other- Celby starts out by being the one who feels like she's being used, but actually begins to be the one who is the user. While with Aileen it's the opposite (Although Aileen never used Celby, but just wanted to be friends with her).

Charlize Theron gives a fierce, brilliant performance which gets

Back!

Hey everybody! It's been a LONG time , yes, but I've been on vacation in France for the past two weeks! It was a lot of fun, but it was very hot and I did get really tired by the end of the day. But I did see Woody Allen twice (!) in the city walking with his wife and I almost saw Marion Cotillard but me and my father left because we had waited for about an hour and she still hadn't come out of her hotel, so bummer. Here are some things I did there: Went to the Eifle Tower, Went to countless museums and saw the original Mona Lisa, saw King Louis's palace, saw and toured Notre Dame and several other churches, and ect.

So, now I'm back! And I'll start 03 tomorrow with Charlize's profile. Anyway, I have the next three years planned, but if anybody has any requests for Best Actress years they'd like me to do, I'd be happy to take them! I was also thinking about some Supporting years and I'll either start with 89 or 42, depending on which one you'd like me to do first. So, give me some requests!