Wednesday, July 13, 2011

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2003

2003


So the much anticipated ranking is:

This is a wasted opportunity.2003 offered some really weak Best Actress nominees and Morton was one of them. There were some points where I was minimally impressed but for most of the time I felt really nothing. Too bad, as this could have been something very interesting and moving and yet it became a little dreary and lifeless.

I'm very confused. How should I feel? What should I be thinking? For me, Naomi Watts' performance in 21 Grams is a failure. It's not epic fail, it's more of a missed opportunity even though it's extremely hard to say anything about this performance and the movie. All so shady and confusing and again, not in a good way.

Keisha Castle-Hughes, stands out in the awful field of 2003. Although this is not one of the greatest performances, she still turned in a beautiful work, full of substance. The great parts make up for the weaknesses and overall it's a really great job by an extremely young talent.

I ask myself: is this that much from Diane Keaton? Well, probably not. Still, she's extremely funny and entertaining as Erica Barry, she has a wonderful chemistry with Jack Nicholson and she enlightens the screen with her wonderful, radiant personality that I love so much. I might be biased but who cares? I liked her.
SURPIRSE! :) This performance is universally praised and for a reason. Charlize Theron gives an unfogettable, astonishing, breathtaking, mindblowing, heart-breaking, angry, bitter, desperate, devastated, devastating, in short brilliant performance as Aileen Wuornos. This might look like another deglam role but it's more than that in my opinion. Charlize really rocks as Aileen, showing the dark sides of human life. Brilliant.

So I can proudly announce
the winner is...
Charlize Theron
in
Monster
As easily as it gets.

Congratulations to Malcolm! Excellent predictions! Prize: you can pick the year I'm going to do after the next one (available for me: 1933, 1943, 1953, 1956, 1961, 1962, 1967, 1968, 1971 1976, 1982, 1985, 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1999, 2000, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008)

Final thoughts: An awful year. There you go, I said it. I guess that's pretty much what I expected. Charlize was the easiest winner so far. There was so much gap between the first and the second that it almost hurts. Diane and Keisha are pretty solid. However, the other two ladies were not that satisfying (ot put it delicately). Actually, this was the first year when two nominees were fighting for the #4 spot. :) I gave the edge to Naomi because she grew on me a bit.

Omissions: 
  • Uma Thurman in Kill Bill Vol. 1. 
  • Jamie Lee Curtis in Freaky Friday
About the next year: Oh, I can't wait to do the next year. It offers not one, but two (or even three?) iconic performances. I really want to make my thoughts clear on that year. It's a historic year. This clue says why:
  • VIVA ITALIA! :)
What do you think?

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I bet it's 1961! :)

joe burns said...

Expected and I agree pretty much.


I guess 61 will be next.

Louis Morgan said...

A rather weak year, but a great winner.

dinasztie said...

Louis: Exactly. :)

Malcolm said...

I really liked mot of the years but..... I guess 2005. Seems like a pretty weak year, eh? :)

dinasztie said...

No, please don't do that to me... another year from the 2000s. :(

Malcolm said...

1992 could be fine? :)

dinasztie said...

Perfection. I just bought Howards End in Germany and I haven't watched it yet so I'm glad but I promise to do 2005 after I've done decades I've been ignoring.Just 2 or 3 years.

Malcolm said...

Thanks a bunch! :))