Showing posts with label Cate Blanchett. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cate Blanchett. Show all posts

Saturday, February 15, 2014

Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine

Cate Blanchett received her sixth Oscar nomination for playing Jasmine French, a socialite having a complete nervous breakdown in Woody Allen's latest, Blue Jasmine. At this moment, Cate Blanchett seems to have this award locked up and I believe she will win by a landslide as the only minimal threat to her is Dame Judi, whose film is simply not big enough, despite the love it received from the Academy and the backlash against American Hustle doesn't work in Amy Adams' favor, either. I'm not mentioning this new controversy because when I started to think how that might affect Cate's chances, I really became ashamed how I can analyse the impact of a family tragedy on the Best Actress race. So that's about that. 

Most people don't consider Blue Jasmine one of the best movies of Woody Allen and while I agree with that, I still view it as a more than respectable effort from a true master. It's so tastefully and carefully directed and written that I couldn't stop marvelling at the nuances in the story, which many people overlook. I love its deeply dark tone and sense of humor, its almost wicked parody of the over-the-top story of Streetcar and ultimately, its devastating ending. The cast is also stellar: while I'm actually disappointed that Oprah wasn't nominated (The Butler was guilty pleasure for me), I'm so glad that Sally Hawkins got in. a) She was brilliant in Happy-Go-Lucky (for which she easily should have won), b) she was excellent as Ginger, carefully and gradually revealing her resentment towards Jasmine.

Still, the respective achievements of Woody Allen and Sally Hawkins are clearly overshadowed by the brilliance of Cate Blanchett, who's so obviously at the peak of her career. Cate took six years of (sort of) break from movies, devoting her energy and talents to the Sydney stage and this kind of creative recharing clearly shows in every second of her breathtaking performance in Blue Jasmine. Katharine Hepburn always used to say that you win the Oscars for the wrong roles and Cate proved that by winning an Oscar for playing, ironically, Katharine Hepburn (although I love that performance immensely, it was clear that it wasn't her best). Also, if she hadn't won in 2007, she wouldn't be such a threat to win this time (that win could have taken her career into a different direction). However, the best thing about Cate Blanchett, that she constantly proves what we so often forget: great work is its own reward.

Cate could have done this role in many different ways: she could have coasted on the neurosis and the mannerisms of the character, creating an easy, delightful rich bitch character that I'm sure just as many people would have celebrated and loved. She could have just given another Blanche DuBois and ignored the rest of Jasmine, depriving her from layers that were still there. Had she only chosen to do one of these, I can assure you, she would still be the front-runner to win this Oscar. However, Cate used an amazingly written character and gave it everything she knows and is capable of as an actor as a performer. She really examines all the parts of this character, thoroughly exploring all the areas, revealing all of them to the audience. Even strictly from a technical point of view, this is a flawless turn that should be studied and observed in the years to come.

And it should be studied, because there is a new aspect of a performance that you discover every time you watch this film. I've seen it three times now and frankly, I wouldn't watch it more than once if it wasn't for her. There is this magical performance that becomes so addictive that you just have to get small doses of it regularly. As a whole, it's a lot to take and honestly quite overwhelming and devastating, but even the smallest nuances seem interesting in it.

As I said, what I love the most about Cate here is her decision to really do this character justice and not to surrender to our expectations. This is a marvelous achievement because it doesn't hit you in your face with the tragedy of the character: it's hard-hitting and devastating because she knows when to hold it back and when to let it all out, while also remaining unpredictable and surprising (I suppose that "I saw you, Erica" line will haunt many of us for a long time). There's always a necessary amount of intensity and anxiety to this character, but Cate is seemingly aware that sudden slaps hit harder than being constantly beaten up. Slaps, what slaps? :) Cate basically punches you in the stomach. That punch is, naturally, devastating and shocking but the journey which leads to that point is just as interesting. You keep marvelling at the nuances and details about the character that become subtle hints about the character's fate.

And if the 100% precision hadn't already been enough, Cate also manages to take it a step further. Not only is she able to do everything right, she also knows how to do this seemingly effortlessly, while letting the audience sink deeper and deeper into Jasmine's story. It's like watching a magician: you kind of know that there most a trick, but you just cannot spot it, no matte how much you try. Or does that lead us to the conclusion that there's real magic going on the screen? In my opinion, probably. This is one of those rare cases when you see that everything is working with this character.

Moreover, she doesn't leave you there with all the drama of this character and instead, she also emphasises the dark comedy in it. She doesn't settle for the cheap solution of letting only the craziness and the tragedy have an effect on the audience. Even when you have an actress doing miracles with a role, I cannot really appreciate the role unless there's some humor to it. It gives an extra layer of reality and color to every role, even the darkest, most tragic of all, otherwise it can easily become plain camp or at worst, self-conscious suffering.

Obviously, the stage experience of Cate helps her a great deal with this part. As I wrote about Viola Davis' performance two years ago, if a stage actress uses all the energy inside her that she brought from the stage, it can lead to the most powerful results. Neither of them is theatrical, but they brought this magical aura that draws you in and that's so missing from most of the film performances. As I said, what we see on the screen it's just plain magic.

Still, none of this can prepare you for the devastating ending of Blue Jasmine. SPOILER We get to see Jasmine's past revealed: you cannot really imagine if Cate's performance can get any better after the scene where we see Jasmine find out about Hal's plans to leave her, having a total meltdown, but as we get back to the present we see how this really has taken toll of Jasmine. Although we can see Woody's screenplay severely judging Jasmine (I wonder how much of it is a subtle hint at a previous leading lady of his), Cate avoids that path and she somehow makes us feel sorry for this lady as we see her get completely lost in her conscience and her own insanity. Eventually, she's just crazy homeless lady with wet hair talking to herself (never mind the designer outfits). And Cate does nothing to cut the edges of the brutality of the ending in order to make you feel better about Jasmine. There's no kind stranger to help her, only the Chanel clothes and stories of her vanished wealth and forgotten dinner parties. Cate doesn't give us any resolution or peace about Jasmine; her juicy diva lines fade and you don't see her as a fallen queen anymore, but as that crazy homeless lady with wet hair talking to herself. The pain of all the million promises of "I'll start again" fading away is devastatingly shown by Cate.

In the end, it comes down to this: not only does Cate Blanchett give the best performance of her career on the big screen, it's also one of the most interesting, complex and richly played characters I've seen in years. You see a brilliant actress at the top of her game, completely understanding the character, handling the technical part like nobody's business, while also holding a real emotional (gut-)punch for the audience. Overwhelming, terrific, terrifying and ultimately amazing work for which Cate will deservedly walk away with the Academy Award.

Obviously. :) What do you think? 

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Best Actress 2013

2013


So the nominees are:

  • Amy Adams in American Hustle 
  • Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine
  • Sandra Bullock in Gravity
  • Judi Dench in Philomena
  • Meryl Streep in August: Osage County
Since everybody's concentrating on this years' race, instead of posting my review of Angela Bassett, I decided to focus on this year's set of nominees. Will I be charmed by Cate or Meryl's pill-popping ladies or Amy and Sandra's survival stories or perhaps the softie side of mine will go for Judi Dench? 

What do you think beside the fact that I cannot commit to any year? I will finish all of them. :P Who do you think will win? What do you think my ranking will look like? :)

Saturday, October 20, 2012

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2007

2007



So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Ellen Page in Juno
 I don't really know what to make out of Ellen Page's extremely weak performance. Although the character is incredibly annoying and as fake as possible, I really think that it's more due to Diablo Cody's  incompetent screenplay and Jason Reitman's forced direction. Ellen Page's only fault is that she's just not talented enough to make this character realistic and human. So after all, for me this work is nothing more than a failed effort.

4. Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Cate Blanchett's second Elizabeth is a real disappointment, but I'm much more forgiving about it than others. Cate is always such a force on screen that it makes up for the flaws of the character a little bit. Although there's no depth or real development in Elizabeth, Cate is able to prevent the movie from being a total disaster and she kept me from turning off the tv set. A flawed performance for sure, but not a real failure.

3. Laura Linney in The Savages
Laura Linney gives an extremely relatable, wonderful performance as a person who doesn't seem to be likeable at all at first sight and yet we get close to her and sympathise with her character. She never goes for cheap tricks to portray the neurotic personality of Wendy. She excellently mixes comedy with drama, creating the ideal dramedy performance while seeming effortless all the time (something that one of her fellow nominees didn't really succeed in). 

2. Julie Christie in Away from Her
 As Fiona Anderson, Julie Christie gives an amazing, heartbreaking performance that stays with you long after you finished watching the film. She portrays Fiona's pain and suffering with an incredible amount of grace and dignity and that's what makes this movie even more effective and heartwrenching. Although Julie's acting might be too subtle and seem too effortless for some, for me this is a true masterclass in acting, which is easily among the greatest achievements of this fantastic actress.

1. Marion Cotillard in La Vie en Rose
In what's one of my easiest decisions ever, Marion easily walks away with this year. She is nothing short of amazing in every possible way an actress can be. Her performance has the effect of an earthquake: it makes you go through Édith's journey along with her and get to understand why this woman was such a brilliant artist. It's very unusual, extraordinary and unbelievable work from a truly great actress who gives probably the most  brilliant portrayal of a real life person.

So I can proudly announce
that the winner is...
Marion Cotillard
in 
La vie en rose
Easy win.

Final thoughts: What an unexcting year! Everything went the way I expected and things went pretty predictably. Marion simply killed her competition, Julie was shining, Laura was fine and then there were the two other ladies, far behind. With hindsight, I can't see how Marion could have lost this, she's so damn good here. Congrats to Andre Lepaun, Louis and Nues20 on your predictions! :) You can pick a year, that I'm gonna do some time, hopefully. :)

Omissions: 
  • Anamaria Marinca in 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days

About the next year: I really needed to go back to my favorite decade and my most special actress for some refreshment. :) I think this is enough clue. :) 

What do you think? Any thoughts on your mind?

Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth: The Golden Age

Cate Blanchett received her fifth Oscar nomination for reprising her role as Queen Elizabeth I in Elizabeth: The Golden Age. At the time, people were stunned and pissed that Cate stole the spot of Angelina Jolie whose performance was hailed by critics and audiences all over the world. However, Cate managed to pull off the double nomination. Obviously, she had absolutely no chance of winning Best Actress and I don't think she wanted to win that badly (just remember her genuinely thrilled face when Marion won). Nevertheless, she remained to be one of the least liked nominees this category has ever known (though I feel that the bad memory's gradually gonna fade in people's memory). 

While Elizabeth: The Golden Age is an entertaining movie, I felt it was a completely useless effort. First of all, to me, the first Elizabeth is a real classic and it's the main reason I fell for the genre. It had everything: great drama, flawless acting, battle, intrigue, blood and sex plus above all, a fantastic, plus the brilliant-brilliant performance of Cate Blanchett (yes, I'm seriously considering making her my 1998 winner after all). The Golden Age was bound to fail in comparision with the first part and unfortunately it wasn't a pleasant surprise. It was surprisingly unbalanced and shallowly written and the battle wasn't as epic as I remembered. I just don't like it when historical movies turn out to be soap operas, simple as that.

However, I DO love Cate Blanchett and she always makes up for the mistakes of her movies. There's just a special aura of greatness around her, which makes you shake in your boots. What I mostly admire about her is her incredible range: it doesn't matter if she has to play a fallen teacher in Notes on a Scandal, Kate Hepburn in The Aviator or Queen Elizabeth for that matter. Being trained in the theatre is surely a great push for any actress and in that way she's just like Great Glenn: she brings her confidence and energy from the stage to her movie, which lead to wonderfully vital and balanced performances.

And yet, not even Cate is able to resurrect the legend in Elizabeth: The Golden Age. She's a brilliant actress but not a miracle worker. Actually, I feel it's easier to stand out in a bad movie with a showy character (just see the 65% of Meryl Streep's movies) than being in a so-so movie with an incomplete, one-dimensional character. Queen Elizabeth is a character that's so often portrayed that it's very difficult to add layers to her character and it takes a less-known story of her life to find out  something new and interesting about her. The story with Mary Stuart is a very interesting one and so is the one with the Spanish armada, but I felt the movie wanted a bit too much with showing both of them. As a result, we don't get a real insight into Elizabeth's life, we just get to se small, rushed chapters.

My main problem was that Cate seemed to give in way too early and turned out to be Joan Collins earlier than she could have. A bitchy soap diva might be amusing to see, but hardly Oscar-worthy. What makes Cate better than that is simply that previously mentioned energy of hers. Although some might argue that it would have better for her to go all the way with being campy, I think it was better to keep some sense of nobility and dignity around Queen Elizabeth. I think it's one of the biggest misconception of people that Elizabeth was a drama queen and that's what made the first Elizabeth so special: Elizabeth was portrayed as a powerful woman, full of passion and doubts about herself. I understand that power and being a queen changed Elizabeth as a person, I just refuse to believe that it could transform such a strong character in such a dramatic way. I don't think she became a whiny schoolgirl after all those years.

That being said, this Elizabeth doesn't develop more than characters from Melrose Place, you can just see patterns in her: she's bitchy, than she shouts and she calms down eventually. With such shallow writing, I don't think Cate could have done wonders with the part. She's given neither the time nor the opportunities the make up for all the flaws in the writing (she could have pulled it off if the movie had been just twenty minutes longer). Whenever something interesting is about to happen, there's a useless scene of an assasination or torturing, which is in Cate's way. As a result, none of the relationships seems realistic or complex enough.

And we got to another sore subject: the (lack of) chemistry between Cate Blanchett and Clive Owen. There were two good-looking, exceptionally talented actors and yet there's no fire and music around them: the five minutes that they spend together just doesn't convince me that this relationship caused such a crisis in Elizabeth's life. We supposed to believe something that is seemingly missing from the movie and all this just weakens Cate's efforts.

The same applies for the execution of Mary Stuart: instead of suggesting real moral dilemma, the movie decides to show a whiny Elizabeth who easily gives in to her advisors. This storyline is probably one of the most wasted ones ever in the history of film. And in spite of all these things, Cate was still able to draw my attention. And why is that? Because she's an f-ing brilliant actress and it's always a joy to see a performer at the top of her career, even if the role doesn't live up to her wonderful talent. Despite all the obstacles, Cate simply cannot lose her charm and powerful presence and that's what she has and Ellen Page doesn't: Cate is capable of showing her greatness even with the shittiest material (even if it's for a short period of time). And a great actress always remains one.

To sum up, Cate Blanchett's second Elizabeth is a real disappointment, but I'm much more forgiving about it than others. Cate is always such a force on screen that it makes up for the flaws of the character a little bit. Although there's no depth or real development in Elizabeth, Cate is able to prevent the movie from being a total disaster and she kept me from turning off the tv set. A flawed performance for sure, but not a real failure.

What do you think? (The very predictable conclusion comes today as well so that I can finally move on from this bland, uninteresting year to something REALLY excting.)

Monday, July 30, 2012

The Next Year

2007


So the nominees were:

  • Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth: The Golden Age
  • Julie Christie in Away from Her
  • Marion Cotillard in La vie en rose
  • Laura Linney in The Savages
  • Ellen Page in Juno
A great-looking year, which I was lucky to follow at the time. Marion was a surprise winner over Julie Christie, let's see if I she'll be a winner here as well or I pick another fantastic lady. :) 

What do you think? Who's your pick? What's your prediction for my ranking? :)

Thursday, June 24, 2010

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1998

About the field: Three totally forgettable works and two brilliant performances. 1998 was not a very balanced year in terms of greatness. The field is worth not more than 3 Meryls, however if we see the individual performances, we can see that actually, this race was very colorful. We can find many characters: a monarch, a poetic young girl, a lonely woman, a cancer-stricken mum and a musician. Not all the performances were great, but I actually liked all the movies except for One True Thing. In the case of this year, the decision was much easier (Gosh, I'm still a bit sour about Carey Mulligan) and probably even obvious for me. Actually, this was the ranking that I imagined at the very beginning. So here it is:

5. Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love
This is a performance of which I did not have a very high opinion and I still don't, but I managed to like or at least appreciate it. In the last 20 minutes she was utterly charming and lovable, probably what she should have been during the whole movie. I'm not saying this is Oscar material but not bad anyway.

4. Emily Watson in Hilary and Jackie
She mostly gives the same performance she did in Breaking the Waves in a more subtle way. From a mediocre actress, this would have been a terrific achievement. However, we must NOT forget that this is Emily Watson, an amazing talent and therefore you can understand why I was so disappointed with this performance.

3. Meryl Streep in One True Thing
This performance was probably not as bad as it might seem to be from my review, yet I was just very-very disappointed as this is probably the weakest performance I've ever seen from Meryl Streep. I really hoped for something heartbreakingly sad, but never reall got what I wanted. Too bad for her.

2. Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth
The perfect example of "in another year".The best thing about this performance is probably Blanchett's magnetic and flaming on-screen presence, which is so strong, that she does not only commands the screen, she becomes a true dictator or if you like it, a queen with absolute power.
Amazing work by an amazing talent.

1. Fernanda Montenegro in Central Station
This performance is so indescribable as it relies mostly on emotions, so you cannot really get it across unfortunately. I thought that would not impress me that muchi but I was truly wrong. She does not only break your heart and makes you feel sorry for the character, but also lets you know the regrets, desires, thoughts of this person. Totally mesmerizing, beautiful performance for the ages.

So I can proudly announce 
that my winner for this year is,
Fernanda Montenegro 
in Central Station

I have already chosen my next year (which I won't begin until next Thursday unfortunately) and I give some clues so that you can find out:
  • a winner with a horrible personal life
  • a nominee who's a member of a legendary comedy couple
  • Britain rules
  • a foreign nominee
  • one of the LEAST talked about races ever (if not the one)
These clues might be misleading, so think twice and don't think about the most obvious one.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth

Fabulous Cate Blanchett received her first nomination for playing the legendary queen of England, Elizabeth I, which is one of the most brilliant roles that an actress get ever get (just see which actresses played her). However, in Elizabeth we don't see the strong and merciless queen until the very end of the movie, we rather get to know an inconfident girl who has to deal with the unexpected responsibility, the possibility of marriage, vicious enemies and above all, a ruined and weak England.

Elizabeth is a brilliantly made movie of rarely seen quality. The technical part of the movie is one-of-a-kind and simply breathtaking. The editing, the cinematography, the art direction, the costumes and the catchy music are really impressive. However, the best thing about Elizabeth is the unforgettable acting ensemble. Geoffrey Rush should have received a nom for his role as Sir Walsingham (instead of Shakespeare in Love). His performance is very subtle and simply great. Joseph Fiennes gives a reliable, good performance and so does Richard Attenborough, John Gielgud and so on.

Yet, this movie is the one-woman show of Cate Blanchett, playing her first significant role. Although she was not a big star at all at the time, she had as much confidence as she has today. She shows every possible face of Elizabeth, making her a truly unique, exciting character, one you care about, but never truly like. She masterfully deals with all the emotions and knows exactly well what the audience can handle at the time.

In her frist scene, we see a naive young girl dancing and having fun with her friends. We can almost touch her fear and desperartion, but also her courage in the scenes when she's sent to prison and after all the dignity which she handles her new state with. We can feel that this woman will be a great monarch, but Blanchett perfectly show how immature Elizabeth is at the beginning and how much she lacks self-confidence.

The best thing about this performance is probably Blanchett's magnetic and flaming on-screen presence, which is so strong, that she does not only commands the screen, she becomes a true dictator or if you like it, a queen with absolute power. It's so marvellous, that Cate Blanchett also transforms as her character develops. Blanchett plays her in many different ways, she never repeats herself, her talent flows like a river. I can't think about any other performance which is as strong as Blanchett in Elizabeth.

And I also love that she puts very much humor and irony into this performance, I especially loved her bitchy one-liners, despite the fact that I am not a big fan of on-screen bitchiness. And Blanchett also nails it. If I had to pick the higlight of this performance, I cannot really think about one. Her whole thing is the highlight, but if I really had to choose one, it would be probably her monologue about how religion divided England. It's not a coincidence that it was her Oscar clip as it was just breathtaking. However, her breakdowns are also worth mentioning.

It's interesting that although this performance is loved and respected by nearly everyone, and almost nobody likes her in the sequel. I also loved her in that one, but that's a different story. We just have to agree that in Elizabeth, she's not a dynamite, she's a nuclear bomb.

So, to sum up, I got the performance I've been waiting, hoping, praying for. This year has been so weak so far and it was so refreshing to see breathtaking, gutwrenching, tearjerking, exciting and dignified acting on screen. Excellent work by an amazing talent.
Were you also this amazed by great Cate or you simply despised her? Tell me in your comments that I am EAGER to read.

There's only Fernanda Montenegro left, whom I watch in about two hours. I reveal the results on Thursday.

Sunday, June 20, 2010

The next year...

I have to wait until 1995 to get Dead Man Walking (last time I saw I borrowed it from the school library, but now there's no school), but I figured that I could do another year until then and I decided that it would be...

1998



And the nominees were:
  • Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth
  • Fernanda Montenegro in Central Station
  • Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love*
  • Meryl Streep in One True Thing
  • Emily Watson in Hillary and Jackie
So who do you predict to win? Who do you want to win?