Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina

Audrey Hepburn received her second Best Actress nomination for playing Sabrina Fairchild a young girl falling for a businesman in Billy Wilder's romantic comedy, Sabrina. I think that Audrey Hepburn received the least votes from the five ladies as she won the previous year, starred in a very lightweight comedy. The genre was good to her as she won for Roman Holiday, but the competition was quite weak that year. But 1954 was all about Grace Kelly and Judy Garland.

Sabrina is quite probably the most entertaining movie of the five. It has some sentimental and soappy moments, but everything is so full of the wit and quick humor of Billy Wilder, that I quite easily overlooked these flaws and I really enjoyed this delightful experience. That directing nomination was not very worthy (come on, George Cukor got nothing for A Star Is Born). The acting is quite good too, but not very towering. Humphrey Bogart gives a very strong and memorable performance despite being a bit miscast, his early scenes are simply excellent. William Holden is quite good too, but sometimes he was too over-the-top.

Oh, Audrey, dear, beautiul, amazing Audrey. She had such shining beauty and real acting talent (unfortunately directors preffered her beauty to her acting talent). If there's one real superstar, a true icon in motion picture history, then it's quite definitely Ms. Hepburn. She really had style, grace and she solved even the silliest scenes with such dignity and dedication. Nowadays she's criticized for mostly relying on her charm, but I do not blame her for that since her roles demanded that from her (just look at The Nun's Story how many emotions she can create).

The role of Sabrina is quite definitely neither the best nor the most memorable one in Audrey's career. The movie itself is one that you watch at Christmas on TV, when you have nothing else to do, let's face it. Audrey doesn't have big breakdowns or huge acting moments in it. It's really just an easy work solved quite properly and decently. The character seems to be very easy for Audrey, but you can never feel that she thought that it was nothing to her and did not have to care about it. You see the considerable amount of work Audrey put into this performance.

In the very first scenes, Audrey is just like a wild little angel having fun in the garden. She's often referred to as a kind of ugly duckling, but that's not really the case. Simply, Sabrina is just too young to be taken seriously. Her suicide attempt scene is just excellent and very adorable. She wants to inhale the exhaust fume of the car, but starts coughing and then she opens a window. It's so utterly loveable and charming, which is a greater achievement considering the fact that this is actually a suicide scene.

And actually, the best moments of Audrey's whole performance come at the beginning of the movie: like when she forgets to turn on the owen as she cannot concentrate because of her unhappy love life. Audrey is again just charming in those scenes.

However, the biggest flaw of her whole achievement in Sabrina comes after she returns from Paris. Sabrina's change is so sudden and fast that you really just cannot believe it. It's mostly the screenplay's fault, but Sabrina becomes a bit bitchy for a while (she tries to seduce William Holden quite hard and successfully from his bride) which disappears again quite suddenly. I felt that Audrey could have done much better with the development of Sabrina: she made her adorable and succeeded in grabbing the viewer's attention, but she never made Sabrina's changes credible.

Another thing goes against her, which is the screentime. The movie mostly focuses on Humphrey Bogart after a while and Audrey is in the background for some time. Fortunately that goes away, but then she wasn't really able to have an effect on me or make a lasting impression.

Somewhere around the end, she has a very quiet crying scene, when she cooks at Humphrey Bogart's office. I don't know why, but I was just so moved by her. Although that scene wasn't very pushy and came very subtly, it really had an effect on me and I just felt some warmth in my heart. It was just excellent. And if I'm talking about warmth, then I must mention how great it was to hear her singing La Vie en Rose. Gosh, it was just a piece of Heaven.

So, to sum up, this may not be Audrey Hepburn's best work, but I was utterly charmed and perfectly entertained by it despite its lack of great character development. But I laughed, I was moved, I cared about Sabrina and most of all, I had some kind of an emotional connection to her. First I thought this would be a 3.5, but I said, come on and gave her more for sentimental reasons. This is such a delightful achievement.

So, the final conclusion is due tomorrow! Stay tuned, though it won't offer much surprise, I imagine.

Review: The Kids Are All Right

Yes guys, I am going back to reviewing movies. Don't worry, I am going to do Audrey's profile today or tomorrow, but I just couldn't resist writing this review about this nice indie movie. It might have a lot of connection to the Best Actress category though as I have a feeling that I will write at least another (performance) review of it.

The movie tells the story of a lesbian couple, Jules and Nic (Julianne Moore and Annette Bening) who have a very decent life, raising two great children, Laser and Joni. However, everything changes when Laser and Joni decide to contact the sperm donor, Paul (Mark Ruffalo). The women are quite stunned (especially Nic) and the arrival of this man really upsets everyone and lots of unexpected things happen.

First of all, the screenplay is simply brilliantly written and should win the Oscar hands down. It's really the definition of "Best Original Screenplay". It so perfectly keeps the balance between hilarious comedy and a family drama, that it's simply stunning. The dialogues are simply hilarious, witty, real and very credible. The same goes for the memorable scenes. Sometimes it's the comedy of errors and misunderstandings, which really cracked me up. So briefly, I just loved the writing.

The kids are giving excellent performances here: they never go over-the-top, they are absolutely believable and real, always staying in character. They are not nomination-worthy, but they are doing a good job.

Mark Ruffalo is said to be a hot contender for a nomination in the Best Supporting Actor category. He gives a very good performance, though he wasn't amazing as Paul. I liked that he put some irony and drama into the character, so if he gets the nom, it will be very well deserved, but I would not give him the win.

Naturally, if we are talking about The Kids Are All Right, the main question is: Annette or Julianne? Many have said that this is going to be the next Thelma and Louise and they will both receive nominations, but I find it (unfortunately) unlikely, though I would love to see that.

The performances and characters are polar opposites: Julianne is the fun-loving, lively, wild woman and Annette is the serious, down-to-earth, realistic one, who's very sensitive and vulnerable inside. The chemistry between the two women is just excellent: they are making a really loveable, nice couple, who just look well together.

I have been a fan of Julianne Moore for some time and she did not disappoint here either: she was excellent, showing many faces of her character. She really caught the fun-loving, free spirit of Jules and her desire to create. She's quite probably the most ironic character in the movie. Her big monologue at the end of the movie is really quite great, though I thought that it would be much longer and more emotional. But I loved it the way it was: sensitive, bitter and desperate, but also full of love.

However, for me this movie belonged to Annette Bening, who gives a breathtaking performance as Nic. I have never been a fan of hers, actually her huge fanclub sometimes even annoys me, but I just cannot overlook her brilliance in this movie. You know, there's a reason why she's said to be the front-runner to win the award in February: first, she's overdue and I really cannot imagine anyone not voting for her after her two big losses. Second, she actually deserves it for this movie. She's so delicate and adds so much vulnerability to her character. She's quietly effective and silently hearbreaking. Her scene in front of Paul's bathroom mirror and later the confrontation scene between her and Julianne is a heartbreak: there are so many emotions right there, which really left me speechless. I can see that people love the "grand acting performance" with many loud moments and this is not like that, but I just loved it.

So come Oscar time, I hope that this movie is recognized at least with several nominations and hopefully some wins too. It's one of the best feel-good dramedies I have ever seen. The director, Lisa Chodolenko (I really have to mention her name) created something really extraordinary and loveable. Great job.

Grade: 9/10 It's not an instant classic, but definitely a must-see.

Predicted nominations: Best Picture; Best Actress (Bening); Best Supporting Actor (Ruffalo); Best Original Screenplay

My wins: I don't know yet. I have much to see, but I would be happy if Bening and the screenplay won.

Judy Garland in A Star Is Born

Judy Garland received her first Oscar nomination for playing Esther Blodgett a.k.a. Vicki Lester a young girl who becomes a great star and an Academy Award winner in George Cukor's classic, the remake of the 1937 movie, A Star is Born. Nowadays, it's a consensus that Judy should have won the Oscar for this performance and ironically everyone thought that at the time as she was a real front-runner to pick up her award. She had everything: a great comeback role, huge singing and dramatic moments, a 3-hour-long movie. The rest is history.

A Star Is Born is a real classic, a true definition of a must-see. It's a very dramatic look at stardom, love, marriage, cruelty, alcoholism and Hollywood. Everything is very glamourous on the outside, but everything is rotten and pretentious inside. George Cukor was an excellent director, who made quite flamboyant movies, but they are classics and loved by everyone. He had such a talent in directing his actors: James Mason gives an excellent performance as Norman Maine, a desperate alcoholic has-been, who has only one important thing in his life, his wife. Had it not been for Marlon Brando's terrific performance in On the Waterfront, Mason would probably get my vote.

And yet A Star Is Born is not a classic because of George Cukor's directing or James Mason's acting or the great technical part. The reason is two words: Judy Garland. A towering performance rarely comes in any performer's life, sometimes never. But that moment came to Judy Garland in 1954, when she was doing the part of Esther/Vicki, a role of a lifetime. Now, I'm not a fan of Judy Garland. I have never been and I will probably never be, but I can recognize a great achievement. And this is such a work.

The role of Vicki is itself a real miracle: it has such huge opportunities to shine, that it's quite a miracle if anyone, who has at least mediocre talent, ruins it. But Garland went further with it: she created a living, breathing and natural character, who has so many emotions in herself and can only express them with music and singing. Judy really put her whole heart into it and we can see the result, which speaks for itself.

Even when we first see Esther, it's quite obvious that both her and Judy are amazing talents. It's quite complicated to play a talented person as it can easily be confused with the player. Actually, Judy Garland's life was more of a mix of Norman's and Esther's, so it's not the case. Esther is a unique character and her only connection with Judy is that only she could play Esther the way this character deserves it.

There's a brilliant monologue where Esther tries to express how much singing means to her: Garland lives these lines so thrillingly, that for a moment there's nothing else there, just her. Although this performance is full of unforgettable moments, this is the one that sticks with me the most because of its honesty and pure beauty.

Esther's initial doubts about Norman are perfectly handled by Garland. She never goes over-the-top or annoying, she perfectly found the balance. And the same goes for the scenes of grief in the end, when so many emotions come to the surface and the whole thing is just like a volcano. She does not only leave you speechless, but also moves, saddens and entertains you.

Also it's quite interesting how much humor Garland injected to this character. These moments are not too pushy or forced, they are always very natural and simply adorable. Like when she gets a real make-up and ends up being another dull blonde girl, her face is just hilarious.

And she sings too! Garland had an excellent voice, which had such a wide range and was soo powerful. Her musical numbers are simply flawless. Her show-stopping performance of Born In A Trunk is simply one of the best acted musical scenes in history. And this is quite a positive thing as I really dislike musicals.

Her legendary Oscar ceremony scene is also just heartbreaking. Judy displays so many emotions: fear, excitement, nervousness, embarassment, sadness, biterness and love that it almost burns the screen. The most unforgettable moment is when Norman accidentally slaps her and then she tries to help him. It's so incredible.

I have already mentioned the scenes of grief, but let me say something about her very last lines. When she says "This is Mrs. Norman Maine" in a very teary way, it's such an incredibly cathartic moment and it's really no shame if your eyes get a bit teary. Your heart goes out for her and Garland is simply unbelievable there.

If you travel 1000 years in time and see which performances people still remember, Judy Garland's in A Star Is Born will be one of them. Judy Garland's acting achievement is really one of a kind, a true and eternal classic, one that cannot be forgotten or overlooked by anyone who loves movies. This IS a performance for the ages.

So what do you think? It's time to give your last predictions! :-)

Dorothy Dandridge in Carmen Jones

Dorothy Dandridge made history when she became the first black woman to receive a Best Actress nomination for playing Carmen Jones in Otto Preminger's opera movie, Carmen Jones. Despite this nomination she did not have many other big roles. If I really think about it, then she may have been third in the voting process, but fourth or fifth is (unfortunately) more likely. It was mainly a so-called "two-horse race".

Carmen Jones is a... movie. I really don't know what to say about it. It's very interesting and entertaining, but probably it's mostly strange. Many people consider it a classic, but I think that might be due to the fact that it was very groundbreaking as there were only black people in the cast. Nevertheless, it's very enjoyable, though there are some moments which are hard to follow since the film slows down sometimes. The actors give quite tolerable performances, though Harry Belafonte is a bit annoying sometimes.

But it's the movie of Dorothy Dandgridge, everything is about her, we see her, we root for her, we hate and love her at the same time. First of all, I must say how unusually beautiful Ms. Dandridge was. She had a kind of wild charisma and she was so sexy and attractive. Yes, the key word for this performance is probably attractive. This role is neither baity nor demanding, but there's some kind of a force which makes you pay attention to Dandridge's acting.

Dorothy did not do her own singing, but that takes nothing away from her achievement. What she actually does in this movie is quite great and memorable. Plus during the singing scenes the face is so expressive that you can turn down the volume and you know what Carmen sings by only watching her.

I was instantly mesmerized by her presence in her very first scene, but that's also due to the great directing. Everyone in the movie looks at Carmen, so you have to do that too. There's a woman, who's lively, beautiful, sexy and you just cannot take your eyes off her. Dandridge has a very unusually magnetic screen presence, which makes her performance very sharp, natural and a bit rough, if you know what I mean.

Dorothy has her best scenes in the beginning where the guy named Joe has to take her to prison, while Carmen wants to both escape and seduce the guy. And along with Joe, we are certainly seduced too. She so perfectly portrayed the wild and restless nature of this woman, that it left me speechless. Again: it attracted my attention.

Another interesting aspect of the performance is that Dandridge never really tries to make the audience sympathize with her nor makes Carmen a tragic heroine. Instead she shows all the flaws of this very complex character and carefully (and invisibly) developes her. Though I must say that she should have concentrated a bit more on the development as every change in Carmen is a bit sudden.

Although I have been mostly raving about her, Dandridge's performance is not flawless: it's not as thin as Jane Wyman's yesterday, but it's much less emotionally effective. Although I was very much entertained by Dorothy, she did not really move me (she did not even try as I said). As I previously said, it's very interesting that she did not make Carmen a tragic heroine, but a little emotional connection with the audience would not have harmed her acting. And this is not a minor thing as in some way, a performer should connect to the audience emotionally.

However, I must admit that I was totally charmed and mesmerized by the magnetic presence and extraordinary beauty of Ms. Dandridge, who gave a very exciting, wild, sexy and attractive performance as a very complicated woman. It's legendary status may be questionable, but it's a great achievement by a great talent, who knew how to impress the audience. It's a very strong and deserving four.

So what do you think? Any predictions, observations, off-topic questions? Judy is next and her review comes tomorrow.

Jane Wyman in Magnificent Obsession

Jane Wyman received her fourth and final Best Actress nomination for playing Helen Philips, a woman who becomes blind in Douglas Sirk's movie, Magnificent Obsession. I think Wyman did not have much chance to win the Oscar over Grace Kelly and Judy Garland as she was a previous Oscar winner. I believe firmly though, that she was the third with the votes since the movie was a success (and along came another Jane Wyman-Rock Hudson movie, hat has become a classic).

Magnificent Obsession is a very weird, but extremely entertaining soap opera. The story is so unlikely and illogical that you just cannot take it seriously and by this, you have great fun while watching it. It's not a classic, but a fair movie anyhow with great actors. I realized with this movie and Pillow Talk how talented Rock Hudson was actually. He had a very strong charisma and a great screen presence. Too bad that nowadays he's more remembered because of his private life than his performances. Agnes Moorehead is again very reliable and gives a fair supporting performance.

Jane Wyman is an extremely interesting actress. On the one hand, she's not as legendary as some of her peers and she's not often talked about. On the other hand, every time I watch her, I feel satisfied by her performances. (I must admit though that this every time means two movies). She totally relied on her emotions, but was able to deal with the technical part of her performances too.

She was great at playing disabled women dealing with their condition. In Johnny Belinda she was deaf, here she's blind. Although the characters cannot be more different, they share a common thing: strength, courage and intelligence. I think Wyman was the best one at this and there has never been a performance ever since who's able to get across the feelings of such a condition. That's one thing.

Magnificent Obsession's Helen goes through a lot of tough events in this movie. Right at the beginning of the film, she loses her beloved husband. This is probably the least effective part of her performance as these scenes mostly focus on Rock Hudson's character rather than hers. She's there, uses all the opportunities, but she's nothing very special. Yet.

Her performance becomes truly interesting when Helen loses her eyesight in a very tragic and extremely over-the-top accident. It's so interesting to follow her emotions: she doesn't blame everyone, she doesn't break down, but there's some silent pain right there and some hope for the unlikely recovery. She's truly magical here.

The scenes of finding true love are also excellently handled by Wyman. She never becomes over-the-top or unnecessarily sentimental, she brilliantly found the balance in these sequences. I was impressed by her very much, but I cannot overlook a problem: the emotions she shows are astonishingly shallow and pale. It is astonoshing since the heartbreaking depths were the best things about her performance in Johnny Belinda. She was too simple and there was nothing complex about her acting.

There's one scene though, which is simply unforgettable. After she realizes the very unpleasant reality in Switzerland she goes on a date with Rock Hudson: here I felt that all the necessary emotions were there and I was certainly extremely moved by her occasionally. When she says "I always closed my eyes when I was dancing" or something like that, her performance really reaches the top and has a great effect on the viewer.

After that she disappears for a while and she's there only in the end, but she's very-very good and effective there, too. I felt that the emotions again were very real, but also not very complex and a touch of honesty would not have harmed her acting. However, as I said, it's quite moving and entertaining.

To sum up, Jane Wyman gives a satisfying, emotional and very moving performance, which however lacks depth. It might be also due to the weak points of the screenplay, but she wasn't able to be towering and truly impressive. Although everything is where is should be, the achievement is a bit too thin. Very strong work, though.

So what do you think? Predictions, opinions? Who should be next Audrey or Dorothy? I'm planning to do Garland on Thursday. So whoever you chose, will be reviewed tomorrow and the other one on Friday or maybe Saturday, if I don't have time.

Grace Kelly in The Country Girl

Grace Kelly received her second (and last) Oscar nomination and only award for playing Georgie Elgin, a woman married to an alcoholic has-been in the movie The Country Girl. Kelly's win caused enough controversy. Some loathe it, some think it's deserving. Actually she won by seven votes or so, which (according to the rumors) belonged to Judy Garland's old MGM bosses. So it was a great surprise that Kelly won over Garland, who seemed to be a shoo-in. I guess that the fact that she had the brilliant Rear Window (in which she was much better and more interesting) and Dial M for Murder might have helped her win.

The Country Girl is not a bad movie, but not a great one either. It's a decently made old movie, which has some drama in it, and yet it wasn't able to really impress me. The same goes for Bing Crosby's performance (well, only to a degree). He's unbelievable in some of the scenes but sometimes his performance slows down. Nevertheless, I can say that this is definitely Crosby's best performance in any movie and he richly deserved the nomination. William Holden is also good, but he got the least baity role.

Grace Kelly. A very familiar feeling came to me again after 2002 and some of 1978: dissatisfaction. It's really the worst thing that can happen as it means that the acting was actually good, but something kept me from totally embracing it. I had the same emotions I had with Nicole Kidman: there's one extremely moving scene, which stands out too much and makes the other parts look even weaker. But that scene is satisfying in a way.

First of all, I have to say (as many people before me) that Kelly was totally miscast as she was a) too young b) too inexperienced c) too beautiful (OMG, one could write thousands of pages about her beauty). People say that Susan Hayward started the so-called "acting for Oscar with baity, loud roles" tradition and that Grace Kelly is the origin of the deglam wins. I SO wanted to disagree and love her, but she really wasn't enough.

I was always trying to love her and embrace the character of Georgie, but the main problem is that Kelly didn't embrace the character herself enough to grab my attention. The weakest thing about her was her delivery of the lines: sometimes I felt as if she was at school saying a poem at a literature lesson. She did not connect the emotions to the dialogue and it caused a very mixed bag. I knew (and felt) that the emotions were inside her and she let some out with her face and eyes, but I did not get enough. And yet somehow she was able to make me sorry for her character and sometimes she even moved me.

However, she was able to build her character and show some development in it: Georgie is a bitter, incredibly sad and worried person who tries to control everything to prevent disaster and to protect his husband to whom she's very attached. I could always see how much Georgie was struggling, but not Kelly: she made it look quite easy actually.

As I said, in the beginning I had no emotional connection to the character of Georgie, but as the movie went on I got more and more close to her. There's a climatic confrontation scene between her and William Holden at the police station which is brilliant, and from there it seemed to me as if Kelly's performance got some life and by this, it became so much more interesting. This is especially visible in her last scenes, where she does not have much to say (and thank God she can rely on the emotions of her body) and her silence has so much weight.

Rating in this case is not very easy and I think that this may change. On the one hand, she's painfully miscast and in the beginning she has no weight. On the other hand, in the end her presence and effect is quite strong and is worthy of my praise. Not easy to judge it, but I myself missed her mysterious persona from her other movies, in other words, the essence of Grace Kelly. One part is around a 3, the other is around a 4, so it's somewhere around 3.5. Not easy, not easy. A weirdly effective and very uneven performance.

Just like in the case of Ginger Rogers and Nicole Kidman. A 4 wouldn't be fair I think.

The Next Year

Now it's time to move on and continue the fun with a very controversial and talked about year, which is talked about mostly because of two nominees. But let's see which one of them I prefer or I go with someone else.

1954

So the nominees were:

• Dorothy Dandridge in Carmen Jones
• Judy Garland in A Star is Born
• Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina
• Grace Kelly in The Country Girl
• Jane Wyman in Magnificent Obsession

So what do you think? Who's your pick? What's your ranking? Any predictions for my ranking? I am not sure either as I have previously seen only one of them.

I've already written Grace Kelly's profile, so she will be the first, but YOU decide who the next should be.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1939

About the field: This was a legendary year for Best Picture and pretty great for Best Actress. And I can say this very easily. I was so happy to (re-)watch these performances and movies. I liked them all, though sometimes I was a bit disappointed as that nominee is praised everywhere. So that was the only disappointing thing here, but that performance grew on me a bit. My #5 may not have belonged to this category, but actually there wasn't any other Best Actress performance I would have nominated instead of her. #4 was very good, though a bit uneven, I was mesmerized by #2 and #1 (big surprise) REALLY blew my socks off. This was one of the easiest rankings so far, though I believed (before starting) that it would be much more difficult. But let's just see the results (which are not surprising if you read my reviews):

5. Greer Garson in Goodbye Mr Chips

This was a heartwarming and charming performance, which wasn't full of opportunities, but Garson did her best in my opinion and was able to show her immense charisma for the first time on screen. Leading or supporting? Doesn't really matter. 

4. Bette Davis in Dark Victory

I saw a performance that disappointed me to a degree (mostly because the movie is so horrid), but there are extremely strong scenes so I really cannot say that I did not enjoy it (and it considerably grew on me). I did not find her as great as everyone else, but she's quite good.

3. Greta Garbo in Ninotchka

This performance is also quite unusual as it basically consists of two different performances.I can say that I was impressed by Garbo once again and she gave an excellent performance full of charm, humor and her grabbing persona.

2. Irene Dunne in Love Affair

In a movie, which was her personal favorite, Dunne was able to create a lively, charming, emotional and lovely performance, which might be a bit slow for others, but I was a total sucker for this one. Excellent, intelligent work.

1. Vivien Leigh in Gone With the Wind

Do I need to explain this? We can be grateful for the miracle that was born on-screen 71 years ago. I could go on and on, I could write a novel as long as Gone with the Wind itself about her, but I just wrap up by saying that I was overwhelmed, entertained, delighted, amazed, moved, amused and mesmerized by Vivien Leigh.

So I can proudly announce

that my winner is (hands down)...

Vivien Leigh 
in 
Gone With the Wind

Tears of a WINNER! :-)

So my next year: I thought it would be very uncertain and I had more years to pick from after all, but somehow life decided it for me. This year is very often talked about but mostly only two of the nominees (especially one). So the clues:

• #1 hated loss
• Far From Heaven: The Origin
• Deglam forever!

I think huge fans found it out from the first clue immediately. :-)

Irene Dunne in Love Affair

My darling Irene Dunne received her fourth Best Actress nomination for playing Terry, a woman in love in Love Affair, the original version of the 1957 romantic classic, An Affair to Remember. Poor Irene Dunne, she never won an Oscar, she deserved so much and not even an Honorary Oscar. It's a funny world we live in: Reese Witherspoon is an Oscar-winner and Dunne never got an award. Shame. I think she had the least chance of winning in this year as she was a serious threat to win in her other years (particularly 1937 and 1948). I guess she was fourth after all.

Love Affair is an excellent and entertaining love story, which was really so natural and enjoyable that I loved the most of it. The second part of the movie is a bit rushed though, I think they could have told something more about these characters. This is not a real complaint actually, as I liked the movie as it was, but it could have lasted a bit longer since I wanted more of the joy. Charles Boyer was a brilliant actor (it's so awful that he's a bit forgotten nowadays) and he proved it here once again. Maria Ouspenskaya deserved her Oscar nom, but a win would have been much. I can say the same about the movie.

And Irene Dunne. In a way. While I was watching Love Affair, I became a real fan of Ms. Dunne. Actually, I had previously seen only two of her films. I loved her in The Awful Truth (her best performance and I am really loud with this opinion in the blogosphere LOL), but I felt a bit neutral toward her in I Remember Mama (but that was actually the movie's fault). Right now, I am proud to say that I'm an official Irene Dunne fan and I am going to watch as many of her films as I can.

But since this blog is not an Irene Dunne fanclub, I have to talk about her performance in Love Affair. And she's (once again) simply wonderful and has a very magnetic and charming presence. From the very beginning to the very last scene I was in love with her: everything was so right, so lovely, so enchanting, so adorable, so emotional.

This performance very successfully combines the technical and the emotional part. I was totally mesmerized by her sometimes and although I thought sometimes that she wasn't that amazing, she totally grew on me in a couple of minutes(!). I needed a little bit of time to fully appreciate her very intelligent and subtle acting.

She took this very simple and ordinary character and she created an effective mix with which she totally amazed me. I always felt that behind the smiling face of Terry there was some deep bitterness, but also so much hope for a better, calm life with a man with whom she can share her feelings and secrets. It's so heartbreaking to see her trying to be a mother of the orphans as she does not have children. Again, her eyes tell everything we need to know.

Another amazing thing about this performance is that Dunne is never too sentimental or soappy. She could so easily hold herself back in the dangerous scenes (most of her peers should have learned from her example). I love that Irene Dunne was always able to control a performance and show the real face of her character (and by this she also might sacrifice the big impact).

Her chemistry with Charles Boyer is simply perfect: they just look so well together that you instantly think that this is a match made in Heaven. Oh yes, that's the romantic side of me, but the merciless critic is impressed in me too. I have never been afraid to criticize popular performances or to express my fondness of least loved achievements. I am not saying this to hail myself, but to show Dunne's brilliance. There wasn't doubt in me for a second that I would not like her.

In a movie, which was her personal favorite, Dunne was able to create a lively, charming, emotional and lovely performance, which might be a bit slow for others, but I was a total sucker for this one. She's just becomes better and better as I think about her. Excellent, intelligent work.

So what do you think? You cannot officially predict now, but if you have any thoughts or observations or questions, please share it. The final conclusion is soon to come.

Greta Garbo in Ninotchka

Greta Garbo received her fourth and final Best Actress nomination for playing Ninotchka, a communist woman in the movie Ninotchka by Ernst Lubitsch. I'm quite sure that Garbo would have won the Oscar if it wasn't for Vivien Leigh, as she was Oscarless and a huge star in an unusual role. I think she was the third after Davis that year, but I guess I should watch the results somewhere. No matter what, Garbo finally had to make do with an Honorary Award.

Ninotchka is a very entertaining and funny movie (in an old-fashioned way) and it has some very satirical thoughts which I especially loved. It makes fun of communism, capitalism, Lenin, the Russian royals, everything, of course in a very subtle way. Although some of the jokes might seem dated, they are all extremely witty and charming. The situations however are excellently directed and acted by all the actors. Melvyn Douglas is quite amusing, but this is far from his best works.

But nobody can deny a sequence that made movie history: "Garbo laughs". Yes, that was pretty special considering Garbo's ice queen personality in movies and in real life. Therefore, I think that this movie's (and performance's) enourmous popularity is mostly due to this one unforgettable and charmingly weird scene.

This performance is also quite unusual as it basically consists of two different types of acting. In the first half, it's Garbo's usual ice queen and in the second half Garbo is so unusually charming and lovely that it was a bit distracting for me. Now it's needless to say that I preferred the first half, which is more usual, but in my humble opinion much stronger and ten thousand times funnier.

In Greta Garbo's first scene, we see a stoned-faced, serious, humorless, loveless, cold, merciless, unkind, grumpy feminist and communist, who just stands there and says a fast and brilliant line: "Please don't make an issue of my womanhood". We can see how much Ninotchka sticks to her principles and how much she cares about her country and the people in it. And she's brutally hilarious and deadly witty.

I think her greatest scene in this movie is when she wants to cross the street and asks how much time she has to wait until the next whistle. Garbo so easily makes fun of this cold character and also herself. There's so much self-irony in this part, that's certainly very impressive. She had so much effect on me and her presence was extremely strong and magnetic the whole time.

Also, there are some small details of her performance that I loved: the movements of her face, her eyes, eyebrows and the way she walks. Moreover, I loved that she added a touch of dramatic depth to the character. I felt a bit sad when she left the apartment of Melvyn Douglas after the phone call. It was again, simply brilliant.

But who could ever forget the laughing scene? I saw this movie years and years ago without knowing about the "Garbo laughs" thing, but that's the only sequence that I remembered. And deservedly so: it's so lovely, charming and unforgettable. You just want to go there and give Garbo a hug. She just cannot be resisted and you laugh along with her and everyone else. This is a really great achievement.

But that scene is unfortunately the end of Garbo's true brilliance in the movie as the other part of the performance comes, which lacks the (self-)irony I loved the most about the first half and Garbo's acting goes a bit downhill. It's far from not being enjoyable, but it's not that magnetic and hilarious anymore. Actually, she's less dramatic with more drama and less funny with bigger opportunities. This was quite a dangerous part, because it's so easy.

I must admit though that I was charmed once again by her drunk scene, which was hilarious and I liked the ending too, but I just missed the wit and simplicity of the beginning.

However, I can say that I was impressed by Garbo once again and she gave an excellent performance full of charm, humor and her grabbing persona. Rating is not that easy however: the first half is a very easy five, however the second is not more than three and a half. Four would be a bit low for her and four and a half would be high for her. Great performance nevertheless.

So what do you think? Now it's time to give your last predictions! :) I accept them until I post Irene's profile.