Monday, November 27, 2023

THE TROUBLE WITH BLOODY SNOW: My Review of Justine Triet's ANATOMY OF A FALL


It is kind of a shame that movies that consist of "lots of talking" are often considered dull. It all comes back to an "art is subjective" mentality, but there is proof that a film with a lot of "talking" can be highly gripping when done well.

This year, we already have Oppenheimer showing us that you can truly make an epic film that is based around a lot of scientific and political discourse along with a deposition...even if there was a bomb explosion during it. Films surrounding depositions or legal cases can often prove to be a tightrope walk between "riveting" and "boring". 

A lot of this comes down to these very key factors: the plot, the filmmaker's execution, and the performances.

Over the years, we have gotten films like 12 Angry Men and The Verdict which benefitted greatly from great pacing and character work. The former, in particular, was particularly impressive in how the majority of the film is set within one room and relies solely on the personalities of the men in that room and their opinions on the case they are set to reach a verdict on. 

While I wouldn't consider this to necessarily be on the same level as these two films, I would say that Anatomy of a Fall is one of the better courtroom-based dramas I have seen in quite a while. 


If you look at Anatomy of a Fall, it is a pretty straightforward story:

A novelist named Sandra (Sandra Huller) is living in a chalet outside of Grenoble, France (right in the middle of the Alps) with her husband Samuel (Samuel Theis), their nearly blind 11-year-old son Daniel (Milo Machado-Graner), and his guide dog Snoop. 

After an interview for a publication is interrupted by loud music played from above by Samuel, Sandra cancels on the reporter and suggests they meet in the village sometime soon. Shortly thereafter, Daniel takes Snoop out for a walk only to return to find Samuel on the ground outside the chalet dead with a gaping wound on the side of his head.

Without any real witnesses, Sandra poses that this was an accident but there is a growing suspicion that she pushed him out the window from above.

She enlists the help of her friend Vincent (Swann Arlaud) who just so happens to be a lawyer to help her prove her innocence. The plan is to say that he committed suicide even though Sandra doesn't believe he did so...although little hidden incidents and beliefs from both Sandra and Daniel begin to make the authorities question the validity of Sandra's innocence and the case goes to trial a year after Samuel's death.


With that setup, it doesn't exactly sound like anything overly original. What the film does manage to do to make it effective is that we aren't entirely sure at first if Sandra is innocent because we did not see what actually occurred...and this also isn't exactly anything new. A whodunit courtroom drama is a classic form of entertainment, but it all comes back to the execution as I mentioned earlier. 

Justine Triet is a filmmaker that I was not really aware of prior to this film, but I really like what she did with this material. She co-wrote the screenplay with Arthur Harari, who just so happens to be her real-life husband. 

The film's first act sort of slowly evolves where we only get fed certain pieces of information about the characters...and the atmosphere amongst the chilly snowy French Alps does make for an aesthetic I very much loved. However, where the film managed to take off even more was once Sandra's case goes to trial. 

Watching the process of the French courtroom system was rather fascinating, but also the treatment of Sandra was rather volatile. The prosecutor (Antoine Renartz) has a rather brash and hateful misogynistic energy toward Sandra...but I think a lot of this has to do with Sandra's background.

Sandra, like the actress herself, is German. As a novelist, we learn that she met her French husband Samuel in London, and she became fluent in English while living there. French became her third language, and her son Daniel primarily speaks in French...but there is certainly a sense that those around her almost resent that she'd rather speak in English...even though she considers it a middle ground. The courtroom certainly seems to prefer she stick to French....despite the fact she can articulate herself far better in English.

In a way, this disconnect makes Sandra appear as lot colder of a human being than she actually is...and perhaps she does feel a little unfulfilled. In a way, I almost viewed her as a mild example of Lindy Chamberlain, the lady portrayed by Meryl Streep in A Cry in the Dark who was viewed as being cruel and emotionless following the death of her young child at the mercy of a wild dingo. 

I do want to discuss the performances in the film, so this seems like the right time to bring up Sandra Huller. 


While not an actress known to the masses, Sandra Huller is quite respected in film circles. She made a splash back in 2006's Requiem but established herself as a force to be reckoned with in 2016's Toni Erdmann. 

2023 seems to be her year in a lot of ways, because not only does she have Anatomy of a Fall, she also plays the matriarch in Jonathan Glazer's The Zone of Interest, a film I am very eager to see soon. She has the potential to become a double Oscar nominee this year, too...and for an actress of her caliber, that would be richly deserved. 

Huller is a fascinating performer. She is quite strong and sterling in how she appears, but she is absolutely brimming with vulnerability; not to mention she can switch from playing warm to bitter in the blink of an eye.

The Best Actress category this year is a bit of a bloodbath at this point, and the sad truth is that Huller could be left off the list...and I think that would be a shame. While a mostly subtle performance, she gets a couple of great monologues and explosive moments that are truly lovely and masterfully performed. 


Swann Arlaud is also a standout as Vincent, her lawyer friend who ends up defending her in court...and honestly, while not a badly written role by any means, this easily could've turned into a rather thankless part. He was able to give the role a lot more weight thanks to his presence.

However, I actually think young Milo Machado-Graner should be in the discussion for awards consideration along with Huller. 


I am going to avoid a particular spoiler during this portion of the review, but I will say there is one major plot point moment where his character did something I had extreme issues with and it might really upset people, but despite this, I found him to be a very captivating screen presence and his emotional work was quite lovely for someone of his age. In a just world, he would totally get a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Both he and Huller would make my personal lineup rather handily. 

As for the film's Oscar chances in general, Anatomy of a Fall is yet another victim of France's strange submission history for the International Film category.

It has been reported that Triet is viewed by some as a pariah in France for actively protesting against French PM Emmanuel Macron following his repression of Pension Reform...and that this led to her film not getting submitted at the expense of The Taste of Things, a film featuring Oscar winner Juliette Binoche. 

I think despite of this, Anatomy of a Fall has enough of a profile that it could still slip into Best Picture, Director, Actress, and Screenplay...but it is still too early to tell if the support will lead that way or not. Unlike some recent foreign films that got nominated, like Drive My Car or Parasite, which built up an insane amount of support following extensive sweeps at regional critics awards, it is unsure how well Anatomy of a Fall will do in that regard. 

After Parasite became the first film to win Best Picture that also won the Cannes' Palme d'or in over 60 years, there seems to be a bigger focus on the film that wins this award in the last couple of years.

France was wise to submit Titane for the Oscar after it won the Palme d'or, but that film's extreme nature undoubtedly turned a lot of people off...but last year's winner, Triangle of Sadness, managed to make the Oscar lineup...including a surprise Director nom for Ruben Ostlund. 

With that in mind, I do think Anatomy of a Fall stands a good chance of making the Best Picture lineup. It is certainly a lot more accessible than those films. 


I have mentioned Triet succeeding well with the film's execution (along with her husband Arthur Harari's script contributions), but I do want to stress that she does an exquisite job with the film's direction. At times, the film takes on a documentary/French New Wave/Cinema Verite style...and even utilizing clips from what would be local news broadcasts since the idea of a novelist being on trial for murder would undoubtedly be a story that would get a lot of media attention. Her placement of the cameras, along with cinematographer Simon Beaufils, makes for some truly wonderful shots...and the use of zoom ins only aided to that documentary feel. You could even compare some of the moments to Succession in that way.

I recently raved about the pacing and editing of Oppenheimer, which was about a half hour longer than Anatomy of a Fall. I do think that Fall could've benefitted from a little trimming here and there...and I do have one quibble I want to make. This is going to go into SPOILER territory, so I will give you a heads up once I finish:

---------

SPOILER ALERT:

Sandra is acquitted of Samuel's death...and as the film progresses, it becomes increasingly clear that she is, indeed, innocent even though Triet and Harari throw us little crumbs that could show that maybe Daniel might know more than he originally let on. However, the ending results left me slightly cold. It didn't feel like there was any kind of grand character arc nor any kind of dramatic shift. I am still uncertain whether or not I like it. I am not saying that I hate it necessarily, because on one hand, it does feel more realistic. It also feels a bit tepid...so perhaps maybe it isn't a thrilling ending, but it feels true-to-life.

Also, on a completely random note - the vile prosecutor seems almost obsessed with talking about Sandra's infidelities as she is revealed to be bisexual...and due to her being a novelist, the court seemingly wants to tie in plot points from her novels as a means to justify that she is capable of murder. I am not bringing them up as issues I had with the plot, but more like little details I found fascinating with how the French courtroom system played out and also just further deepening the relationship that Sandra had with Samuel.

--------

END OF SPOILERS!


As it stands, I think Anatomy of a Fall made for a compelling watch and that its compelling nature came from rather surprising places. The stylistic flourishes weren't exactly grand in nature, but they helped the film feel a little rougher around the edges in the best possible way.

On top of that, you have Sandra Huller giving a wonderful leading performance and a young Milo Machado-Graner giving one of the best child performances I've seen in a film.

Oh yes and it must be said. 


When it comes to animals in films, the doggy playing Snoop is practically the new Lassie. Some reviews I have read on Letterboxd say the dog gave the best performance and while they may be a little coy about that statement, the dog is VERY well trained.

And also - who knew that 50 Cent's P.I.M.P. would be so prominently featured in a French film set in the Alps? 


              RATING FOR ANATOMY OF A FALL:

9/10



Thursday, November 23, 2023

NOLAN DROPS A BOMB: My Quick Review of Christopher Nolan's OPPENHEIMER


It goes without saying at this point but as we come out of the haze that was the peak of the COVID pandemic, the year of 2023 will be linked to two films: Barbie and Oppenheimer. 

Two very different films which just so happened to open on the same day but managed to strike a nerve around the world and... rather handily...rejuvenated a certain passion and excitement for getting people back to the movie theaters. 


The "Barbenheimer" Phenomenon is particularly thrilling because you have two films that managed to unite audiences and critics alike in a way that feels a lot rarer than we see these days.

Barbie, which I reviewed earlier this year (HERE), may have hit more of zeitgeist zone thanks to having what could arguably be considered a plot/style that was palatable to a larger audience.

Sure, I am not going to knock Barbie for achieving what it did and, frankly, I am thrilled that Greta Gerwig was able to be the first female filmmaker to break the billion-dollar mark at the Box Office. It was a film that could've been a colossal disaster but ended up sticking the landing. With that, she has the highest grossing film of 2023, the highest grossing film of Warner Brothers, and the 14th highest grossing film of all time. 

Then you have Oppenheimer, which came in as the third highest grossing film of all time behind The Super Mario Bros. Movie and managed to gross just shy of a billion.

This is where I can't help but feel completely and totally elated.


Whether you want to link it to the "battle" with Barbie or the clout that Christopher Nolan has accrued as a filmmaker over the last 20 years, there is something so gratifying about a 3-hour film that doesn't pander to its audience or condescend to them while dealing stuffy topics such as scientific research and committee hearings becoming one of the greatest successes of the year both critically and financially. 

I think if I even had a negative opinion on Oppenheimer, it would've been hard to deny or ignore the true achievement that it managed to grasp.

But no... I didn't have a negative opinion of Oppenheimer.

In fact, it might seem cheap to say it is a favorable opinion...but perhaps it is closer to a rapturous one.

There has been a lot of talk this year with two films that have extremely long runtimes: Oppenheimer being one and Killers of the Flower Moon (review on that coming soon) being the other.

When a film is released with a runtime that is approaching the 3-hour mark, you are truly playing with fire at that point. Does your film earn that runtime, or could your film afford another trip to the editor's office for a 25-minute trim?

When I sat down to watch Oppenheimer, I thought I was prepared for the journey but didn't realize what I was truly in for. 


This movie felt like relentless roller coaster and a lot of that credit obviously goes to Nolan and his editor Jennifer Lame. Within the first few minutes of the film, it was almost as if we were cresting the top of a hill and then we dropped. Scenes fly at us, characters weave in and out, the linear doesn't always seem clear at first, and information is handed to us and then moved away so the next beat can begin to quickly breathe.

As the film progressed, I began thinking that the pacing and the tone made it feel like we were inside our own atomic bomb watching the fragments of this story unfold. It is that pacing that truly makes this film something to behold.

Forgive me for the hyperbole as I am not sure if I am forgetting another film at the moment, but I would be prepared to accept the statement that Oppenheimer is one of the best paced films I have ever seen...and that is saying a whole hell of a lot considering it is 3 hours long.

Christopher Nolan has outdone himself here.

I can't exactly say that I have been some kind of rabid fan of his work compared to a lot of other film bro types, but I did love some of his work such as Memento and Inception, and I highly respect what he did with his Batman Trilogy.

His work here is beyond exceptional...and yes, I would actually say this is his masterwork to date...and will likely not be topped.


The film covers a fairly expansive period of J. Robert Oppenheimer's life: his studies at Cambridge in 1926 up through the discovery of nuclear fission in 1938, the development of the atomic bomb, the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and his eventual fall from grace with the 1954 Security Hearings...although we do see a glimpse of his 1963 Presidential Medal of Freedom ceremony when we, as a country, seemed ready to give him a rehabilitation. 

Nolan's script zigzags throughout time and insists you keep up with the pace...and I was enthralled. With so many boiler-plate biopic films year after year, I loved that I was seeing a film that was daring to do things with a non-linear narrative and trusts that we were able to contain all of the information we needed. In many cases, some of the callbacks at the end felt like delicious rewards.

I will come back to Nolan in a moment, but I do want to address the ensemble of actors here. 

We get strong and sterling work from the likes of Matt Damon and Josh Hartnett and even a great little cameo of Gary Oldman playing President Harry S. Truman...but I want to discuss Florence Pugh, Robert Downey, Jr., Emily Blunt, and Cillian Murphy.

With Pugh and Blunt, there is a frustration in that I really wish Nolan took time to give us more with their characters. If there is anything negative that I can say about the film, it is that these two actresses deserved more.


Pugh plays Jean Tatlock, a psychiatrist with whom Oppenheimer has a romantic history with and is officially put under FBI surveillance due to her being a member of the Communist Party. She eventually commits suicide, and her death devastates Oppenheimer even though he is now married Katherine 'Kitty' (Emily Blunt). Pugh doesn't have much screentime, but her uneasy emotional state as Jean certainly gives the role more weight than might have been given had it been a lesser actress. Following her work in two films from 2019: Little Women and Midsommar, I am truly excited to watch the rest of her career unfold. 


Blunt's Kitty is even more frustrating because Nolan will give her moments involving her alcoholism or the bitter rage that she has for the people out to get her husband during the 1954 hearings, and I kept finding myself longing for her to come back whenever she would disappear for very long gaps of time.

Emily Blunt has shockingly never received an Oscar nomination and I do feel, at this moment, that she will likely get her first nomination for Oppenheimer. Despite the relatively mess the Supporting Actress category seems to be currently, I don't think Blunt will pull off a win...but I do think that far lesser performances have done so. Blunt is arguably playing something of a "suffering housewife" stereotype, but I do think she manages to find enough in the small moments to make her compelling in ways that seem unexpected.


You also have Robert Downey Jr. as Lewis Strauss, the man who sets the path for Oppenheimer's hopeful downfall. Likely to also get an Oscar nomination, I don't think he will end up winning, but I think this was a key example of a performance where the actor seemingly got lost in the character. Sure, I may have known I was watching RDJ onscreen, but I felt like he was doing a level of character work that felt incredibly fresh from him.

And then that leads us to Cillian Murphy.

Could Murphy win the Oscar for his role? 

I think it is possible.

Would it be deserved?

Yes. 

Yes, it would be.


I still have to see other contenders, of course...but I feel comfortable saying that even if I somehow end up preferring another performance, there is no way to ignore the fact that Murphy would be worthy in his own right.

Award winning performances are often known for being about big and brash emotional journeys, but this isn't a big or brash role. This is true subtlety, but it also feels like subtlety at its most volatile. There are moments when you see the grief and concern on Murphy's face, and you feel like he is going to explode without it even coming close to looking melodramatic. Even in just his relatively normal scenes where he is discussing scientific research, his whole demeanor and approach to the character is simply investing. 

All in all - we have a truly epic leading role overseeing a truly eclectic ensemble of actors...and it is all brought together by Christopher Nolan's vision.


When it comes to the film and Nolan's chances, will he win Best Director? Will Oppenheimer win Best Picture?

I do think there is a strong chance that Oppenheimer, based on the high acclaim from audiences and critics, will be a viable candidate to take the top prize but even if that doesn't happen, I think Nolan is very likely to win Best Director.

With the success and esteem that Nolan has built, it seems like the abundance of praise being heaped upon Oppenheimer makes for the perfect opportunity to reward Nolan with his first Oscar.

And this wouldn't be like Scorsese winning for The Departed after losing for much superior work time and time again. Nolan would have the distinction of winning an Oscar that may be overdue but is actually richly deserved and for what is the best work of his career.

One might argue that the film contains one of the typical Nolan tropes that he is often attached to: emotional distance. While I would agree that Nolan films can suffer from this, I certainly didn't feel it here. The rapid pace of the film might leave some thinking that we don't get enough time to become truly invested in these people...and yes, I think that this does effect Pugh and Blunt the most...but I think Nolan gives us what we need for the most part. It also helps that we have the ensemble that we do, because Murphy's tortured antihero almost single handedly elevates the film to another level.

Oppenheimer was an extraordinary effort. It may have made me wish for little changes here and there, but the final product simply left me overwhelmed.

It is Nolan's best film, easily one of the best films of 2023, and will likely be on the best of the decade list as well. I have said for many years know that my favorite Nolan film was his second: Memento. 

In many ways, Memento is the film that I think can arguably be closer to Oppenheimer in terms of how it presents itself: multiple timelines and quick cuts. It begs you to pay attention. After years of films that were a lot about spectacle and less about a strong story, Nolan found the right mix of spectacle and the early narrative works such as Memento and The Prestige.

It lived up to the hype for me....and has a final moment that truly hits you hard.


RATING FOR OPPENHEIMER:

9.5/10

Sunday, November 5, 2023

"ACTING!!" - 20 Amazing Performances from the 1980s


Welcome to the next volume in my "Acting!!" series where I discuss some of my favorite performances from decades past...just to sort of change up the momentum from discussing films specifically.

I have already tackled the 1990s, so next up will be the 1980s.

Just to lay down the general ground rules again:

None of the 20 performances listed will be Oscar winning, BUT I will acknowledge some that may have received a nomination.

Prior to the list, I will select a few performances that did win a richly deserving Oscar as sort "de facto" honorable mentions. 

The 1980s can be an uneven decade when it comes to film, but I found that it provided a truly eclectic mix of performances and I really feel excited to single some of these out...especially since some of these might often get singled out for being the best of the decade.

Let's begin with the Oscar winners before delving into the list proper:

SIX DESERVING OSCAR WINNING PERFORMANCES


 Robert DeNiro, RAGING BULL (1980)

-You could argue that a performance like this is a key example of how voters would soon flock to similar instances where an actor does an extreme transformation to their body. DeNiro famously gained 50-60lbs for this role...but thankfully, the man put a lot of effort into it otherwise. While I may not be as big a fan of this film as seemingly most of filmdom is, I can't deny the brilliance of DeNiro here in what is not only the greatest performance of his career, but one of the best in cinema history.

--------------

Timothy Hutton, ORDINARY PEOPLE (1980)


-Major category fraud alert! In a way, I am grateful that category placement happened as it is nice that Hutton was able to win an Oscar for this performance. I cannot begin to express the kind of effect this film and his character had on me...and I think it is a shame that a lot of the film is cast in a shadow because it was the movie that beat Raging Bull. 

--------------

Sissy Spacek, COAL MINER'S DAUGHTER (1980)


-The Academy really nailed it with 1980! Even the Supporting Actress winner Mary Steenburgen was a solid choice overall. Spacek falls into the musical biopic narrative which we have been sort of drowning amongst in recent years...but Spacek set the gold standard. Not only does she work well enough to convince as Loretta Lynn as a freaking 13-year-old, but she does her own singing and perfectly captures every about Lynn as a performing artist. This is a marvel of a performance.

--------------

Meryl Streep, SOPHIE'S CHOICE (1982)


-I will say what I said when I ranked her as one of the five best Lead Actress winners in my ranking: "This performance is a legend for a reason".

Enough said.

But I do want to quickly shout out her work as Lindy Chamberlain in A Cry in the Dark; a truly dark performance of a character who was actually rather cold and distant, but she made it so deeply emotional in only the way she could.

--------------

F. Murray Abraham, AMADEUS (1984)


-While I would've loved the chance to see what Ian McKellan did in this role in the original Broadway production...opposite Tim Curry no less...I feel like F. Murray Abraham was a very welcome alternative. This was one of those performances/characters that I saw at an age where I was truly developing a strong interest not just in wanting to perform but write/direct. I took in all the details of what made Salieri a delectable complex villain and wanted to do something like that when I got older.

--------------

Daniel Day-Lewis, MY LEFT FOOT (1989)


-There did seem to be a strong chance that Day-Lewis would lose the Oscar to Tom Cruise, who certainly was giving one of his better performances in Born on the Fourth of July, but I do think Day-Lewis gave one of his best performances here...maybe even his absolute best...and that is saying something.  

--------------

SOME SPOILERS AHEAD FOR THESE FILMS, YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!

AND NOW...THE LIST: 

============================

Isabelle Adjani

POSSESSION (1981)


There has been a lot of talk in recent years about the true negative bias that horror films and performances have in the prestige film community. 

Strictly going off of performances alone, we have had Toni Collette in Hereditary, Lupita Nyong'o in Us, and Elisabeth Moss in The Invisible Man as some recent examples of Oscar snubs that truly infuriated a lot of film buffs/critics. 

Horror is a genre that is often quite deceptive in its artistic merit, which you could argue stems from such heinous efforts as most slasher films or torture porn...but even prior to the slasher boom of the 1980s, Horror was rarely acknowledged in a prestige way. In fact, The Exorcist was arguably the first true horror movie to even get a Best Picture nomination back in 1974. Only The Silence of the Lambs manages to be the closest example of a horror film winning (unless you want to count elements of 1940's Rebecca or 2019's Parasite).

At any rate, horror performances are often unfairly ignored...and none all the more insane than that of Isabelle Adjani, whose work in the psychological horror film Possession remains one of the most psychotic and no-holds-barred performances ever captured on film.

Adjani is easily one of the finest actresses to ever grace a film. Some of her amazing credits include The Story of Adele H., One Deadly Summer, Camille Claudel, and Queen Margot...but the crown jewel of her career is Possession. 

Adjani has stated that after doing the film, she didn't want to put herself through this kind of physical anguish again, and it is not surprising to see why. It caused such a strain that she ended up in therapy for many years trying to cope with some of the thoughts that kept bubbling up following the process.

The film begins with Mark (Sam Neill) returning home from West Berlin where he was on an espionage mission and finds that his wife Anna (Adjani) wants a divorce.

She won't say why but Mark's first belief is that she has been having an affair.

Needless to say, it is...umm...a little more complicated than that.

If you haven't seen Possession, I would highly implore you to check it out. Adjani gives one of the greatest performances ever. That may seem obvious since I am including it on this list of greatest performances of a decade, but I would seriously consider this one of the best performances ever captured on film.

I don't want to say much else about the journey of the film, because I think it is worth discovering as soon as you can find it. 

There are many scenes that are simply stellar, but there is a scene that takes place in a Berlin train station that has since become quite iconic in filmdom. Shot in almost one continuous take (with just one quick cut in the middle), Adjani has a breakdown that can be described in many ways, but at the moment, I would choose "animalistic".

__________________________

Babak Ahmadpour

WHERE IS THE FRIEND'S HOUSE? (1987)


Iranian filmmaker Abbas Kiarostami is known for wanting his films to be naturalistic. He doesn't want any kind of flare or gimmicks. He simply wants his films to be laid bare and to be presented as straightforward as possible.

When discussing performances of the 90s, I had mentioned Homayoun Ershadi, who was the star of Kiarostami's 1997 film Taste of Cherry...and how did Kiarostami cast him? He found him sitting in Tehran traffic and felt he conveyed the right energy he wanted for the film. That gave Ershadi, an architect, a push that led to further success in films.

As is expected, Kiarostami's instincts were spot on 10 years prior when he needed a young boy for his film Where is the Friend's House? Babak Ahmadpour was spotted by Kiarostami in an Iranian village where he also managed to find other kids to fill out the cast. 

Child actors are known for being too staged and performative in the final products. This was even apparent as far back as silent films when Hal Roach grew so sick of most child actors that he ended up developing the Our Gang shorts to try to bring real youthful exuberance (not to mention unity and acceptance of all races...despite some of the more problematic representation) to a mainstream crowd.

That natural quality of a non-actor makes this performance feel all too real...and with that, all of the emotions displayed...no matter how sweet or subtle...are all the more effective. This performance is a far cry from the volatile rage of Isabelle Adjani. We are watching a shy, sweet young boy who is perhaps far too polite for his own good. He barely will even raise his voice. 

Ahmadpour did pop up in another of Kiarostami's films called Through the Olive Trees, but he never sought to be an actor again unlike Ershadi.

____________________________

Sandrine Bonnaire

VAGABOND (1985)


Ah, Agnes Varda...why must you be such a genius?

When Vagabond begins, we see a young woman named Mona dead in a ditch covered in frost. We don't know if she specifically died from hypothermia or something else entirely. We then proceed to flashback through her final weeks to see what led to her death.

So yeah...not exactly a lighthearted romp for the whole family, but I think by now, you may have noticed I tend to be drawn to these cynical moody pieces.

Vagabond plays out with us watching someone's life unraveling...sort of like The Lost Weekend or Leaving Las Vegas and yet, Vagabond is far more effective. The film is presented almost as if it were a documentary in style...not surprising considering it is Varda...and that gritty nature, along with the work of then 18-year-old Bonnaire, give the film such a tragic feel.

Years ago, I was discussing films with someone I knew mostly as an acquaintance, and they proceeded to bash this film because they felt that Mona was an insufferable character who brought all of this upon herself and that she was an immature brat. 

Looking back on that discussion now, I mostly see a person who was giving off vibes of "Get off my lawn!" mixed with "Why don't you get a job?!". 

For me, Mona was a truly captivating creation...and the layers with Bonnaire gave her were nothing short of astounding. She is certainly a young woman, but her drifting tendencies make her seem like she could be older...until she doesn't get her way and her more youthful pouty tendencies come to light.

Mona is expected to make something of herself, and is often taken advantage of by people she comes in contact with...but, who is to say she has to conform? This is a woman who isn't quite sure who she is, but she just wants to take everything one day at a time. 

I oddly marvel at her ability to just take life as it comes...and it does sadden me that she never gets the chance to actually find something that could potentially make her want to experience more out of life.

And yet, WHO AM I to say that she should've experienced more?

Varda's message of the film is quite bleak, but oddly powerful in its blunt nature...and Sandrine Bonnaire, who has since gone on to have an absolutely wonderful career, moved me deeply in such a difficult role that could've come off as a total whine.

___________________________

Glenn Close 

FATAL ATTRACTION and DANGEROUS LIAISONS


I decided to cheat for this one. Considering this was a great one-two punch that set off the legend of Glenn Close being an actress adept at villainous roles, I couldn't decide which performance I liked more. I have already mentioned three performances, so these will represent the fourth and fifth selections for my list.

As a film, Fatal Attraction is clearly the more problematic one in how it presents Close's character of Alex Forrest. Sure, she shouldn't be trying to kill Anne Archer before her bath, but there is a certain misogynistic streak to the film that is undeniable. Having said that, Close has been very vocal about how much work she did on trying to understand the psychology of Alex. From first glance, this is just a psychotic woman, but she is also a woman suffering from past trauma...potentially sexual abuse. Despite the problems with the film, Close should be highly commended for what she did to make this role a work of art. 

It is a shame that she lost the Oscar to Cher that year for Moonstruck, who was certainly very good in that film but I think Close (and Holly Hunter in Broadcast News) were more worthy.

Then you have Dangerous Liaisons.


This was more of a sly and devilish role...not to mention far more regal.

But I do want to single out Close's final moments in this film. First, you get her absolutely unhinged breakdown which is quickly followed by her getting booed at the opera house. That leads to perhaps one of the most beloved and iconic endings of a film where Close quietly sits and wipes off her makeup alone. She is angry and truly devastated and ashamed and then we see the tears slowly starting to drop. 

It is a shame to live in a world where Glenn Close can't even win a single Oscar.

____________________________

Issach de Bankole

 CHOCOLAT (1988)


No relation to the bland fluff of a film starring Juliette Binoche, this Chocolat, by the legendary Claire Denis, is far more complex. In fact, you could even argue that this is one example of a film that could've flirted with a "white savior" trope and didn't. Before I delve more into that specifically, let me briefly set up the film for you. 

Chocolat is set in French-Occupied Cameroon and focuses on a young girl named (oddly enough) France and her family who were part of the colonialization. One of their "houseboys" is Protee (Issach de Bankole) and young France has a friendship with him but there is an attraction forming between him and France's mother Aimee. 

At first glance, you could find this film to be incredibly problematic, but I think a lot of what saves the film is how Denis approaches it. Denis actually LIVED with her family in occupied Cameroon as a child...and a lot of what she saw there in terms of interactions and behaviors inspired her to make the film. That particularly POV is what saves the film because it certainly doesn't try to sugarcoat the process...and through it all, you have de Bankole's Protee acting as the true heart and soul of the film. That is what I find so impressive; Denis gives the POV to the colonizers, but the agency she gives Protee makes it feel far more worthwhile than, say, The Blind Side.

Protee doesn't talk much, but this is easily one of the expressive and emotional performances I have seen from a film. For playing what could simply be considered a "slave" role, de Bankole feels so alive and vibrant. He seems to be able to put on a show for others but then he turns away from them to face the camera only to break down into tears...such as when Aimee and France laugh at the field that the servants must shower in, even though just moments before, Protee had to fill up a tank to allow Aimee a chance to take a shower in complete privacy.

Claire Denis walked a fine line with this one and managed to succeed, but the real masterstroke is how she handled the character of Protee and how brilliantly Issach de Bankole portrayed him.
______________________________

Shelley Duvall

THE SHINING (1980)


The journey of this performance has been a fascinating one...and one that most people tend to know about. When The Shining was first released, it was considered the weakest film that Kubrick had made since his earliest efforts from the 50s. 

It culminated in Kubrick getting nominated for Worst Director and Duvall getting nominated for Worst Actress at the 1st ever Razzie Awards. Even as a kid, I heard many people reference Duvall as being horrible in this movie and once I did see the film, I actually felt that people were wrong.

I will admit that maybe I found some of her moments to be a bit over-the-top or that her energy (particularly her anxious energy at the beginning of the film) did come off as annoying.

It is common knowledge that Kubrick basically put Duvall through an emotional ringer and would have her do take after take after take after take leaving her exasperated and truly distraught...and the results on the screen are basically where Kubrick drove her to.

I now view this performance as being a very brave and bold work and one that I am thrilled is receiving a resurgence in acclaim.

______________________________

Whoopi Goldberg

THE COLOR PURPLE (1985)


The career trajectory of Whoopi Goldberg is one she didn't necessarily expect for herself. She had considered herself a character actress and that was always her main goal: playing anything she wanted.

By happenstance, she managed to cross paths with the like Mike Nichols who wanted to take her small off-Broadway one-woman show to Broadway...and she was quickly established as a legit comedic character actress. 

Almost at the exact moment, she was poached by writer Alice Walker and director Steven Spielberg to portray the pivotal role of Celie in the film adaptation of The Color Purple.

Now - I am of the belief that I don't think Spielberg was the right choice to adapt that novel into a film...but regardless of that, I do greatly admire the acting in it.

Nowadays, most people just seem to think of Whoopi as the moderator on The View but the woman can act...and she gave us one of the best debuts in cinema history with this performance.

She ended up losing the Oscar to the previous 7-time loser Geraldine Page for The Trip to Bountiful, which often gets selected as a truly weak choice...but honestly, it does a disservice to both actresses in this case as both of them were fantastic. 

When I think about Goldberg, my mind does admittedly go to other films like Sister Act or Ghost, but there is no denying how affective she is in this film and how much we commit to Celie's journey. She is particularly effective in her big scene with Margaret Avery's Shug where she smiles at Shug's insistence...or at the end when she finally stands up to Danny Glover with a knife to his throat. 

Despite my issues with the film, I think Goldberg (and the ensemble) more than make the film worth a watch.

______________________________

Richard E. Grant

 WITHNAIL & I (1987)

Back in 2019, I was absolutely thrilled when Richard E. Grant was gaining traction for his truly exquisite work in Can You Ever Forgive Me?

It was one of those Oscar nominations that was certainly deserved but also a huge vindication after decades of working as a dependable character actor. Of course, he lost to Mahershala Ali for a category fraud performance in the mawkish mess that was Green Book. 

The 1980s saw a bit of a solid resurgence for British cinema as it seemed to die down after its explosion in the 1960s. Withnail & I is certainly a strong highlight of the decade, but a lot of that power belongs to Richard E. Grant as Withnail.

Talk about a delicious performance. He is a flamboyant drunk who acts with such bravado and narcissism, but deep down, he is an absolute spineless coward. He is someone trapped in an era that he both doesn't want to leave and wishes someone could pull him away from and nothing seems to ever really happen from there.

Next to Grant the Teetotaler (aka "I", Paul McGann), Withnail is a reject who seems to want to drink away his sorrows after essentially being ignored by his wealthy family. There is a bizarre charm to him, but it is yet another example of watching an actor find so many layers within a complex character...including the fact that he is willing to leave Grant in a compromised position with his sexual predator Uncle Monty (played by the late Richard Griffiths).

________________________________

Dennis Hopper

 BLUE VELVET (1986)


When you have an actor who had been on the down and out for many years, it can be truly glorious when they get to have a major comeback. 

1986 was a banner year for Dennis Hopper, who had a stint in rehab and was eager to restart an acting career. While he did manage to net an Oscar nomination for Hoosiers along with receiving good notices for his work in River's Edge, there is no denying the legend of this comeback truly stemmed from his work as Frank Booth in Blue Velvet.

Hopper had said in interviews that he didn't care at the time about how little he was paid for Blue Velvet because he had faith in David Lynch who had already built up a name on movies like Eraserhead and his Oscar nominated work for The Elephant Man.

And keep in mind, Lynch was given many offers to direct mainstream films after that nomination...including to even direct Return of the Jedi and...I am not kidding...Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Needless to say, him taking on Dune wasn't the best decision but it was the failure of Dune that led to him being able to bring Blue Velvet to light.

As Frank Booth, Hopper is not exactly the deepest character. He is a frothing at the mouth villain who yells and abuses nearly every around him, particularly Isabella Rossellini and Kyle MacLachlan. His character falls madly in love with Rossellini's nightclub singer Dorothy Vallens and to cope with that, he kidnaps her husband and young son and begins to have a truly...umm...warped sexual relationship with her.

Although...there is one scene which shows Hopper watching Rossellini perform in the club and he watches with a wistful longing. It is actually a quick beautiful moment which shows that there IS something there that might be rather human...but in truth, this is a performance that is simply vile in the best way...and in true Lynchian fashion, his text manages to make Booth not just a terrifying figure but rather humorous at times. Some critics, famously Roger Ebert, DESPISED Lynch's tendency to put horrific actions onscreen and have them be sprinkled with dark humor about. 

If you were to take what might be the perfect example of this practice, look no further than Hopper as Booth. 

_________________________

Holly Hunter

 BROADCAST NEWS (1987)


James L. Brooks helped nurture the careers of such actresses as Mary Tyler Moore, Valerie Harper, Cloris Leachman, Tracey Ullman, and would eventually lead Shirley MacLaine to her overdue Oscar win for Terms of Endearment along with another Oscar win for Helen Hunt in As Good as it Gets.

Having said all that, I think his creation of Jane Craig, as played by Holly Hunter, might be his best...and it might still be HER best. 

After primarily working as a theatre actress, Hunter got a HUGE breakthrough with Broadcast News and managed to be quite the critical darling of 1987 even though most of the mainstream acknowledged Cher in Moonstruck and Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction. 

I already talked about Close and Cher above, so I won't dwell on that here.

Needless to say, Jane Craig is a true marvel of a character. She is a neurotic mess at times, but she is also a very smart and capable news producer.

From the first moment we see her sitting on a bed and abruptly breaking into a sobbing fit to start her day, we realize this is a woman with intense feelings...but she is not a joke. Brooks writes her with great interest and dignity, and Hunter has the talent to make her truly captivating and not some kind of annoying victim. 

I still stand by the claim that Broadcast News is the finest effort Brooks ever gave us (unless you want to count The Simpsons but we know that was more directly nurtured by Sam Simon in its earliest days), and that Holly Hunter's Jane Craig is one of the most fascinating characters I have ever seen in a movie, male or female. 

__________________________

Jeremy Irons

DEAD RINGERS (1988)


In 1991, Jeremy Irons won a richly deserved Best Actor Oscar for Reversal of Fortune, where he played suspected attempted murderer Klaus von Bulow.

I would also like to think that the award was divine justice for having gained no real traction for the finest work of his career, which occurred just a couple of years prior in Dead Ringers. 
I am of the belief that Dead Ringers is David Cronenberg's best film, and while a lot of that is due to the compelling plot, I think a big part of that is due to the dual work of Irons. 

Irons plays twin brothers Beverly and Elliott Mantle, who happen to share a gynecology practice in Toronto. Elliott is more of a womanizer and uses his status to try to seduce his female patients. However, when he tires of them, he sends to the more reserved Beverly...and since they are twins, the patients are none the wiser.

Things take a turn when actress Claire Niveau (Genevieve Bujold) visits the clinic and the discovery is made that she is unable to conceive a child. In this process, Elliott seduces Claire but actually wants to give her to Beverly for him to sleep with. Soon after, Beverly becomes attached to Claire and ends up getting addicted to prescription drugs much like she is...which he is able to get by means of writing prescriptions out to her and himself.

Dead Ringers is a film that manages to be a tragic romance and a creepy psychological thriller...and I do feel without the kind of dual work provided by Irons, the film would've failed. 

It bears repeating that I do think this is the finest work of his career.

___________________________

Nastassja Kinski

 PARIS, TEXAS (1984)


Acting is fascinating. Sometimes, people watch a performance and find brilliance while others may watch it and think that the actor did nothing of note to warrant any kind of significant praise.

Then there are performances where the actor just has this energy about them that is almost trance-like...where they aren't exactly emoting at any kind of bombastic level, but their presence just compels you so strongly that you can't help but love what they are bringing to the table. 

When I first saw Paris, Texas, I had only seen Kinski in one other film, which was Roman Polanski's Tess, a film that hasn't really remained in the pop culture lexicon and isn't as discussed as much as his other efforts (or his crimes) despite the fact it did get multiple Oscar nominations (which is proof how little those often matter).

Kinski's presence in the film is relatively minimal, but she somehow becomes one of the best things about it...which is saying something considering how much I love it.

Paris, Texas is one of my favorite films of the 1980s and also of all time. I absolutely love everything about it and think it is a masterful effort from Wim Wenders and quite possibly the crown jewel on the late Sam Shepard's resume.

I am about to give you the most basic setup to this film, but I still highly recommend you seek this one out.

The beginning of Paris, Texas revolves around Travis (Harry Dean Stanton) walking aimlessly in a desert with no recollection of who he is...and it turns out, he walked out on his wife Jane and young son.

Kinski plays Jane, and once Travis begins to regain his memory, he manages to track down Jane and discovers she works at a Peep Show Club. A bit stunned and disheartened, he decides to go see her in one of the rooms. Set up with a one-way mirror, Travis sees Jane enter the room wearing a pink sweater (which is from the image you see above).

Jane has no clue this is Travis on the other side of the mirror, speaking over an intercom...but she has a very genteel quality. She tries to give him what she thinks he wants by asking "Do you mind if I take off my sweater?" but when he objects to that...she seems so unsure of what is going on and how to help him. 

These mirror scenes, between Stanton (who is honestly worthy of this list too) and Kinski, are so compelling that the first time I saw the film, I had goosebumps the whole time. Also, how Kinski uses her voice makes it seem like she came straight from a Kristin Linklater class...and would be rife for an ASMR video. 

Kinski's Jane is a creation that is practically dreamlike. Even her aesthetic is iconic and sublime.

____________________________

Aleksei Kravchenko

COME & SEE (1985)


I don't think I can truly convey what an achievement this performance is.

It is brutal...it is relentless...and the pain that is inflicted upon him both mentally and physically is truly difficult to watch...as it should be considering this is a movie set during the Holocaust. 

The true intensity of Kravchenko in this is nearly unparalleled...especially when you take into account that he was 15 when it was made.

The Belurusian film Come & See is one I had heard about years ago when I began studying and looking into film history...but it was pretty much impossible to find. In 2001, Kino Lorber released the film on DVD and my local public library managed to acquire it for its collection.

I have said it before but my local library growing curated an insanely extensive catalog of films and it was there that I managed to rent films that were too artsy/obscure/foreign as many of them were hard to get at local video stores such as Video World, Blockbuster, or Video Warehouse. 

I finally rented Come & See in 2002. I was 14 years old...and I honestly didn't know what I was getting into. I honestly think I managed to block a lot of it out.

Even though I knew it would be tough, I wanted to revisit the film as an adult and did so during the 2020 quarantine. The feelings of discomfort and disgust washed over me, but there is no denying why this film has managed to gain a strong following in the film community these days. As of this writing in 2023, it is the #2 ranked film on Letterboxd's Top 250 with a 4.6 out of 5 rating. To put that into perspective, it is only one of 8 films to score that high. 

Elem Klimov's work on this film is a marvel that should be studied in every single film class, but I think what he was able to get out of Aleksei Kravchenko also deserves a standing ovation to last for decades.

The sheer terror and devastation conveyed by him is, I think, unmatched by anyone in any film I have seen. I would even go as far to say that even talking about him and the film in such a way feels cheap. I would also be prepared to make the claim that he gives one of the greatest performances in the history of cinema...like maybe top 5 level. 

___________________________

Carmen Maura

WOMEN ON THE VERGE OF A NERVOUS BREAKDOWN (1988)


There is a fine line in being able to make the concept of chaos work on the screen. 

The works of Pedro Alomodovar are masterclasses in the form, because he is somehow able to ground such insane stories in a very realistic but heightened world. 

I think a lot of what makes Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown work is Carmen Maura...and that isn't to take away from Almodovar or anyone else. If anything, there was a clear reason why Almodovar loved working with Maura. 

This is a movie of pure insanity...and through it all, there is Carmen Maura as Pepa. 

Pepa is distraught because her lover left her and now all she wants to do is partake of her sleeping pill-laced gazpacho and end it all.

BUT...life won't let that happen. She keeps getting interrupted by various eccentric people in her life, but it leads her to try to seek answers as to why he left.

There is a strong resolve to Maura as Pepa...and it is that resolve that helps aid the film remaining grounded despite how absolutely bonkers this film and its characters are around her. 

She manages to keep sort of keep all of her emotions at a reserve, but we can see every little bit of each one creeping in. There is a moment where she accidentally sets her bed ablaze...and when you watch it, you see her staring at this flame stunned...but it is more than that. You can see the delicate and intricate inner monologue from Maura; how she is coming to terms with her past and present and the uncertain feature. She is definitely shocked and upset, but there is almost a strange vindication behind it. Later on, she masterfully manages to do the truly difficult act of crying and laughing all at once but one not being born from the other. 

In the flashy world of pinks and reds provided by Almodovar, Maura was...even if it may sound cheesy...a true rainbow.

______________________________

Mary Tyler Moore

 ORDINARY PEOPLE (1980)


Perhaps it is all in hindsight, but even as a young kid who saw reruns of her titular show on Nick at Nite, I did sense a certain cool nature to Mary Tyler Moore. There was no doubt that she had talent and could command the screen...and it was especially apparent to me when I saw her as Beth in Ordinary People.

I had a truly intense reaction to Moore in this film...much like to the whole film in general. I had such a passion for it that when I was in high school, I fought hard for our theatre teacher to mount a production as there was a stage version that had been licensed. As she was about to retire, she didn't really have much say on the future school year when I discovered the play version's existence but she said that while I maybe wouldn't get to act in it, maybe I should try to direct a scene from it for the upcoming Directing class I was going to be in my junior year. 

When I pitched the show to fellow classmates who were going to audition, I was often very volatile in how I described the character of Beth because I did have an uncertainty at first of which scene I would direct. Looking back, I do feel like I missed the certain layers that Moore gave Beth...and with watching interviews she gave on the topic, it is clear that Moore didn't see her as a villain. 

Don't get me wrong, I don't condone the cold nature which Moore casts upon her family...but it is a complex situation. This is a woman who lost her eldest son in a tragic accident (seemingly the son she bonded with most) and then soon after had to deal with the attempted suicide of her youngest son who was with his eldest brother at the time of his drowning (during a storm on Lake Michigan).

Moore's Beth has that sort of Stepford Wife quality where she cannot stand anything snapping from breaking the perfect façade, and that is something that her son Conrad (Timothy Hutton) keeps doing and she can't give him the love and support he needs. 

There is a scene in which she and Donald Sutherland are having lunch, and she begins to berate him for how he has been handling the emotional outbursts of Conrad...but when the waitress approaches, she quickly dissolves into a happier façade that we know is fake and then the moment the waitress walks away, Moore continues her line as if she simply couldn't contain holding it in. She is simply on a very refined but vicious war path. 

______________________________

Eddie Murphy

COMING TO AMERICA (1988)


This might end up being one of a couple of choices on this list that will raise a few eyebrows. When it comes to performances that are considered among the best ever, I still feel like some tend to scoff at certain kinds of genres such as horror and comedy.

While horror seems to be having a bit of a critical appraisal, I feel like some comedies aren't spoken of in the same kind of way. I also think the majority of Eddie Murphy's career in the last 30 years has turned a lot of people off...but in the 1980s, he was certainly on the Mount Rushmore of Comedy.

Halfway through his legendary 4-year stint on SNL, Murphy broke onto the film scene with 48 Hours, which made for a truly wonderful debut...he quickly followed those up with Trading Places and Beverly Hills Cop. Those two films further cemented him as a charismatic comic genius.

And yet, I always come back to Coming to America.

One of the more familiar Eddie Murphy film tropes of the last 20-30 years has been him playing multiple characters within his films...which has led to some truly heinous results (Norbit). 

This gimmick of sorts began in Coming to America, which he and co-star Arsenio Hall would take on multiple roles often aided with tons of prosthetics. 

In Murphy's case, he plays the lead character Prince Akheem along with three others:

Randy Watson
- the lead singer of a band named Sexual Chocolate who seems to have only one true fan.

Clarence
-the owner of the barbershop that Akheem visits

Saul
-the Jewish man who seems to hang out in the barbershop

When it comes to comedies, I often find myself thinking about and quoting Coming to America...and that does have a lot to do with Eddie Murphy.

There are so many things I could reference, but let's go back to the one scene character of Randy Watson. The people in attendance are obviously not enthused with Randy as a performer but he seems completely oblivious to it; giving off the vibe of a very slimy and poor man's Little Richard.

When he breaks out into a truly laughable rendition of "The Greatest Love of All", you can't help but just smile at the lunacy...or the fact that his band is called "Sexual Chocolate". 

OR -

When Akheem and Semmi (Hall) are awake for their first morning living in their squalor of a Queens apartment and Akheem yells out "Good morning my neighbors!" only to be told "Hey! Fuck you!" back in true New Yorker fashion.

But the naive and sweet Akheem is unaware of this diss and responds back with great joyful gusto: "Yes! YES! FUCK YOU TOO!!"

Forgive me, but yeah...I love this movie and Murphy in it.
______________________________

Fernando Ramos da Silva

PIXOTE (1980)


Much like Kiarostami discovered Babak Ahmadpour for Where is the Friend's House, the Brazilian filmmaker Hector Babenco found Fernando Ramos da Silva and felt he was exactly who needed for his film. Although, while Ahmadpour played more of an innocent figure, da Silva was living a life that was, quite sadly, very similar to that of the character in the film Pixote (which translates to "small child").

In real life, his mother only earned a pension that would translate to $10 a month and the family would sell lottery tickets to try to net an additional income. He did find solace in theatre programs at his school where he began acting in plays at the age of 8. This was where Babenco selected him out of 1300 applicants...and while you could say this is where the happy ending for da Silva and his family began, I am sorry to say that isn't the case.

Pixote is about a 10-year-old boy who is taken in at a local detention center and faces cruelty and abuse from the officers. While there, he witnesses others getting abused and even murdered by the officers, who then choose to frame the murders on 17-year-old Lilica, a trans female who has no means to go about a transition relying only wearing female clothing...which causes her to get misgendered and ruthlessly mocked. The young boy (whom we only know as "pixote") helps Lilica and three boys escape from the detention facility, but their freedom only ends them back into a life of crime in order to survive.

Much like Ahmadpour, but on a darker level, there is a realness to da Silva that is completely disarming. He is 10 years old (13 when filming), but his life seems to have made him wiser beyond his years, especially in how he acts and appears. 

The sad truth is that da Silva was murdered by Brazilian police in 1987 at the age of 19 as the claimed he was resisting arrest, even though eyewitnesses said that it didn't seem as though he was...nor was he armed. 

Pixote is a bleak and truly horrifying film, but one of great importance. It showcases the horrors of police corruption and police brutality, but how much that type of intense immersion can lead to attacks on those who are poor and just need some help. 

I actually didn't know about da Silva's murder until after I had first seen the film about 20 years ago...and now, I find myself struggling with the idea of revisiting it. I thought about it a lot after the many senseless murders caused by the police in the last...umm...many decades...but particularly with the surge of protests following George Floyd in 2020. I do highly recommend the film, but it is no going to be an easy watch. I also feel like da Silva had amazing potential and it is a shame that his life was cut so short.

_______________________________

Paul Reubens

PEE WEE'S BIG ADVENTURE (1985)

*Full disclosure - I began devising this post on July 30th, 2023...but then put it off for a while. Paul Reubens passed away the next day, and I had hoped to try to get this post up quickly to give him due credit for some underrated comedic work. I decided I want to watch a couple of films for a refresher and then time was my own worst enemy. Better late than never...*

The simple truth is that I find Paul Reubens to be a better actor than some may give him credit for.

There was a period from my childhood where the idea of Pee Wee Herman was engrained in my head that I didn't really know the extent of who Paul Reubens was as a person or actor.

I do remember finally seeing him in his small role in Matilda and also, more memorably, the truly bizarre poacher/exterminator in Dunston Checks In which were both very far removed from Pee Wee. Then you had his performance in the movie Blow which didn't exactly lead to other prospects.

When you look at what Paul Reubens achieved with Pee Wee, it was the true definition of commitment to a character. 

This is a world where a manchild like Pee Wee can exist without any real questioning...and it is therefore a lot of fun to watch as the people surrounding him have to deal with Pee Wee manically trying to find out who stole his bike.

This could be trying to attack Francis, another manchild, while taking a bath in his swimming pool sized bathtub...or holding a meeting lasting for over 3 hours in his hot basement showcasing various pieces of evidence as to the whereabouts of his bike.

For example, exhibit D is a pen.

"I bought this pen one hour before my bike was stolen. Why? What's the significance? I DON'T KNOW!" only for the scene to dissolve to hours later with him, no shortage of bravado yelling "Exhibit Q, a scale model of the ENTIRE MALL!!"

I mentioned how I knew of Pee Wee as a child, but I should reiterate that I absolutely adored this character...which also included the iconic Saturday morning kids show Pee Wee's Playhouse and the less successful film Big Top Pee Wee. His work brought me so much joy and I still feel like his content holds up tremendously well. May he rest in peace. 

________________________________

Sigourney Weaver

ALIENS (1986)


Once in a while, the Academy will nominate a performance that makes you applaud them for branching away from their comfort zone. As is expected, those performances don't often win and that is the case with Sigourney Weaver in Aliens.

If you really think about it, this is a Sci-Fi/Action/Horror performance in a film sequel...how often does THAT happen?

I feel like I can't say much about Weaver's impact as Ellen Ripley that hasn't already been said. Sure, when the character been first devised for the predecessor Alien, it was said that Ripley (like all the characters) was written gender neutral and that the casting would be based off of the auditions. 

The director for that film, Ridley Scott, knew that Weaver had something special...and she certainly has a unique quality that felt unlike many of her peers of the era such as Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, or Jessica Lange. 

Ripley is such a well-rounded and emotional character that just so happens to be an action hero. In a way, it is sort of similar to that of how effective Bruce Willis was as John McClane in Die Hard...a hero who, at first glance, doesn't seem to be your typical action star and yet...they work perfectly.

Sigourney Weaver is an underrated actress, and she has deserved far more than she has gotten out of her career, which seemed to mostly stall after such a strong streak in the 80s. I find that to be an absolute shame, and I do hope that someone will allow her to have a comeback she so richly deserves.
________________________________________

FINAL THOUGHTS:

I will admit that I actually struggled with this list. I had maybe about 10 performances that I felt strongly about, and then I put in about 2-3 more and then kept swapping out the remaining seven until I decided to go with the list you see above.

As you can see, some of the options may be a little more obscure while some manage to bleed more into mainstream type fare.

To be honest, that doesn't seem as much of a surprise to me now that I really think about it. The 1980s were a decade for film that managed to take a dip in quality after a rather fruitful 1970s output that seemed to be rapturous on a worldwide scale. 

I think that over the years, I have managed to find little diamonds amongst the films of the 80s, but what REALLY surprises me is how some of these performances aren't just among the best of the decade, but among the best of all time.

I would easily put Isabelle Adjani and Aleksei Kravchenko on a list of the top 10-20 greatest performances ever captured on film.

I suppose you didn't expect a list to include the likes of them along with Paul Reubens and Eddie Murphy so there you go! I am full of surprises and not just a snob in the end... ;-)

Thank you for checking out this installment and do intend to continue this series. However, considering it took me nearly 6 months to get his post up and running, I won't make any promises on when it'll be up. 

I have begun drafts on the 2000s and 2010s, but I will also try to tackle the 1970s eventually.

If this still proves to get the readership over time, I may consider doing the 50s and 60s as well.

At any rate, let's hope it won't take me seventeen years for the next volume!


THE GREAT YEARS OF CINEMA: A Look Back at 1989 in Film

Over the past year, I was doing a series of posts that I dubbed "An Anniversary Retrospective" and I would list my top 10 films fr...