I was not invited to do the Oscar Symposium at Nat’s site this year, but it has returned, though only Nat and Ed Gonzalez are back from last year. The newbies include Spout’s Karina Longworth, InContention’s Kris Tapley, Antagony and Ecstacy’s Timothy Brayton, and Erik Lundergaard. I poked around a bit and stumbled upon this paragraph, you know, just to stir things up. On the best actor race, Longworth:
To me, Mickey Rourke is the only nominee in the Best Actor category. Sean Penn’s Milk impersonation too often feels like a big show from someone who knows how and when to hit the notes that make critics and Academy voters take note. Both Richard Jenkins and Brad Pitt were better in Burn After Reading (sorry, haters). Again, I didn’t see Frost/Nixon, but in the commercials, Langella sounds like a Muppet. Rourke may not have another performance like this in him, but that’s all the more reason why he deserves to win over Penn, who proved with I Am Sam that he can bait Oscar in his sleep, and will surely do so again real soon.
It makes me think of …. Sigh. When Woody was good.
Timothy Brayton defends Penn:
That said, it amazes me that Penn actually finds something playable in the stock character Black gives him. I don’t know that he’s necessarily playing the same Harvey Milk who lived and walked the streets of San Francisco, but whatever he’s doing, it’s electrifying. I see Penn’s Milk as the male version of Sally Hawkins’s Poppy from Happy-Go-Lucky: confronted by great suffering, he makes the conscious choice to remain happy and optimistic, although Penn shows us a character much closer to the breaking point than Hawkins does. It gives the film’s version of Milk a hidden depth that, as far as I can tell, he completely lacks on the page, which means Penn has done the best kind of acting job: saving the film from its screenplay.
32 Responses for "Oscar Symposium is Back"
Karina Longworth sounds like an idiot. I have no respect for someone who makes fun of a performance she’s never seen.
From what I’ve read in that symposium, it seems Karina has no idea what she’s talking about. It was like every point she made I completely disagreed with. Should be great fun reading some of her thoughts.
There’s nothing like an atypical, hyperbolic opinion to get some attention.
I didn’t see the film. She should really shut up about a performance if she didn’t even see it. It was one of the major films of the award season how don’t you go see it. “He sounds like a muppet” which muppet would that be.
I just wrote that I am hating the Symposium but finding it irresistible.
It’s been a very polarizing year in American film.
Not watching all of the BP nominees should be grounds for immediate disqualification for the Oscar symposium.
It is a fun read….
“Again, I didn’t see Frost/Nixon, but in the commercials, Langella sounds like a Muppet.”
Way to destroy your credibility in an instant. At least when I criticize a film or performance (like it or not) I have fucking SEEN it (and paid to SEE it – all she needs to say now is she had free passes to attend a screening, but didn’t go).
Did anyone see her picture? Someone who looks like a puppet shouldn’t say things like that, lol.
I can’t help but agree with Karina’s statment about Penn. He knows how to work ‘em. It’s good, but feels calculated. At the same time, I can’t help but agree that he elevates the character beyond the screenplay. That screenplay is getting way too much credit.
That bit about Langella is a sad comment. Next time, see the film! It’s up for Best Picture, what excuse do you have for not having seen all 5 best picture nominees at this point. At least I’ve done that!
Regarding Penn….some like her might call it calculated. It’s called technique.
Oh yeah, cuz we all know Sean Penn is sitting around trying to figure out a way to get on another Oscar ballot.
Seriously?
Too many people see “Milk” as a garden variety “biopic”. If it were, there would be more about Harvey’s personal life in it (sexploits optional, to please those looking for that). The fact is, it’s not a standard biopic. “The movement” was a sizable part of the story being told in “Milk”. IMO, it was a more important part of Harvey’s story than who he had sex with and when.
If anything, I would have liked to see about ten more minutes of his relationship with Scott. I got the impression there was a love story (perhaps one too convoluted to tell) there, but not quite enough detail to affirm that. But, again, this wasn’t just a “biopic”. It was partially a history lesson about a human rights movement.
ETA: “Oh yeah, cuz we all know Sean Penn is sitting around trying to figure out a way to get on another Oscar ballot.”
Honestly. He’s knocking himself out to get that second Oscar (not).
I think the biopic comparisons with respect to Milk are more about how the story is told, rather than with respect to content. It felt like a standard biopic to me in a lot of ways, and part of that might be because Gus Van Sant was directing it, so I was expecting more innovative. I didn’t get the emotional connection I thought I would get from it–it actually felt more like a documentary to me. It’s not that I didn’t like the film, it’s just that it didn’t blow me away.
I just saw The Reader, and I thought it was a very good film. I thought that David Kross should have received some awards consideration for his performance, too, though his character did bug the hell out of me. I also liked Kate’s performance in this much better than I did in Revolutionary Road–the latter was a good perf, but what she did in The Reader had much more texture, I felt. On thing bothered me though–is it just me or did that laptop that the 1997 version of Michael had on his desk look waaaay too post-2000?
Karina might bring back memories of the scene with Diane Keaton in Manhattan, but she’s also a lot like the girl at the very end of this Annie Hall clip.
There’s nothing wrong with not seeing Frost/Nixon. ‘Tis a point of wisdom, in fact.
But you don’t rag on Langella’s Nixon. It is brilliant–the only great thing about the film and its only deserving Oscar nomination.
Even if he does sound a little like Rowlf.
How the hell can someone participate in an Oscar Symposium without having seen all of the films and or nominated performances. Totally ridiculous! You cannot judge an entire performance by what you see in a COMMERCIAL?!! This woman is an idiot!!
Watched the first half of The Strangers tonight, Benj.
Holeee sheeit! You’re so right about the editing. The sound mix is amazing too. Not sure if I want to watch the rest before bed. It’s a genuinely “dark and stormy night” here.
Karina…
Bitch, Pleeeaaase!
T.
“How the hell can someone participate in an Oscar Symposium without having seen all of the films and or nominated performances.”
First, you have to be able to craft distinctive critiques like the “sounds like a Muppet” line. That way it won’t sound like you memorized all the “cold and remote” and “it’s just like Forrest Gump” stuff from something you heard Leonard Maltin say. Second, think up some good Oscar Symposium topics like “Sean Penn is always great so the Oscar should go to the guy who hasn’t been great for years and might never be great again.” Third, repeat IFC, IFC, IFC a lot, as if that has a fucking thing to do with the Oscars. Fourth, if you’r'e a girl let the boys do most of the talking, and dress appropriately. Fifth, name a lot of movies that didn’t get nominated and never would in a trillion years because, in a circle jerk like this, if you can’t beat off you gotta be off beat.
Great post about the actors. I’ve copy pasted that and added it to my personal files. The way he wrote it summed up my feelings on this year’s best actor race perfectly.
I just took a gander at Katrina. She looks like she’s from the road company of Ghost World, the musical.
KJS: You should probably take that back, because I sort of take it as a comment. Or would, if my name was “Katrina.”
Everyone else: I feel duly chastised, and will do my best to approach all matters Oscar as humorlessly as you do in the future.
“Karina Longworth sounds like an idiot. I have no respect for someone who makes fun of a performance she’s never seen.”
She DID see it. She said she saw it in the commercials, and based on the performance she saw IN THE COMMERCIAL he sounded like a muppet. She wasn’t judging his performance in the film, and she never said she was.
What, no one in the history of advertisements ever made a comment or a judgement on what they’ve seen in an ad or a coming attraction? On what planet does that happen?
It is one thing for friends to make comments to each other based on a commercial. If you are a professional though it is your responsibility to critique having watched the film. If you did not see the film, a simple “I can’t comment on that one because I have not see it.” suffices. It’s simple and to the point and does not betray your ethics as professional film critic.
Also Longworth is engaging in a disturbing practice which is also unprofessional. She wants a performance to win so bad that she is purposefully tearing down the other 4 performances. Her comments on Penn, Jenkins and Langella are designed to put Rourke higher on the pedestal. There is not an ounce of legitimate thought there. It is all about her having a favorite to win. This type of behavior is embarrassing.
KJS: You should probably take that back, because I sort of take it as a compliment. Or would, if my name was “Katrina.”
ouch, the taint of Katrina is a double-pronged dagger since it forces Karina to think about Benjamin Button again.
Thanks for being a good sport, Karina. Do me a favor? On Day 3, when he’s not looking, would you spit in Braydon’s drink? For comparing Harvey Milk — or anyone else — to Poppy Longstocking. thnx.
Is anyone just not blown away by Mikey Rourke or Sean Penn? If I had to pick between the two I would go with Sean Penn. The best actor of the year is Leonardo Dicaprio in Revolutionary Road.
I have seen FROST/NIXON and the first thing I said to my wife upon exiting the theater was “it’s history as puppet show.” Langella does indeed sound — and act — like a Muppet. I wish I’d only seen the preview as it was more than enough.
It is one thing for friends to make comments to each other based on a commercial. If you are a professional though it is your responsibility to critique having watched the film. If you did not see the film, a simple “I can’t comment on that one because I have not see it.” suffices. It’s simple and to the point and does not betray your ethics as professional film critic.
Also Longworth is engaging in a disturbing practice which is also unprofessional. She wants a performance to win so bad that she is purposefully tearing down the other 4 performances. Her comments on Penn, Jenkins and Langella are designed to put Rourke higher on the pedestal. There is not an ounce of legitimate thought there. It is all about her having a favorite to win. This type of behavior is embarrassing.
Oh, get over yourself. You sound like you get dressed up before you submit a post.
First of all, learn to read. She did not tear down the other 4 performances. She complimented Richard Jenkins and Brad Pitt’s performance. If you’re going to pretend you know all about “journalistic ehtics”, then you should try to show you have ethics of your own and not misrepresent what other people say, you hypocrite.
And she didn’t even tear down Sean Penn’s performance. She just criticized it. Sorry if your feelings are so hurt by what she said that you have to make more of something that’s really so very little.
As for commenting on a commercial, welcome to the new media. This was an informal setting. There are online discussions about movies and Oscars all over the place, and professionals engage in them all the time. And they don’t usually write as they would in their columns. They’re permitted to make jokes, they’re allowed to be informal, it’s even very commom to be a little unkind. That’s how it is these day, and the candor is very refreshing. Welcome to the 21st century. Get used to it.
“I can’t comment on that one because I have not seen it.” LMAO!!! I will agree that when Ms. Longworth is subpoened to appear before before the Senate Comittee on journalistic ethics, that’s how she should answer.
Ryan: I watched The Strangers again last night (to make sure I hadn’t gone crazy with the hyperbole, here), and it was stormy in my neck of the woods, too! Yeeee.
Agreed on the sound mix. It uses dynamics to get a reaction, but not by blasting something so loud that it hurts the ears.
What did you think of the ending?
Oh, and LMAO at that image link above. If the movie finds enough of an audience on DVD, I think Dollface, Pinup and Baghead could enter the pantheon of scary movie icons. They beat the snot out of Jigsaw, if ‘n’ you ask me.
Ryan Adams (#20) “…think up some good Oscar Symposium topics like “Sean Penn is always great so the Oscar should go to the guy who hasn’t been great for years and might never be great again.”
Exactly!! LOL!! And that symposium would deserve to be paintballed!
“What did you think of the ending?”
Retro classic homage. Excellent touch, and — again — the precision of the editing made all the difference. Didn’t read any reviews until after I saw it, but J.R. Jones at the Chicago Reader sums it up perfectly: “old-fashioned suspense without any guarantee of old-fashioned mercy.”
I like how even after the masks came off we still have only the vaguest clue what the strangers look like.
Leave a reply