You know what I mean by Acting. The stuff that wins awards, that you notice right off the bat and can say "Damn, that is good acting! So good I noticed it!" DiCaprio and Waltz are getting recognition for their performances, and while I don't want to downplay how good they are (DiCaprio manages to make plantation owner Calvin Candie despicable without being cartoonish, and I'm convinced that Christoph Waltz is incapable of being anything less than stunning), it kind of irks me that they're getting all the clout while Foxx is left in the dust. Because let's face it, Foxx isn't doing an Acting part; Django's evolution is much more nuanced than King Schultz's charismatic demeanor or Candie's casual cruelty. Foxx does a great job of showing Django's growth from an uneducated slave to bounty hunter sidekick to guile revenge hero. For most of the film Django has to put a cool exterior over the emotions roiling inside of him and play the part of a despicable man in order to get to his wife. It's the most important part to get right, and Foxx hits it perfectly, but it's also much less noticeable as great acting because of the subtlety and stoicism of the part. It's understandable but pretty frustrating that he's probably not going to get much recognition for the title role of the film, and a little cringeworthy since the two actors who are getting recognition happen to be playing the white savior and evil slave owner in a film predominately about a black slave.
And, you know what, I'll be honest; I really liked Leo's performance, but I think a lot of the praise he's getting is more about the part than about him. I had read about how much trouble he had with getting into the head of Candie, and to be honest, when I saw the film, I expected a worse person than I got. It really seems to me like there's this giant shock!! factor about the character of Candie, where Leo apparently deserves extra special credit for being strong or brave enough to play someone so racist, and it does make me roll my eyes a little. Candie is a terrible racist with no regard for the lives of slaves, but let's be honest: that wasn't out of the ordinary in those times. I can't really put my finger on how to explain this, but it seems a bit self-congratulatory on the part of white people, like bringing to light how horrible people actually were is such an emotional burden to carry. And it's like, a bloo bloo bloo white people. I don't know how much sense I'm actually making (and I definitely don't mean this to turn into a white people/black people thing), but I guess I get the feeling that he's getting praise for the wrong reasons. He should be commended for keeping Candie out of goofy cartoon zone, which would have been pretty easy to fall into, but he's far from magical or show-stealing and I feel like everyone's getting baited by Acting and sort of forgetting about how great regular damn acting can be.
(It may seem like I should go off on Christoph Waltz as well, but he's a genuine show stealer who makes sure his character is so much more than the white savior. Also he's so charming he probably poops charisma and I'm kind of in love with him and his inexplicably amazing beard.)
I really shouldn't rail too hard on Leo though, because he really did have to work to get through that part. If there's an example of someone racking up nominations that I think are kind of silly, it's Alan Arkin in Argo. Now, don't get me wrong, Alan Arkin is great in it, but Alan Arkin could play the snappy old man with snappy lines that he does in his damn sleep. The draw of Argo is that it does nothing new, but everything well (or at least well enough that you don't mind the last scene or the fact that the final chase is kind of silly), and it's really the same with the acting. Arkin, Goodman and Cranston, are gruff and a little crotchety yet loyal and funny, and they're the standouts of the film, but it's the comedic equivalent of Acting: beloved stars in their comfort zone. I don't want to downplay their performances, but they're one of those "of course" type of roles.
But maybe I'm jumping the gun; the Golden Globes are...the Golden Globes, and the Oscars haven't been announced yet, so maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. I might just be too cynical; good Acting is still good acting, after all. I guess I just wish there was more room for subtlety when discussing performances.
But then again, I'm also really sad that Denis Lavant won't be getting any major recognition for Holy Motors, which completely relies on both amazing acting and Acting and batshit insane magic art movie mojo, so maybe I'm just a little frustrated with the Hollywood machine in general.
No comments:
Post a Comment