Well with both The Golden Globes and the SAGs behind us, the BAFTAs and Oscars are looming over the many award winning films which will receive nominations. While I'd love to nick pick over who should and should not win, there is a category that I feel has already been decided. The supporting actor award has practically been won already by German actor, Christoph Waltz. Having won literally every award for his portrayal of Col. Hans Landa, he has even won the Golden Globe and SAG award for supporting actor.This is where it gets interesting. IF Christoph Waltz wins the Oscar, this will be the third year in a row that the Supporting Actor award has been received by an actor in a villainous role. For those who do not remember Heath Ledger nabbed a posthumous Oscar for his role as The Joker last year and Javier Bardem won for his role as Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men the year prior. While this sets a trend, not all villains win. William Hurt in 2006 lost with his role as Richie Cusack in A History of Violence. The real question is what sets villains apart from heart warming old men (Hal Holbrook, Into the Wild) and possible pedophile priests (Philip Seymour Hoffman, Doubt).
First and foremost roles of these nature allow the actor to over act. Was the Joker really a seamless blend of reality and villainy? No! He was a character. Character acting is one of the best ways to get people to notice your skills as an actor, without having to break down crying in front of the camera. Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, Petter Lorre and many other funny little men have made a living with character roles. While Javier Bardem's role might not come off as overacting, the little smile he gives the gas station clerk pushes a barrier that cannot be seen. Actors are allowed to act inhuman, unethical, and unruly all while they smile. It also allows the audience to escape into a mind set they will never embody or create something to absolutely hate. This reaction from the audience is what film in essence is about. Film is about reactions- crying, laughing, fear, etc.
Take a movie like It's a Wonderful Life. Jimmy Stewart is given continuous praise for his new cynical acting style which he embodied after his run in WWII. While Stewart is extraordinary, Lionel Barrymore as Mr. Potter is probably the most successful of all the roles. He makes you hate him and by doing so we can easily side with Stewart even with his feelings for Mary (He loathes her because she represents him never getting out of the grubby little town). Taking this idea of the villain allowing the viewer to like the lead, look at films like The Dark Knight or No Country for Old Men. While there is no doubt in my mind that Josh Brolin and Christian Bale are two of the greatest actors to grace the silver screen, their characters are not the most lovable or praise worthy. The reason an audience member screamed "HELL YEAH BATMAN!" after Batman took out the 18 wheeler, is because Heath Ledger has laid down the unsettling road to which we side with the Batman.
With actors becoming so unsettling and the perfect outline for what a villain should be, audience members can end up siding with them. More people undoubtedly dressed as the Joker for Halloween, rather then the Batman. In this case the villain has become so successful he outshines the hero. Unlike The Dark Knight which is about the black and white and grey areas of morality, Inglourious Basterds is about showing that all of the characters are in the grey or black. When Christoph Waltz outshines Brad Pitt, Eli Roth, and Diane Kruger, it is alright because they all are cruel characters. There really is no good or bad, just bad and worse.
The villainous role has slowly left the realm of Snidley Whiplash and moved towards Professor Moriarty or even Sherlock Holmes on a bad day. This transformation has undoubtedly improved cinema, just as leaving the Dudley Do-Right characters in the past and making leads multilayered emotional anchors. It is because the villainous role as started to truly mature so much we are siding with them, actors are receiving more nominations for such roles.
As usual Paul gets it right on the money!
ReplyDeletedid I miss sarcasm, or did you call Bale and Brolin "two of the best actors to grace the silver screen" ?
ReplyDeleteExcellent job, Paul, and cosmicly speaks to my post perfectly.
ReplyDeleteI personally love Bale and Brolin. Brolin's role in Milk is probably the hardest one out of the bunch. He created a character that was hateful but you could see the layer that were under the hate. He wasn't just the evil government official that would have came out of most people. He had layers and it felt as if he didn't truly hate gay people but rather felt forced into the position. That's great acting and he's brought that acting to many of his roles. Then there is Bale who I am always excited to see on screen. I don't have a single role that I can point to, but I suggest taking a look at The Prestige because I feel there's some fine acting in that one as well.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI dunno, I say Jason Alexander deserved an Oscar for his role in Rocky & Bullwinkle. Now that was a deep and multi-layered villain!
ReplyDelete