In Contention

Tag: Woody Harrelson

  • INTERVIEW: Woody Harrelson

    Woody HarrelsonWoody Harrelson is running behind…about a half an hour behind.  This after a number of delays and schedule changes throughout the week.  When he strolls nonchalantly out onto the rooftop spread of a posh West Hollywood hotel, you can see why.  It’s not irresponsibility.  It’s not eccentric nuisance.  The guy just marches to his own drummer, and certainly, to his own beat.

    Publicity handler in tow, Harrelson moves and speaks purposefully, casual, always relaxed (though one might have fun speculating why that is).  Some may get him to say sensational things, but that’s not the M.O. of the interviewer he’s chatting with this afternoon.  So the perching hawk to my left, giving him a sharp look when he offers harmless jokes that might be seen as tasteless, isn’t exactly necessary.

    “Why don’t you let us talk alone,” he finally says, half-way through — respectfully, but sincerely.  He’s a man who seems to enjoy a chat, no matter how much it might push the rest of his schedule back.  And he’d certainly prefer to engage in one without that kind of oversight.

    Ostensibly his press rounds as of late are for the Oren Moverman film “The Messenger.” Appearances on The Colbert Report and, immediately following our encounter, The Late Late Show are popping up left and right.  He’s on the cover of this month’s Venice magazine.  But he’s also given a pair of zany performances in genre films this year that are worth discussing for the versatility they illuminate in his work.

    (more…)

  • Woody/Ferguson

    Woody hustled off to CBS to film this appearance on The Late Late Show right after I spoke with him Tuesday.  So it’s surreal, from my point of view, to see him wearing the same stuff he was when we spoke.  Anyway, just one of those things.  Wonderful interview, a Teddy bear, great heart, and, it goes without saying, a hell of an actor.  I really hope his brilliant work in “The Messenger” gets a fair shake this season.

  • “If someone says ‘Drop and give me 20,’ I just can’t see it happening.”

    (Courtesy: Hulu)

  • 11/10 Oscarweb Round-up

    Edward Norton in 25th Hour• Deborah Sontag talks “The Messenger” with Oren Moverman, Woody Harrelson, etc. [New York Times]

    • Roger Ebert sits down with the fast-becoming new “it” girl, Gabourey Sidibe. [Chicago Sun-Times]

    • With movies still to be seen in 2009, Noah Forrest pegs “25th Hour” as the decade’s best.  Brave choice.  I’m a fan. [Movie City News]

    (more…)

  • OFF THE CARPET: Looking at the supporting gentlemen

    Paul Schneider in Bright StarIn recent weeks we’ve been covering the performance categories in this space.  With little else of tangible interest, what else can we possibly discuss?  It’s as good a time as any to take note of what we have on our hands.  Be sure to check out our looks at Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress if you missed them.

    (Speaking of which, with the rise of “Crazy Heart” in this year’s race, it goes without saying Jeff Bridges and Maggie Gyllenhaal should be added to their respective fields as they are very much in this year’s race.)

    At first glance, the Best Supporting Actor category looks fairly established this season.  There have been, after all, a number of contenders already and plenty more to come.  But none have really stood out from the pack yet, making this race actually as up for grabs as any other.

    Possibly the most agreed-upon contender in the field has to be Christoph Waltz, who took acting honors in Cannes for his villainous portrayal in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds.” Waltz has made for quite the story off-screen as well, given his latter-career lift-off.  And even detractors of the film (yours truly included) have to consider his performance a highlight of the year so far.

    If anyone gives considerable chase here it’s going to be Christopher Plummer, smartly shifted to a supporting focus for his performance as Leo Tolstoy in “The Last Station.” Plummer will have sentiment (never been nominated) and added visibility (also appearing in “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus”) on his side.

    (more…)

  • The Great Performances: 1998

    Edward Norton in American History XFor all my bitching about Roberto Benigni winning Best Actor in 1998 for his incessant mugging in “Life is Beautiful,” I was also thrilled the Academy watched enough films and paid enough attention to realize that Edward Norton was deserving for his magnetic turn as a neo-Nazi who sees the light in “American History X.” Norton was electrifying as Derek, the charismatic leader of a group of skinheads, handpicked by the older gentleman, played with menace and sleaze by Stacey Keach, who believes in what Hitler taught and seeks to spread the word to the youth of California.

    Norton gave the best performance by an actor I saw in 1998, but the Academy got caught up in the groundswell of support of Benigni’s movie, a fable set in a death camp. I’m not a fan, either of his overwrought, over the top performance, or the film itself. No rant, you all know what I think there.

    That said, there was a bounty of great male performances in 1998, many of which went unnoticed by the Academy. They did their best to get it right, though.  Joining Norton and Benigni for nominations were Nick Nolte in “Affliction,” Ian McKellen, superb in “Gods and Monsters,” and Tom Hanks as the weary soldier in Steven Spielberg’s magnificent “Saving Private Ryan.”

    Not even nominated, however, were Warren Beatty for his brilliant turn as the truth-talking senator in “Bulworth,” Joseph Fiennes in Best Picture winner “Shakespeare in Love,” Jim Carrey in “The Truman Show,” George Clooney in “Out of Sight,” Brendan Gleason in “The General” and John Travolta in “Primary Colors” or “A Civil Action,” take your pick.  And perhaps the most deserving of all: Jeff Bridges as The Dude in “The Big Lebowski,” the actor’s finest work, in my opinion.

    Each of the aforemenetioned men gave stronger performances than the eventual Oscar winner, yet failed to nab a nomination.  Jeez!

    (more…)

  • The Great Performances: 1996

    Robert Carlyle in Trainspotting1996 was an odd year, a year when the independent cinema dominated the weak product emerging out of Hollywood. I am going to confess right off the top of this article (as I have numerous times before) that I was not a fan of “The English Patient,” which for me remains one of the most vastly over-appreciated films ever made.  I couldn’t stand Kristin Scott Thomas’s work, though I did enjoy the Dafoe/Binoche storyline.

    So with that out of the way, and firmly in mind, let’s go…

    The Best Actress race was clouded with the notion that Madonna was hell-bent on being nominated for her performance in “Evita,” which finally made it to the screen after years of starts and stops. Her performance split critics, but for me lacked the depth and edge that it was given on stage by Patti Lupone, and that Meryl Streep or Michelle Pfeiffer would have given the role. Her performance proved that Madonna should stop acting as she has little or no acting talent, and should stop making movies and trying to conquer Hollywood as she did the music industry.

    Honestly, the performance rarely rises above a really good community theater performance. Mercifully she was not nominated, but she did win the Golden Globe for Best Actress in a Comedy or Musical over the eventual Oscar winner, Frances McDormand in “Fargo.” The nominees for Best Actress included, McDormand, Kristin Scott-Thomas for the aforementionend “The English Patient,” Diane Keaton for “Marvin’s Room,” Brenda Blythyn in “Secrets and Lies,” and best of all, perhaps, Emily Watson in “Breaking the Waves.”

    (more…)

  • REVIEW: “The Messenger” (***1/2)

    The MessengerThere is a film that succeeds as a cerebral drama, concerned with the impact of war on the individual, free of the genre’s typical tropes and remarkably fresh as a result.  And believe it or not, I’m not talking about “The Hurt Locker.”

    Of course, it is unfair to Oren Moverman’s “The Messenger” to so quickly evoke the name of one of the year’s most critically acclaimed films by way of comparison.  And Kathryn Bigelow’s sterling 2009 gem doesn’t deserve to be jerked down a peg by showcasing the merits of another, more under-the-radar film.

    But the fact remains, these two efforts are departures from the status quo in a dramatic subset that is perhaps more artistically important now than it has been in 60 years.  And Moverman’s film has settled, for this viewer, much more completely than Bigelow’s.  It instantly stands out as one of the year’s most powerful dramas.

    The nuts and bolts of the story concern a pair of military officers charged with the heavy burden of notifying next of kin in the event of a combat casualty.  Woody Harrelson’s Anthony “Tony” Stone has been wading through the waters of this “sacred” task for some time and has come to identify its importance with a strict regimen followed each time out.

    Ben Foster’s Will Montgomery, meanwhile, has been relegated to Tony’s charge in the wake of a heavy combat experience.  He is neither comfortable with the emotional workload of the job nor, seemingly, convinced of its importance over his battlefield duties.

    The narrative isn’t focused in any traditional manner.  It serves up what is, essentially, a series of vignettes, Tony and Will notifying next of kin in a variety of atmospheres.  These are powerfully acted by supporting, basically cameo players such as Peter Friedman, Halley Feiffer, Steve Buscemi and Angel Caban, among others.

    (more…)