030. Deadly Friend

030. (24 Jan) Deadly Friend (1986, Wes Craven) 50



Craven, on the heels of A Nightmare on Elm Street, is reliant on a couple dream sequences for the best scares. But there's otherwise a freshness to his weird, gory, sort of sci-fi horror flick. From the goofy robot who sounds too much like Stripe from Gremlins to Anne Ramsey's head exploding, there's plenty of fun to be had here. However, more impressively, there's surprising heft in seeing immature teens deal with the consequences of their own Frankenstein creation.

021. Killer Party

021. (21 Jan) Killer Party (1986, William Fruet) 51



Killer Party is incredibly wacky, going for practically every genre element there is in a brisk 90 minutes. The "killer party" doesn't even start until about an hour in! Two false starts set the disorienting tone, as a character in a music video watches a horror movie in a music video, before we're introduced to the college students the film centers on. It's typical sorority row horror, but then this turns into a murder mystery, then a revenge flick, then a slasher movie, and finally a ghost story featuring demonic possession. This somehow feels relatively focused despite all the tonal changes, which is no easy task. It helps that we follow a small, amiable cast of characters under efficient direction.

A Room with a View (1986) **1/2

There’s a reason I’ve seen just about every film in Helena Bonham Carter’s oeuvre: she’s one of the best actresses of her generation. Her acting ability is often overlooked (especially by the Academy Awards, which has only granted her two nominations) due to her quirky roles, but even quirkiness requires talent and Carter has loads of that. At the ripe old age of nineteen she appeared (and starred) in her first feature film, A Room with a View (1986)—a movie that garnered eight Academy Award nods and three wins. Her endeavor in this Merchant and Ivory production led to her being cast in several period pieces over the next ten years (one being The Wings of a Dove in 1997, for which she received a Best Actress nomination), but it wasn’t until her turn in Fight Club (1999) that her particular quirkiness was allowed to be on full display from that point forward.  It helps that she became romantically involved with one of the quirkiest film directors ever, Tim Burton, in 2001, and that due to this relationship she has found herself paired in six films with Johnny Depp. For someone unfamiliar with her earlier work, A Room with a View might be a bit of a shock, as it is a film about British social conventions at the turn of Twentieth Century and Carter is somewhat restrained by this. Still, there are slight glimpses of what is to come.

Adapted from E.M. Forester’s (Merchant and Ivory’s author of choice) novel of the same name, A Room with a View tells the story of how Miss Lucy Honeychurch (Carter) inappropriately found love in the Tuscan countryside with a free-spirited philosopher named George Emerson (Julian Sands).  It is this inappropriateness, which is hilariously pointed out by Lucy’s chaperone and cousin Charlotte (Maggie Smith in an Oscar-nominated turn) that causes a rift in the relationship.  It takes an unbearable engagement to an exhaustingly boring and affected Cecil (Daniel Day-Lewis in an Oscar-nominated role) and the publication of Eleanor Lavish’s (Judi Dench) scandalous novel about Lucy and George’s Tuscan tryst to convince Lucy that there is more to life than social constraints, namely love and happinesss.

What I like most about the film is the acting performances. With a cast full of then and future Oscar winners director James Ivory had a pretty easy row to hoe with this picture, and I suspect he would be the first to say that his Best Director Oscar nomination and the film’s Best Picture nomination were due in large part to his cast.  As I’ve pointed out in previous reviews, Daniel Day-Lewis is an exceedingly gifted actor. He can play any part and make it completely his own, and that’s what he did with Cecil.  In the hands of a lesser actor Cecil may have turned into a caricature of the cuckolded fiancee. Instead, while Cecil is boorish and priggish he is also engaging to watch because Day-Lewis turns him into a character you don’t necessarily like but want to watch.  The same can be said of Smith’s role as Cousin Charlotte. No one plays exasperatingly idiotically polite characters like Smith, and that is exactly what Charlotte is. Smith expertly uses body language and facial expressions, not to mention that memorable voice of hers, to turn poor Charlotte into someone you first want to shake and then into a woman you want to embrace. 

The pairing of Carter and Sands is an interesting one.  Here are two actors who found themselves on the same career trajectory following the critical acclaim of this film, but one ended up on the A-list and the other on the D-list.  By far Sands’ portrayal of George Emerson is his best—perhaps he peaked too early in his career?  Still, one of the reasons I wasn’t completely enamored with Lucy and George’s pairing was because it was obvious that Carter was by far the more superior actor of the two. There are several layers to Lucy that must be peeled slowly away as the story progresses and Carter shows an unusual depth of character development for an actress so young. Never is Lucy more enchanting than when she finally tells Charlotte and Cecil what she really thinks of them.  Plucky and perky suit Charlotte, not to mention Carter, quite well.

Of course what would a Merchant and Ivory film be without beautifully designed period costumes (Oscar winners Jenny Beavan and John Bright), expertly crafted sets (Oscar winner), and pristine cinematography (Oscar nominated Tony Pierce-Roberts)?  All of the hallmarks of what comprises a Merchant and Ivory production are present here.  Edwardian clothes don’t excite me, but breathtaking shots of Florence and the Tuscan countryside do.  The first part of the film, which takes place in Italy, is where most of the visually stunning images are captured.  I suspect that is why Cousin Charlotte so desperately wanted a room with a view in the first place. 

Overall, A Room with a View is an interesting study in upper-class social etiquette in Edwardian England.  The movie benefits greatly from a stellar cast and a somewhat engaging story. 

Children of a Lesser God (1986) **1/2

What makes Children of a Lesser God (1986) a compelling film is its superb acting and unique storyline.  There are no stunning visuals or intricate shot designs—it’s purely a cinematic dissection of the age-old battle between love, acceptance, and individuality. It was nominated for five Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Screenplay (adapted from Mark Medoff’s stage play of the same name), Best Actress (winner Marlee Matlin), Best Actor (William Hurt), and Best Supporting Actress (Piper Laurie).  Matlin’s win made Oscar history on two fronts: she was (and still is) the youngest actress to win Best Actress (21 years old) and she is the only deaf person to win an Oscar. Her performance, both raw and unflinching, is reason enough to make you watch. 

Hurt plays a newly arrived teacher at a school for the deaf. His Jim Leeds is an educator who employs unusual teaching techniques to help his deaf students learn how to speak.  Matlin’s character, Sarah Norman, is a former student of the school who works as a custodian.  Strong-willed and emotionally guarded, Sarah refuses to learn how to speak, and this causes a few mild confrontations between them. Eventually they become romantically involved, which enables director Randa Haines to rip away any preconceived notions you may have had about deaf people being mild-mannered and chaste.  In addition, you get a front row seat to the total deconstruction of what it means to be (or not) accepted by the one you love. 

There have been many unusual love stories in the annals of cinematic history, but this one has to be right at the top. Here we have a deaf woman who uses sex as both a defense mechanism and as a way to emotionally connect.  There’s one particular scene which is jarring in this respect. After having one of their many arguments, Sarah almost demands that they have sex. For some odd reason she thinks it will bring them closer together, but what it actually does is pulls them further apart—it’s the breaking point in their relationship. As anyone who has ever been in love knows, there is a balancing act between being one with another person while retaining your own personhood. How much, if any, are you willing to change for another person?  In Sarah and Jim’s case, he just can’t accept that she won’t learn how to speak and she can’t accept that he wants her to change for him.

While Hurt gives one of his finest performances here, the movie belongs to Matlin.  With no voice to verbally express her character’s emotions, she relies on facial expressions and body language. It’s always clear whether Sarah is bemused, frustrated, angry, or happy—the way in which she signs and the look on her face is all you need to see.  Of course, the most powerful moment in the film comes when she finally allows Jim (and the audience) to hear her voice.  Every time I hear it I am startled. The scene up to this point is already so emotionally charged that when that sound comes hurtling out the core of her being you are stunned.  It is literally painful to hear—let alone to watch Matlin in such an agitated state of despair when she does it.  This is one of the most emotionally raw moments I have ever seen captured on film. 

Personally, I’m not a big fan of how the movie ends, but it didn’t infuriate me like some others (like Four Weddings and a Funeral). As such, I am willing to overlook this one qualm and reflect fondly on the other two-thirds of a superbly acted and written film.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1986

1986

So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Kathleen Turner in Peggy Sue Got Married

I thought I'd like her more and yet I feel quite disappointed. When I started writing, I thought I was impressed but after taking a closer look at this performance, I found Kathleen Turner less than satisfying in Peggy Sue Got Married. This works looks really good on the outside but there are big problems that cannot be overlooked. Still, an enjoyable performance.

4. Sissy Spacek in Crimes of the Heart

Although I feel that Spacek is really great as Babe Magrath, I think that this is not a fantastic or mindblowing performance and it's not one of Sissy's best. I really liked it and enjoyed all of the scenes but I feel that Sissy could do way better. She got everything out of this character that she could, it's just that I felt that she had way better works. Still, she's great.

3. Marlee Matlin in Children of a Lesser God

This is great work by Marlee Matlin who didn't make Sarah the "ordinary disabled character" but she played her as a real human being instead. She beautifully portrayed all of Sarah's emotions and this was really a beautiful performance. Excellent, thought-provoking work. A bit incoherent work but otherwise great.

2. Jane Fonda in The Morning After

This is a fantastic performance by the amazing Jane Fonda. I know I'm not supposed to like this work that much and I might be biased but I was really blown away by Jane's work as Alex Sternbergen. This character is over-the-top and she's almost like an animal and yet Jane made me care about her and think about her.

1. Sigourney Weaver in Aliens

Sigourney Weaver is astonishing in Aliens giving not only the best action performances but also one of the most memorable performances evers. She's a real treat not only for Oscar maniacs but also for film buffs and everyone else on this planet. Sigourney created a beautiful, wonderful, strong character that is for the ages. It's really fantastic work by a brilliant actress.

So I can proudly announce

that the winner is...

Sigourney Weaver

in

Aliens

Get away from my Oscar, you BITCH! :)

Congrats to Fritz on his great predictions! :)

The prize: Fritz can pick the next year that I'll do after the next one. :)

Final thoughts: Not a great, but a VERY interesting year. I truly-truly loved doing it. Siggy Weaver had an easy win and I expected it. I LOVED Jane as always, I think if The Morning After had been better, she could have rivalled Siggy. I liked the others very much, too, especially Marlee even though I feel I overrated her initially. Sissy was very good but somehow I didn't like her as much as I usually do. Still, I liked her. As expected, Kathleen Turner was the weakest link. It's not that I didn't give her a chance, she was just the weakest one, that's all. But what I loved the most is that you seemed to be really interested in this year and I was incredibly happy that we could discuss so much. Thanks, again.

The ranking of the reviewed years:

1. 1944
2. 1969
3. 1974
4. 1989
5. 1959
6. 2006
7. 1978
8. 2010
9. 1996
10. 1964
11. 1939
12. 1977
13. 1997
14. 2009
15. 1980
16. 1941
17. 1972
18. 1963
19. 1966
20. 1973
21. 1983
22. 1986
23. 1937
24. 1990
25. 1954
26. 1958
27. 1948
28. 2002
29. 1957
30. 1940
31. 1998

About the next year: You seemingly like less discussed years, so the next two ones will be two of them. I know I solemnly promised to do 2003 but I'll still have to wait for In America. I won't make any more promises about when I'll do that year. I'll do my best. However, there are clues about our next year:

• This is one nutty hospital.

What do you think?

Jane Fonda in The Morning After

Jane Fonda received her seventh Oscar nomination for playing Alex Sternbergen aka Viveca Van Loren, an alcoholic, has-been actress becoming the suspect of a murder in the movie, The Morning After. Jane Fonda's seventh Oscar nomination must have been a real shock. Or I just think so. She hadn't been nominated for any other awards, she hadn't won anything for this performance and the movie itself wasn't a masterpiece. Considering the fact that she was already a two-time Oscar winner and a huge star, I guess the Academy didn't give her many votes. I think this must have been the only time when she wasn't third at the very least. Still, Jane's the greatest that's ever been so I don't think she needed another Oscar. :)

The Morning After is one of the most horrible movies that I've ever seen during my Best Actress reviews. It's right up there with Afterglow and Gloria even though The Morning After might be a tiny bit better and more enjoyable (for one reason, and that's called Jane Fonda but more on that later). Still, the direction is AWFUL (Sidney Lumet???!!!), the soundtrack doesn't fit the movie at all and the whole story is just uneven, illogical and damn stupd. I really like Jeff Bridges and he's one of my all-time favorite actors and yet here he was kind of nothing. There wasn't anything interesting about the character even though Jeff sailed through with his charisma and presence.

How much I love Jane Fonda! Jane Fonda. Jane Fonda. Jane Fonda. Two magic words that mean something so complex and so wonderful for me. I guess I am quite biased about her and I just cannot say anything bad about her. She has the most wonderful screen presence and her acting talent is just enourmous. What I really admire about her is her versatility. She played all these various roles and yet she left her mark everywhere. She's neither overacting nor subtle, she somehow has her own, very emotional acting style and a very buzzy and exciting personality that shines through her parts.

If you watch her performance as Alex Sternbergen out of the context of her horrible movie, it's mindblowingly amazing. Alex is a broken-down, has-been actress who wants nothing but booze. She doesn't have any goals, she's bitter and she's not even angry anymore. She just doesn't give a damn about the whole world as long as she gets her drink. She's careless and reckless but not in a very traditional way. She's an extremely weird person and her intentions and actions cannot be very well interpreted. However, I felt that Jane did a fantastic job, showing the darkest sides of this person. Alex was once a good TV actress (never really famous) and you would expect her to cry over the loss of her career and everything. She's not like that. She looks at her own career and life in a very cynical way. She doesn't think that anything good happened to her or will ever happen. She's just like an animal in the jungle of LA.

Alex's initial shock and surprise over the dead body that lying next to her is really shocking and quite scary. Jane showed this desperate mental state so brilliantly and she created so much tension that it almost blew up the screen. It was astonishing to look at her as if she was a scared animal. The little nervous ticks that Jane added to the character are so breathtaking. As I said, it's a very intense experience. A very similar scene comes when Alex tries to get away and goes to the airport and she's begging for a ticket. She makes up a story about a dying daughter and she puts on a fake performance so brilliantly. I actually believed it at the time.

Jane's chemistry with Jeff Bridges is just excellent, in my opinion. Although before the movie I never thought they would make a great on-screen couple, now I'm convinced about the contrary. They are just great together. There's a very over-the-top drunken scene of Jane when she's shouting with Jeff. That scene is not supposed to work and yet I was so blown away.

I guess my only problem is that this performance is in an awful movie that's really not worthy of it. Even B-Actresses would have been too good for The Morning After, not Jane, the greatest. The horridness of the movie doesn't overshadow her but it ruins her greatness a little bit. It's too bad.

Still, this is a fantastic performance by the amazing Jane Fonda. I know I'm not supposed to like this work that much and I might be biased but I was really blown away by Jane's work as Alex Sternbergen. This character is over-the-top and she's almost like an animal and yet Jane made me care about her and think about her. This is really great workthat's way too good for the movie that it's in. Excellent.

What do you think?

Kathleen Turner in Peggy Sue Got Married

Kathleen Turner received her only Oscar nomination to date for playing Peggy Sue, a woman going back in time during her high school reuninion in Francis Ford Coppola's movie, Peggy Sue Got Married. Many thought that Turner was going to win the Oscar as she was a great star, previously snubbed many times. However, she had only won the NBR for Best Actress. I guess the thing why she didn't win is that the role was too lightweight. I think she was either second or third. The Academy seeming didn't like Kathleen Turner as much as the audiences at the time.

Peggy Sue Got Married is too much like Back to the Future, except it's much less original and it lacks the brilliant humor of the latter. It's really one of the lesser efforts of Francis Ford Coppola. I mean how could you compare this to The Godfather trilogy, for example. I don't like that he always gives roles to the members of the family as they are not that great actors, I think. Nicolas Cage is really weird as Peggy Sue's (future) husband, Charlie. He's way too mannered for me. This movie is quite interesting, though, and it's mostly because we can see future stars and/or Oscar nominees in minor part (Jim Carrey, Joan Allen). Still, there are some great things about this movie and it's quite entertaining.

I haven't seen many of Kathleen Turner's movies but I think she's a really great actres and she really has a great voice. I felt she was really great in Body Heat and Prizzi's Honor and that she was brilliant as Chandler's father on Friends. So I have only had good memories about her so I was really looking forward to watching the only movie for which she received an Oscar nomination. She was one of the biggest stars of the eighties and she got the best roles back then. I wonder why she isn't that popular now.

Turner's performance in Peggy Sue Got Married really divides people. Some call it weak and insignificant, some say that Kathleen was robbed of the Oscar. Therefore, I was wondering what I would think about her. To tell the truth, I'm somewhere between those groups. While I think that she was really good as Peggy Sue, I don't think that this really was Oscar-worthy material. It's very entertaining and it serves its purpose well but I didn't feel that she was really amazing.

My first problem is that I didn't see any development in Peggy Sue or if there was any, it didn't make any sense. She always goes one step forward and goes two steps back and I never felt that Peggy Sue wasn't going anywhere. First, she feels like going out with that weirdo kid and then she goes mad about Charlie and it's all so strange and not really believable. I thought that the relationships were not very carefully developed and that's also the fault of the director. I mean everything becomes so shallow and the real emotions are never present. Sometimes I felt the necessary emotions in Kathleen's performance but somehow the whole thing never worked.

Moreover, some humorous parts weren't that well acted by Turner, either. There are so many missed opportunities and as a result, I started to feel quite uncomfortable. I felt that I cared about Peggy Sue but I wasn't that excited about her. I mean the sympathy was there but not that much of it. I guess that's another problem even though it didn't bother me while I was watching the movie.

The best scenes were the ones where Peggy Sue was visiting her grandparents. I felt that she handled those scenes the best. All the emotions were present and Kathleen handled them all very nicely. Moreover, the ending was quite touching and that was also quite good.

Wow, I thought I'd like her more and yet I feel quite disappointed. When I started writing, I thought I was impressed but after taking a closer look at this performance, I found Kathleen Turner less than satisfying in Peggy Sue Got Married. This works looks really good on the outside but there are big problems that cannot be overlooked. Still, an enjoyable performance.

What do you think? It's time for the last predictions! :)

Marlee Matlin in Children of a Lesser God

Marlee Matlin received her first (and to date only) Best Actress nomination and Oscar for her screen debut as Sarah Norman, an angry, stubborn girl in Children of a Lesser God. Nowadays, I would instantly predict her for the Oscar but that wasn't the case back then. Although she had already won the Golden Globe, most people predicted Kathleen Turner or Sissy Spacek. I'll never understand why, I guess they didn't know the Academy. You see, Kathleen Turner was a huge star at the time but I just can't see her winning for a comedy performance. Matlin's work was, however, really baity and Oscary.

Children of a Lesser God is a very nice, touching movie about deaf people and accepting them. The best word to describe it is indeed nice. It's nicely written, nicely directed and the actors give very nice performances. William Hurt received his second consecutive Oscar nomination for playing a teacher in a school for deaf children. He goes there and encourages his pupils to use their voices. Hurt shows the character's enthusiasm quite well but I think an Oscar win would have been a bit much. Piper Laurie is also very good as Sarah's mother, however, her role is a bit limited. The nom was deserved for her, though.

I don't know if Marlee Matlin is a very talented performer or a charming person full of star power. I guess the fact that she's deaf was a major drawback in her acting career, unfortunately, and that's probably why we can mostly see her on television and she rarely does movies. Nowadays, she's mostly a celebrity but she's really someone that you can look up to. I think what she does in real life is extraordinary. Still, I don't know if she's a really great actress.

The fact is that Marlee Matlin is really great as Sarah Norman but this is one of the cases when you can say "she just played herself". Indeed, the same criticism could be said about Mickey Rourke in The Wrestler or Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard (though that criticism be REALLY argued) and yet both performances are considered nowadays iconic and fantastic. However, in Marlee's case that seems to be rude. Playing a deaf person must be easier for a deaf person but Children of a Lesser God is about accepting and realising that deaf people are really not that different. However, the movie (and Marlee) shows how hard it can be for them and they always have to struggle in life.

Marlee's performance here shows that struggle and fight so well. I think The Silent Scream could have been a great title for this movie. Marlee's work is extremely intense. This was her first movie so she was quite inexperienced and it fits these fierce roles so well. Just like Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone (BTW, that girl is amazing in X-Men: First Class), Marlee plays her role with this previously mentioned fierce intensity that could only be done by newcomers. She really had no vanity and always cared about what the best was for Sarah's character.

Newcomers tend to be very emotional an loud and starngely, that's the case with Marlee. She has only one line so she only has to work with her hand. Personally, I don't know the sign language but I didn't need William Hurt's interpretation to understand Marlee. Everything was in her eyes, gestures and it was a thrill just to look at her. Marlee was not afraid of making Sarah even unlikeable. I think the biggest problem with such roles is that the actors make the characters either saints or unbearable, demanding little bastards. Marlee, however, made a mor complex picture of Sarah. Sometimes she's unlikeable, sometimes she's romantic, sometimes she's angry. This whole thing is about making people realise that people with disadvantages are not different at all. Marlee wants to make us not look at Sarah as if she was something weird. And it's indeed beautiful. Moreover, the scene when she finally talks is unforgettable and it's so beautiful.

I guess my only complaint could be that sometimes the performance felt a bit incoherent and it was a little bit uneven. Still, this is great work by Marlee Matlin who didn't make Sarah the "ordinary disabled character" but she played her as a real human being instead. She beautifully portrayed all of Sarah's emotions and this was really a beautiful performance. Excellent, thought-provoking work.

I went for a very strong 4 in the end.

What do you think?

Sissy Spacek in Crimes of the Heart

Sissy Spacek received her fifth Best Actress nomination for playing Babe Magrath, a mentally unstable woman shoting her husband in the movie Crimes of the Heart. Somewhere, I read that Sissy Spacek and Kathleen Turner were considered the front-runners of 1986. However, I don't think that Sissy got that many votes. She was a previous Oscar winner plus this wasn't the type of performance that the Academy usually goes for. I think she was either fourth or fifth though I must say it's incredibly hard to speculate about her chances of winning. She was the critics' favorite, she got the Globe and yet I don't think the Academy wanted her to win that much.

Crimes of the Heart is not a bad movie, on the contrary, it's actually quite entertaining and I really had fun watching it. It was quite good though I wouldn't say it's very deep. Very much like Bruce Beresford's later work, Driving Miss Daisy it touches emotions only on the surface and it's rather soappy, not truly emotional. Tess Harper's Oscar nomination is a real mystery. She plays the most annoying character of the movie in quite an over-the-top way and she's really not that great. However, the leading actresses are really fine, especially Diane Keaton who gives a really great performance and she was by far the most sympathetic person here. Jessica Lange is a bit too much occasionally but she's OK, too.

Sissy Spacek is such a great actress and I admire her so much. She's quite unusual and that's what I love about her the most. There's so much intelligence, beauty in her roles and I'm always impressed by her unique presence. There's something about her that cannot be described with words. All in all, she's just fantastic and I always love watching her on the screen.

Becky 'Babe' Magrath is a really complicated person and I think that Sissy Spacek really was the best choice to play her. Babe shot her husband and she doesn't even try to deny it. She did it and that's it. She doesn't say anything else about this. However, more and more secrets come to surface and Babe just cannot do anything about it.

As I said, Sissy was probably the best choice to play such a weird role. She doesn't overplay or underplay the weirdness of Babe and she always finds the right balance. I think an inexperienced actress would have been too much in this role and couldn't have found the right way to play this character. I felt that Sissy knew this character really well and understood her emotions.

We can see Crimes of the Heart as a lighter version of Three Sisters by Chekhov and I guess it would make us understand it much more easily. In Chekhov's classic, the youngest sister, Irina is full of uncertainty and she doesn't know what do do exactly. I felt that Sissy Spacek injected some of Irina into Babe. Babe is also clueless about what to do and she just cannot make any decisions. Irina always wants to go to work and Babe always wants to kill herself and yet neither of them really succeeds. There are tries that could be considered 'almost' but that's it. Sissy showed this hopelessness of Babe excellently.

It's always risky if you get three really fantastic actresses in a movie. They either try to outdo each other or they support each other really well. Fortunately, with Crimes of the Heart, the latter is true. The three ladies are excellent together and I felt that they are really supportive of each other. Whenever they are all on the screen, it's a really great moment. I couldn't decide if I picked Keaton or Spacek as my favorite (Lange was a bit weaker than them), though. Their performances can only be understood if we look at them together.

Sissy is also quite great on her own, especially her suicide scenes. They are quite weird and yet Sissy somehow hold them back and they became really great as a result. We see more and more layers of Babe and it's really interesting to get to know things about her affair with a black boy of the town.

Although I feel that Spacek is really great as Babe Magrath, I think that this is not a fantastic or mindblowing performance and it's not one of Sissy's best. I really liked it and enjoyed all of the scenes but I feel that Sissy could do way better. She got everything out of this character that she could, it's just that I felt that she had way better works. Still, she's great.

What do you think?

Sigourney Weaver in Aliens

First, I'd like to say how honored I am to celebrate the first anniversary of my Best Actress reviews with an analysis of a performance that is as iconic as...

Sigourney Weaver in Aliens for which she received her very first Oscar nomination in the Best Actress category. First, I am so shocked. Really, I wouldn't expect such a performance to be nominated in the Best Actress category. I mean, iconic action performances have never been among the favorites of the Academy. However, the Academy made one of the best decision when they nominated Sigourney for Aliens, a smash hit sci-fi. I guess the fact that the movie was such a great success (it received six other noms and won two of them). I think Sigourney may have got close to the actual win despite the fact that all the other performances were more Oscar-friendly. I feel she was at least third in the voting.

Aliens used to be my favorite movie ever, when I was about 11-12 years old. I was so crazy about it and I was crazy in love with Sigourney herself. I could go on telling funny and a bit cheesy stories about this movie (and the first Alien) but I guess I don't need to. For me, Aliens meant cinema. Everything that's great about it, emotion, action, scariness and above all, iconic characters. James Cameron's stories are the most unoriginal ones one could ever imagine and yet they work so fabulously on the screen. He just knows how to entertain people. I guess he once opened Pandora's box and found the secret of entertainment.

Sigourney Weaver, as I said, is someone I was once really in love with. However, I haven't seen enough of her works, I think. There are so many of her movies that I'd very much love to see and yet I don't get round to watching them. Too bad, as I think that she's one of the greatest actresses that we have today and I'm really hoping for a great comeback for her on the big screen. She just deserves way more than You Again. And she should really get an Oscar once. I thought that she would get it for Prayers for Bobby (that seemed so baity) and when I realised it was made for TV, I was in shock. So, she's in need of a great role, plus I'm really looking forward to the time when she'll play Miss Marple (as she wishes to)

If you search for lists about the most iconic characters of all time, you'll most definitely see Ellen Ripley among them (very often in the Top 10). By creating her, Sigourney Weaver also created a brand new character for the screen, the tough but sensitive heroine who's willing to fight and never gives up. I couldn't imagine any of the movies like Kill Bill had it not been for Sigourney Weaver's performance in the Alien movies even if the moviemakers don't think about Ripley that much. In short, Sigourney Weaver made history.

The very essence of Ellen Ripley (in my opinion) is best displayed in Aliens. In Alien, she's a scream queen and she may not even be the lead there. Ripley becomes a more layered and important character in Aliens. The development that she goes through is quite extraordinary for a sci-fi and Sigourney plays all the changes just brilliantly. At the beginning of the movie, Ripley is a hardened, bitter woman suffering from her own demons. All her fears are exceptionally portrayed. We really believe that this woman is suffering from all the events of her past and she's quite disturbing in some of the scenes. However, as I said, Ripley is a person who's willing to fight and she decides to fight her own fears by going back to the place where all the torture began.

Once she gets back to LV-426, Ripley becomes even more determined to act and destroy the aliens. However, a radical change comes in Ripley's life when she gets to know a little girl, Newt who wakes up Ripley's motherly instincts. And Sigourney is surprisingly touching in her scenes with Newt. She shows Ripley's love for Newt in a really moving way. In the director's cut this aspect of the movie becomes even more significant and understandable but I try not to think about that as she was nominated for the theatrical cut. All in all, Ellen's almost mother-daughter relationship with Newt is the most beautiful thing about this otherwise ugly and gruesome movie.

Moreover, I loved how feminine Sigourney made Ripley. On the outside, she has short-haired and talled. She's seems to be a really tough person. Inside, however, she's a really emotional, gentle human being full of love and the dedication. She's a real woman and Sigourney lets us see Ripley's real beauty which is inside the sexy looks. Ripley's beauty comes from her love and care and Sigourney shows Ripley's inner beauty just like a flower blossoms. It's just wonderful to see her in all of the scenes and you really cannot take your eyes off the screen. Sigourney's presence is really magnetic and I always wanted to see her and her. Very much like Michelle Pfeiffer (the other Oscarless huge star of the 80s) in The Fabulous Baker Boys, when Sigourney is not on the screen, we don't mind as her presence is so luminous that it lasts until she comes back. And unlike Kate Winslet in Titanic, Sigourney is never overshadowed by the stunning visual effects and the great directing of James Cameron.

To sum up things, Sigourney Weaver is astonishing in Aliens giving not only the best action performances but also one of the most memorable performances evers. She's a real treat not only for Oscar maniacs but also for film buffs and everyone else on this planet. Sigourney created a beautiful, wonderful, strong character that is for the ages. It's really fantastic work by a brilliant actress, in a brilliant movie.

What do you think, dear readers?

The Next Year

1986

So the nominees were:

• Jane Fonda in The Morning After
• Marlee Matlin in Children of a Lesser God
• Sissy Spacek in Crimes of the Heart
• Kathleen Turner in Peggy Sue Got Married
• Sigourney Weaver in Aliens

This year is never talked about. OK, almost never. So it will be really interesting. I can barely wait.

What do you think? What's your ranking? What do you predict for my ranking?

Note: I know I posted 2003 already but it turned out that I have to wait a little bit more for In America, so I'm really sorry. I solemnly promise to do that year as soon as I can! I decided to pick 1986 because all the movies were readily available for right now. Sorry again.

The requested years that I've had: 1938, 1945, 1970, 1971, 1981, 1986, 1987, 1988, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2008. From these, 1938, 1945 and 1970 fall into the almost impossible category (1970 is the most likely). 1981 and 1987 could happen but I have to get Anna and Only When I Laugh somehow. However, I'll probably have access to all of the movies of the other years.