March 27, 2014

Actress Round-up: 1936

 photo 1936actress.png


5. IRENE DUNNE AS THEODORA IN THEODORA GOES WILD
 photo ScreenShot2014-02-22at125400AM.jpg

It's not that I didn't like Irene Dunne...I sort of did. This is one of those performances that sort of plop themselves right into that gray area where you're neither for it or against it, you just kind of shrug over its existence. At first I wasn't sure why this was, but upon watching the other nominated comedic performance in this category, it became a little more clear to me. Her delivery was decent, but she was never laugh-out-loud funny to me and doesn't resonate long after the film's over. It's an interesting and brave turn, though not spectacular.



4. LUISE RAINER AS ANNA IN THE GREAT ZIEGFELD
 photo ScreenShot2014-02-02at85224PM.jpg
I know that I liked this performance a lot more than I should have. But I can't help it! Rainer brightens up the screen, always making her agonizing picture a thousand times more interesting every time she's around. To me she plays the many facets of Anna Held wonderfully--whether she's to be naive, childlike, vulnerable, or wounded, she does so with poise, all the while remaining consistently funny and charming along the way. What Florenz Ziegfeld felt for Anna, I could feel too. She takes her small yet integral part and makes every second count.



3. GLADYS GEORGE AS CARRIE IN VALIANT IS THE WORD FOR CARRIE
 photo ScreenShot2014-05-13at35527PM.png
There's a refreshing lived-in quality to George's work in the first part of Valiant is the Word for Carrie. You can really feel the weather in Carrie's voice, the anguish as well as the pain she must be feeling. Unfortunately after a spectacular first act, the film abruptly forgets about her, and she's left with little to do until the rather ridiculous conclusion forces itself upon us. Even still, when the movie teeters there are scenes here and there where it's obvious there's a fire within her, as if she's really trying to prove herself. So consistency is the reason why she comes in third, though that's certainly not her fault. A solid showcase of talent.




2. NORMA SHEARER AS JULIET IN ROMEO AND JULIET
 photo ScreenShot2014-02-12at70826PM.jpg
Try as I might, I can't quite shake the heavier scenes in Romeo & Juliet wherein Shearer's Juliet is so vividly wounded. She brings on the emotion with an effortless ease--in fact, there was not a moment in this performance where I felt like Shearer was trying too hard. That's quite an accomplishment, especially as Shearer was a 34 year old woman playing a 14 year old girl, and it can be very easy to do Shakespeare wrong. But she carries her role with stride, creating a rather haunting characterization. Probably one of the biggest surprises for me in terms of exceeding my (admittedly low) expectations.




1. CAROLE LOMBARD AS IRENE IN MY MAN GODFREY
 photo Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 5.50.06 PM.jpg
Again, like Rainer, I probably ended up liking this performance a lot more than I should. But just like Shearer, Carole Lombard managed to stay with me. I think about this movie and my mind immediately goes to Lombard. Further, she took on the challenge of a somewhat hollow character and completely brought the goods. This is a brilliant comedic performance, jam-packed with tiny little comedic details that bring life to Irene and consistent laughs upon rewatches. Most importantly, she's a lovable riot, probably the biggest standout in a film full of larger-than-life personalities. But Lombard doesn't overdoes it--she delicately balances making Irene uproarious but never atmospherically so. This is how screwball comedic performances ought to be done, and Lombard's work here is certainly one of the best I've seen in the genre.



IN CONCLUSION: Overall, an extremely satisfying year for actressing! Much more so than I could possibly have expected. In fact, it might have helped that I came in with pretty low expectations because the three I wasn't anticipating all that much (Rainer, Lombard, Shearer) ended up making me really happy. I hear that Ruth Chatterton might have been close to nabbing a third nomination for her work in Dodsworth, but other than that I'm not sure if anybody else was realistically in the running. Still, I'm pretty pleased with this batch of ladies. So on we go to 1937, where again my expectations are low.

2 comments:

  1. Great job as always! This is definitely an interesting year considering it's one without a real consensus choice (I've seen people picking Luise, Irene, and Carole and Gladys might be picked more if she was easily available). I'm super interested in all of these now, especially Queen Norma & George.

    I've seen all the 1937 Actress nominees except for Gaynor and think it's a solid year. All four perfs are at the very least good, which for early Oscar fields is the equivalent of amazing, lol. Very excited to hear your thoughts!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've only seen 2/5. :P

    @Derek, you should see A Star Is Born, it's my fav version. :) March is wonderful in it. Gaynor just ok. But very well written.

    ReplyDelete