Saturday, July 23, 2005

Happy Endings Haiku

Messy and thoughtful
Kudrow is great as if it's
Opposite redux

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why wasn't she nominated for Opposite of Sex? I never saw the film but I've always been curious. I've heard she was brilliant.

Anonymous said...

By all rights she SHOULD have been nominated but in terms of the Academy she had more negatives to her name than positives. Negatives such as the film being about sex and homos and it's a dark comedy.

But, yes, the film and Lisa are indeed brilliant. However, Don Roos is slowly heading downstream. Bounce was pretty good but then there was that other movie of his about a straight couple and a gay couple and then this doesn't exactly look thrilling.

...we'll see.

-Glenn

par3182 said...

she was ok, but hardly oscar worthy. the supporting actress field was pretty competitive in '98 - dench, bates, griffiths and redgrave all deserved their spots. blethyn certainly didn't, but joan allen should've taken that spot, not kudrow.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I've never fully decided what I think about Blethyn in Little Voice. On the one hand, it's overact central. On the other hand, that's exactly the performance the role required. But agreement that Allen or Kudrow should have been there instead.

Rob

darkcypherlad said...

Have you checked out Kudrow on HBO's "The Comeback"? The show is a mixed bag (on the one hand, it's tough, unsentimental look at the TV business; on the other, it's overtly broad comedy and heavy reliance on "The Office"-like pauses doesn't exactly make it original) but Kudrow holds it together brilliantly. Her Valerie Chase is one of the most multifaceted characters on TV today: selfless yet egotistical, friendly but also overbearing and careless, and sympathetic and revolting at the same time. She's a living contradtiction that her industry not only supports, but manufactures every day in almost every medium. Anyone have any thoughts on the show?

Btw, KUdrow wasn't nominated for "Opposite of Sex" because the studio didn't campaign for her. It was NOT because of the homosexual content (if so, how do you explain McKellan and "Gods and Monsters" in the same year) or because of her role on "Friends" (see Hunt, Helen, and her undeserved (Julie Christie should have won it for "Afterglow") win for "As Good As It Gets."

Re: "Happy Endings"

I hear Maggie Gyllenhaal and Tom Arnold (!!!) steal the picture from everyone else. Could they be year-end award players?

NATHANIEL R said...

unfortunately Maggie won't be in play because her character is pretty in-your-face unlikeable. Oscar still loves it warm and fuzzy...

NATHANIEL R said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Maggie probably won't be nominated but it was an excellent performance in a film full of them. Her character was both intricately drawn and inscrutable.

Anonymous said...

I just saw it tonight and I cannot say that I feel this or anything Tom Arnold does is Oscar worthy. So please let your comment have been in jest. Also, he was only in the movie for like 37 seconds so it's hard to bestow prestige on a role like that.

I have to say I liked it though. It took me in many directions, though they almost all pointed towards entertained.

Anonymous said...

What a great site »

Anonymous said...

Wonderful and informative web site. I used information from that site its great. » » »

Anonymous said...

Very nice site! video editing schools