lunedì 17 ottobre 2016

Best Actress in a Supporting Role 1994: Dianne Wiest in Bullets over Broadway

Dianne Wiest received her second Oscar from her third nomination for her performance as Helen Sinclair in Bullets over Broadway.


Bullets over Broadway is an extremely entertaining comedy about a struggling playwright in 1928's New York who is forced to hire a mobster's talentless, annoying girlfriend in order to get his drama produced. I thought it was just okay the first time I saw it but on a rewatch I actually found it much funnier than I remembered: it's not an amazing movie, but it's very enjoyable from start to finish thanks to a wonderfully playful cast and a pitch-perfect screenplay. It's not necessarily perfect (some of the most violent scenes seem a bit out of the place within the movie's light-hearted atmosphere) but I found it very good this time. Out of Woody Allen's movies of the 90s I've seen, this is quite easily the best. 

Dianne Wiest plays the role of Helen Sinclair, the play's alcoholic leading lady who used to be a renowned actress. I have to admit I didn't care much for her performance the first time I saw the movie and I found myself a bit disappointed - in that year's award season, she basically won every single possible award for her performance in Bullets over Broadway (expect for the National Board of Review which curiously went to Rosemary Harris in Tom & Viv) and her performance is consistently praised my many people, and at first I really didn't get it. I thought she was fun enough but not the great comedic gem many people said she was. I rewatched Bullets over Broadway without really expecting my opinion to change but, as it is often the case when I (re)watch a movie without having high expectations, I ended up being positively surprised.

Dianne Wiest's performance in this movie is far from being a subtle one - there probably isn't a single moment in her performance that can be really described as quiet, but that is entirely fitting to the role of Helen Sinclair, a woman who acts in her life just as much she acts on stage. Wiest gives a purposefully broad performance but she never becomes excessively over-the-top or overbearing: each of her line-delivery is pretty much on point as she gives them the right touch of theatricality to them and just the right amount of emphasis that suggests that she is a bit of a phony but never overplays this aspect of her character either. Also I have to give credit to Dianne Wiest for not turning Helen Sinclair in the cartoon she so easily could have been - the role barely gives her any depth or complexity but Wiest manages to show a certain vulnerability, making her a little more human. There is a clinginess and neediness in her behavior that suggests Helen's loneliness - she used to be a great star, but she is now more famous for "being an alduteress and an alcoholic", as her agent puts it. Wiest lets us see the fragility behind the theatrics and she makes us realize that Helen believes this might be her last chance to revive her career. The screenplay never seems to be very interested in exploring Helen in depth but Wiest manages to ground her character, preventing it from becoming a one-note joke. 

But, of course, the comedy is why this performance is so remarkable. Her first scene alone is a a masterclass - she's a real tour-de-force and commands the screen like no one else ("I do Electra. I do Lady Macbeth!"). She flawlessly portrays Helen's diva-like behavior and her body language, line-deliveries and facial expressions couldn't be more perfect. Throughout the whole movie she has so many incredibly funny moments - sometimes she is actually funny not because of what she says but because of how she says it. For example, her monologue about the role she played when she comes to the theatre for rehearsals is incredibly enjoyable because it is completely out of the place but what makes it absolutely hilarious is Wiest's theatrical, overcooked approach that is just deliciously entertaining. And in later scenes she has so many brilliantly delivered lines that she makes all the more hilarious ("Please forgive me, my pedicurist had a stroke", "The world will open to you like an oyster.. No, not an oyster. A magnificent vagina!", "She makes you want to sneak up behind her with a pillow and suffocate her" and probably my favorite "Listen, how long as it been since you had a real hemorrage?"). 

Her best scenes are probably the ones she shares with the playwright David (John Cusack). She is absolutely hilarious in their first scenes as Helen flirts with him in an attempt to make him rewrite her role in order to make it more interesting - the overdone intensity of her acting in those scenes is what makes them absolutely priceless. When David and Helen embarks on an unlikely affair, the two actors couldn't be more funny together: the scene at Helen's favorite spot of Central Park is one of her performance's highlight (the over-the-topness of her "Don't. We must be strong" when David confesses his love for her is so wonderfully amusing) and her monologue in the scene is perfectly portrayed by her. But my favorite scene is easily the one in which she gives David a cigarette case for his birthday and she consistently silents him as he tries to say something: her famous "Don't speak" is hilarious and it keeps being such even as she repeats it often throughout the whole movie - it might have been a tiresome shtick but Wiest's delivery is what makes it amazing. Cusacks' and Wiest' later scenes might not be quite as hilarious as their first ones but they still manage to find some memorable and funny moments, such as the scene on the train ("Oh the train is moving so fast! Oh, David, it's so fast! Hold me, hold me! No, no, don't speak! No, Don't speak!).

This could have been a very one-dimensional performance or even a very bad one but Dianne Wiest takes the role and brings it to another level. It's not necessarily a truly complex performance but it doesn't need to be: I thought her performance was amazing, hilarious and scene-stealing. She gives a perfect performance because she is properly broad without being hammy and she manages to be consistently compelling and funny despite her role being written as rather one-note (it doesn't even get a decent closure). This is a wonderful performance by a terrific, talented actress. 

5/5

8 commenti:

  1. YES! I GAVE HER ALSO 5! AMAZING PERFORMANCE! One of the most deserving winners. Her line delivery is flawless, yet so effective and i really need to mention HER VOICE!, which she changed for this film i guess and works amazingly!

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. Yes, her voice work is outstanding especially because it sounds so different from her usual voice!

      Elimina
  2. 1) Wiest
    2) Thurman
    3) Tilly
    4) Mirren
    5) Harris

    RispondiElimina
  3. 1) Wiest
    2) Thurman
    3) Tilly
    4) Mirren
    5) Harris
    Thoughts and ratings in the rest of The cast?

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. Cusack - 4 (I actually sort of hated him the first time I saw the movie but I found him very enjoyable this time around. He does his character's neurotic routine in a purposefully over-the-top fashion that never becomes grating. He works very well within the ensemble and he also makes his character's arc rather poignant, even if I believe that he's a little overshadowed by the supporting cast sometimes)

      Parker - 2.5 (I didn't think she was bad at all, she was actually completely fine but I thought she was always overshadowed by the other cast members. She is sweet enough and I like her chemistry with Cusack but her role is rather underwritten)

      Joe Viterelli - 3 (He delivers a decent exposition of the stereotypical gangster role, but I never thought he managed to be anything more than fine)

      Jack Warden - 3 (He is completely fine in his role even if I never felt he left that much of an impression. He certainly adds to the movie nicely though)

      Ullman - 3.5 (I thought she was hilarious in her limited screen-time. She is just a delight at portraying her character's perkiness, I wish she had a little more to do though)

      Broadbent - 3.5 (Same as Ullman really. He's very funny whenever he's on screen, unfortunately I don't think he gets that much to do overall and I have to admit I found his subplot with Tilly to be one of the movie's weakest parts)

      Rob Reiner - 3.5 (I really liked his performance as he brings the right amount of arrogance and smugness to his character while being an extremely enjoyable presence nonetheless. Just like Ullman and Broadbent, I wish he was in the movie a bit more)

      Elimina
  4. I guess Wiest is winning, and its unlikely that Thurman who i predicted to win here will actually win(although anything is possible). Anyway im not going to change my predictions after this review since i really want to get the final rating right from the start and really to play this game in a 10% right way. ;)

    RispondiElimina
    Risposte
    1. We'll see how Thurman will fare :) I haven't seen Pulp Fiction in a while.

      Elimina