SAG Awards Tonight

The Screen Actors Guilds Awards are about to start. The red carpet action is at E. What makes these awards different? It's all about the performers, and it's movies and TV.

Between the Golden Globes and the Inauguration, I'm pretty "gowned out" so I won't be detailing the dresses. Here are the nominees in the biggest movie categories:

  • Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
    FRANK LANGELLA / Richard Nixon - "FROST/NIXON"
    SEAN PENN / Harvey Milk - "MILK"
    BRAD PITT / Benjamin Button - "THE CURIOUS )


  • Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role
    ANGELINA JOLIE / Christine Collins - "CHANGELING"
    MERYL STREEP / Sister Aloysius Beauvier - "DOUBT"
  • Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role
    JOSH BROLIN / Dan White - "MILK"
    PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN / Father Brendan Flynn - "DOUBT"
  • Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role
    AMY ADAMS / Sister James - "DOUBT"
    VIOLA DAVIS / Mrs. Miller - "DOUBT"
    KATE WINSLET / Hanna Schmitz - "THE READER" he Weinstein Company)

The tv categories are below the film ones.

While I don't see how Mickey Rourke, Brad Pitt or Sean Penn lose this one, Richard Jenkins for the Visitor is an interesting choice. The movie, about an unfair immigration detention, was very good. (Jenkins also played the dead dad in Six Feet Under.) You can get The Visitor on Netflix.

Anyway, if you are watching or interested in movies and tv, here's a thread for you.

Update: Tina Fey wins the first award for best actress in a comedy series (30 Rock). Is there any comedic award she won't win this year?

Same for Alec Baldwin who just won the best actor for 30 Rock. I think he's with his daughter...she looks older than I thought she was but she really resembles Kim Basinger, with dark hair.

Update: Good to see Sally Field finally win an award for Brothers and Sisters.

< Drug Lawyer Turns Informant, Stings Clients | Kristol's Last Column >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Just in case (none / 0) (#1)
    by SOS on Sun Jan 25, 2009 at 09:26:39 PM EST
    anyone's snacking on desert while watching.

    Simply Enjoy dessert sauces
    Recalled - Botulism


    The Ledger God (none / 0) (#3)
    by BRockNYLA on Sun Jan 25, 2009 at 11:19:56 PM EST
    I'm kind of sick of the Ledger obsession.  He delivered a fine performance in an easy role to go nuts in.  I mean, it is the Joker after all.  

    And why we choose to celebrate someone who abandoned his family via awful choices is just a little beyond me.

    Also, Slumdog Millionaire is clearly not the best ensemble acting film by any stretch of the imagination.  WTF?  Talk about over hype of a mediocre film...geez.

    Other than that I was happy enough with the choices.  I hope Winslet finally wins come Oscar night.  I'd like to hope Viola Davis has a shot in the supporting category with Winslet moved to leading (though for the wrong film).

    Ledger's sudden explosions (none / 0) (#5)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 01:27:57 AM EST
    were so unlike his Brokeback Mountain character.  And they were done in such an effective way that people were stunned.

    Mediocre?  Slumdog Millionaire is one of my favorite films of all time though it's, as I mentioned, a srange mixture of gritty reality topped by a fantasy-fable final section (the latter very Bollywood).  The acting or direction was top notch though I found the lead female bland.  She was not meant to be much more I guess.  

      I was sorry to see the 'millionaire' host from the movie grabbing the Actor statue and trying to hog the entire speech.  Too much like his movie character.  

      Amy Adams did a superb job as the young nun - another quieter role that's more difficult than it seems.  Viola Davis was excellent.  Streep's accent (again) was really amusing.  

      I too hope that Winslet (kept to only one Oscar nomination) does win.  She tends to do characters and rarely seems like the same person in all those films.  She's underrated.

      However, in the Golden Globe reactions, I had to laugh when a commenter wrote, after her speeches, if she had won for overacting  :-)  After 11 straight years of being nominated but never winning, I don't doubt she was sincere though.


    You want better? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 02:52:49 AM EST
    See the documentary BORN INTO BROTHELS or the fiction film SALAAM BOMBAY.  Slumdog was just not that good, sorry.

    All these awards are so subjective.  Remember when Hanks won best actor for that crap Forrest Gump?  A role that required nothing but a performance so flat and monotone it was laughable.  But that's Hollywood.

    Winslet is a goddess, though.


    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by BernieO on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 06:34:27 AM EST
    There is a huge difference between a documentary and a fictional story. I was impressed at the way the gritty aspects worked well with the aspects Cinderella of the story. That is not an easy thing to do.
    And from a practical perspective, some of my friends who would never watch a documentary about this subject (too depressing) will go to this movie and have their eyes opened about how so many children live in this world.
    Apparently this film is controversial in India because they fear that people who don't know much about their country will think it is only about poverty.

    Although I really enjoyed ... (none / 0) (#13)
    by Robot Porter on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 08:18:17 AM EST
    SLUMDOG, it offers quite a prettified view of poverty.  Hell, the movie even prettifies human excrement.  It's really more "poverty porn," than a depiction of the grim realities of life.

    But, nonetheless, a cleverly constructed fable cum travelogue.


    It's not a documentary, and because of that, (none / 0) (#16)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:32:47 AM EST
    the facts of what is behind this fable-ized story will reach many more and have its effect on people.

    As a film, the stirring mixture of reality and fantasy that we've all mentioned worked well on most and though I was happy to see the actors win, by votes from the other actors in the industry, it was seeing the "curtain call" dance (on youtube) that made me tear up because it brought up the feelings from watching the movie -- and knowing that this was not about a time past but it still goes on today, in a supposedly civilized world, in which doctors agree to amputate children's limbs for no reason except to collect another 100 euros, to make them more effective beggers.  

      Other scenes that I've seen glimpses of can affect me in the same way. Some of us suspend disbelief for stories told to us for specific purposes and which weave in counter-elements that have predictability but which involve other emotions common to most.  A 'story' like this, which is not just a documentary, needs those other elements that detract but which also help the audience identify.

      I didn't know about this aspect of India (likely heavy in other countries too) and furthermore did not know it still goes on.  Through a couple of thousand years, stories are spun for audiences for a purpose, to entertain and inform.

      As for the award, the fact that the votes came from other actors, for this cast, was impressive.

      Side note: the camera work in the crowd scenes was unusual.  The director talks about their use of a hard disk on the cameramen's backs and a small, unobtrusive camera for shooting the feel of the city in an accumulative fashion.  Very interesting interview.
      In another interview with filmakers, they describe packing the small cameras,camouflaged, in dry ice, to follow the crowds (not actors).  This is not in connection with the acting but I found it interesting.  


    You actually watch the repeats (none / 0) (#11)
    by BernieO on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 06:36:54 AM EST
    on AMC? Is this just so you can vent?

    As for hating the Titanic, I thought it was fine for mass entertainment. Not every movie has to be a great work of art. Besides anything that gets Americans interested even a little bit in history is a good thing in my book.


    Yes, Of Course (none / 0) (#12)
    by BRockNYLA on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 08:12:10 AM EST
    I've seen most of the films this year, including SLUMDOG.  It was an okay film.  It is not my cup of tea. To suggest it is the best acted film of the year is laughable, imho.  In fact, it is likely the least well acted of the bunch.  Not to mention about six (okay 3) other films not nominated.

    Just think of what you've said here about MILK.  We have Penn, Brolin and Franco doing exceptional work.  Can we name one exceptional performance in SLUMDOG?  SLUMDOG'S success is less to do with the acting than it is do with the concept and direction.

    Go Kate Go!! (although I still love my Jolie and Streep). :-)



    It wasn't an award for a solo performance but (none / 0) (#18)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:41:04 AM EST
    for the effect of the total cast interaction in a movie.

      We didn't get to see the children, whom the casting director (upgraded to secondary Director because she made the decision to have the youngsters speak in their own language despite worries from the moneychangers about that) often directed) and the cast of actors (older ones too) was  so natural that I never thought of them as acting, which is one of the goals of acting, not often  met by highly professional actors, whose effect on us can be "Wow, he was good in that scene!"...


    Again (none / 0) (#22)
    by BRockNYLA on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 10:30:10 AM EST
    I was underwhelmed by the whole thing, but especially by the acting.

    Ah, well - what really matters in this world for (none / 0) (#23)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 11:03:11 AM EST
    them is that the other (professional and mostly U.S.) actors in that guild who know something about their field voted for that cast.

      I'll agree with you that the acting wasn't on a conventional, statospherically thespian level.

      My only problem with the script was actually the predictable storyline of the last 3rd, including the writing for the cell phone portion.  


    well (none / 0) (#14)
    by starsandstripes on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 08:58:55 AM EST
    And why we choose to celebrate someone who abandoned his family via awful choices is just a little beyond me.

    The award is for acting - not best humanitarian or best family man.


    Jenkins was marvelous in The Visitor (none / 0) (#4)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 01:18:42 AM EST
    A performance without histronics but more like Anthony Hopkins' more restrained or suppressed-guy roles -- but Jenkins was expressive beyond facial movements.  The eyes, the posture, the reactions.  The change in his character.  The walk ...

      I hope more people see that film.  The young guy who played the street player was a real find, I thought.  What a wonderful face and energy.  Haaz Sleiman.

    I was pulling for either Jenkins or for Penn (I thought Rourke's role was a little too obvious though he won the Golden Globes award for it).

      Jeralyn, thanks for the post.  I didn't know it was on tonight and I love to watch these.

    The Academy Awards are my Favorite (none / 0) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 01:56:00 AM EST
    I start watching the red carpet really early on E! then go into the actual awards. So be sure to check in that night so I won't be blogging just to myself!

    Ooh, I never miss the Oscars. (none / 0) (#20)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:46:11 AM EST
    I'm just a sucker for all that.  Especially when I've seen so many of the movies.  Rewarding creativity is not a bad thing!

      I even enjoyed the Golden Globes this year.


    I loved Jenkins in The Visitor. Loved the movie, (none / 0) (#15)
    by Angel on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:21:55 AM EST
    everything about it.  Jenkins made me ache, he was so haunting in this film.  He was perfect!

    I did want Jenkins to win (none / 0) (#19)
    by andrys on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:43:27 AM EST
    but an understated performance was not going to make it this year in that particular field.

    And not many have seen the film. Their loss as it (none / 0) (#21)
    by Angel on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:48:31 AM EST
    was magnificent.

    I actually forgot this was on (none / 0) (#17)
    by ChrisO on Mon Jan 26, 2009 at 09:39:18 AM EST
    and I voted for the awards. I was at a loss with most of the movies, because I haven't seen most of them (bad year for me making it to the flicks.) I did vote for Richard Jenkins, who I thought was great in The Visitor.

    I did get sent a screener of The Dark Knight, and I have to say that I was taken with Heath Ledgers's performance at first, but the scenery chewing got to me after a while. It's also not as challenging to play a cartoon character. it didn't help that I really disliked the film, either.

    I voted for Fey and Baldwin, but gave the my vote for best cast in a comedy to The Office. I think all of the characters are very strong and distinct.

    Now I've got to look up who actually won.