January
11
Oscar Watch: The Pitt Debate
Some see Pitt's performance in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button as a transformative role of a lifetime, while others see it as a mix of Pitt and genius visual effects. The question is, how did the Academy actors who will nominate the top five actors of the year see it? At various Golden Globes parties over the weekend, I heard both sides of the argument. Did Paramount, which has done a yeoman job of getting the movie open and turning it into a hit, reveal too much of the process? And how do Academy voters feel about the animation involved in Pitt's performance?
Here's a bit of Michael Phillips' review in The Chicago Tribune:
When we see him in flashback, as a bald, wheelchair-bound codger in miniature, we recognize Pitt, but it's not really Pitt. It's an animated Gollum-y version of the actor we know.
Pitt talks about his conventional makeup here:
And reveals more of the process to CBS's Katie Couric:
Clearly, Pitt was still acting, throughout. But Academy members can be a bit stodgy about these things.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
that's a tough call to make. Ummm..
Yeah, but you know, when Brad Pitt ACTUALLY played Ben Button during his relationship with Tilda (and Cate, too), that WAS him, right? Wel, I still think he gave a great performance and the film is a masterpiece, I don't care what anybody says otherwise!!!
Posted by: UGLY DEAF MUSLIM PUNK GURL! | January 11, 2009 at 02:17 PM
"But Academy members can be a bit stodgy about these things."
That's one hell of an understatement. The problem with the way they vote in the acting categories (at least in terms of nominations) is that its either for ridiculously over-the-top 'showy' performances, or purely based off the body of work the actor has done previously (rather than the actual performance). That Swinton won for supporting last year exemplifies this.
The Pitt situation is interesting - it's probably the best performance he's ever done - yet it's so subtle that many are just going to overlook/ignore it. That said, it's truly outrageous that crap like Eastwood's throw-away, manipulative ham (and Pitt's own one-note 'thirty seconds and it's annoying' schtick in 'Burn After Reading'), somehow will generate support in these circles.
Posted by: Jason | January 11, 2009 at 04:46 PM
I remain curious about the characterization. While Button the youth was playful, Button the old man was humorless. Is that a statement -- or a miscalculation. As Button ages, Pitt first becomes Robert Redford, then himself circa Thelma and Louise. Pitt's peak has yet to be demonstrated.
Posted by: Thelma Adams | January 12, 2009 at 07:44 AM
I've been a big Pitt supporter his whole career and I actually think it's one of his lesser performances. It's subtle true but at the end of the film I felt like I knew almost nothing about his character... which doesn't usually indicate a great performance to me.
I think he's much better in both of his other collaborations with Fincher... though of course neither were Oscar Bait in any way.
Posted by: Nathaniel R | January 16, 2009 at 09:39 AM
he's oddly detached, observing, reacting...but also warm, you care for him.
Posted by: Variety.com * | January 16, 2009 at 11:04 PM