Oscar's Best Supporting Actor (2009)

I enjoyed Heath Ledger's performance, and I haven't seen enough this year to say whether or not it should be up there.

I don't think it was great however as many people have called it. Just very good. I do think I enjoy Nicholson's joker slightly more.

But I would say Ledger's performance is better than the film itself on the whole. I loved Batman Begins but found The Dark Knight a step back from that film. I really hated how they handled the Scarecrow thing and Harvey Dent failed to interest me. Too many plot twists as well.

I think it got what it deserved. What was it? Art direction? Cinematography?

__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below

http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201

It got the shaft.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

Heath Ledger wins this. Had he not garnered a Golden Globe, I might feel differently (while I always considered him a contender for awards, I never would have called him a shoe-in). But he has been buoyed, and the Academy's hands are tied. They won't let him go unrecognized.

And rightfully so. I'm not going to say he's the strongest horse on the track, or ever has been, but his comprehensive work on crafting this character is what gives The Dark Knight its enduring sparkle. Chris Nolan is a fine director, and I've had nothing but appreciation for this recent Batman restart. But I can't help but think The Dark Knight would have been considerably more forgettable without Ledger's driving, binding performance to elevate the film to the exercise in madness that it is. I hate to think Ledger will win this out of courtesy, but whatever the Academy's intentions, he still earned it.

I don't think The Dark Knight is nearly as good as Batman Begins. I think it had the same problem as The Prestige in that there were to many plot twists and surprises. Basically the films were trying to do too much. I thought they were both good, but I had trouble droping my suspension of disbelief when it came to all of the plans and double crosses and how everything works out.

In short the plot of The Dark Knight was too deeply contrived. The performance is great from Heath Ledger sure. But without his death I feel that it would be marked in his career say the way Brad Pitt is remembered for 12 Monkeys. Great performance but not necessarily a recognized performance by the mainstream public.

Josh Brolin, MILK

Heath 4 sure

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

The world seems to agree this category is a lock for the late Mr. Ledger, but if you want to comment before the Oscars they're this Sunday....

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

It's nice that both Brolin and Downey got nominated, and in this case, I think they both got it because they were even better in their lead performances this year, W. and Iron Man, respectively, but they just weren't going to get nominated for those (did anybody else besides me even see W.?) Heath Ledger not only will win but also deserves to win.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

I haven't seen W. I'm not sure if I could ever sit through a film about that guy. I think we all know just about all we need to know about good ole Dubya. Don't you?

No because I did watch it. I guess you missed that Movie Tab II?

Hey, I saw W. My initial impresson was that it sucked and that it totally lost me in that first meeting scene with all those meaningful shots of Bush's staff. But now that I think back on it, it was an easy enough movie to watch. I'm not sure the exact motivation behind making it and some of the choices/casting were a might questionable and ham-handed. Stone played it a bit broader than he probably should've, but Brolin easily could've made the Best Actor cut and I wouldn't have flinched. Anyway, it's a movie I don't need to see again.

What is this Movie Tab, of which you speak?

Does it have dancing girls?

I believe you, but if left to my own devices, I'd believe it lost you before you turned it on, sorta like Powdered.

I was lost, but now I'm found.

Prove it.

I watched Double Indemnity last night. How's that?

And I bet it is 10 times the movie that W. is.

Who'd you think I was anyway? The guy that walks into a good looking dame's front parlour and says, "Good afternoon, I sell accident insurance on husbands... you got one that's been around too long? One you'd like to turn into a little hard cash?"

Here is the acceptance speech from Heath Ledger's father, mother and sister...

&feature=related

I think it would have been great if he didn't receive the award.

I think it's a fine performance in a very flawed film. It's pretty clear that if he hadn't died he wouldn't be given that award. It's not the type of film or performance that generally garners them... of course America does love her villains.

I'd be insulted with the sympathy award if I was the family, because I think it undermines his death.

The same reason I'd be insulted if I was Scorsese for winning director for a simply above average picture.

Am I the only person who thinks that this is 100% dead wrong? (Forgive me for using the word "dead", if necessary).