SubscribeWhy Jake got jilted at the Globes
Mystery solved. It sure looked odd yesterday when the Golden Globes displayed so much love for gay cowboy pic "Brokeback Mountain" (noms in 7 of 11 categories) but none for poor cowpoke Jake Gyllenhaal.
Turns out that the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. qualification committee insisted on putting Jake in the lead-actor race instead of supporting, which is the category he's campaigning for at the Oscars and other kudos.
The contest for best drama actor was so packed this year that the Globes couldn't find room for Viggo Mortensen ("A History of Violence"), Tommy Lee Jones ("Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada"), Ralph Fiennes ("The Constant Gardener"), Jonathan Rhys Myers ("Match Point") or Eric Bana ("Munich") either.
With so many great leads to choose from, it seems the category couldn't squeeze in a supporting star — regardless of how much they love him in his Stetson and chaps.
Photo: Poor Jake Gyllenhaal has discovered how lonely a cowboy's life can be.
(Focus Features)
QUOTE------------------------------
Ledger has to communicate more with gestures and body language.----------QUOTE
Everyone is talking about Ledgers restrained performance.....but Ralph Fiennes is the MASTER of the restrained, understated performance....and no one is talking about him.
If any of you have seen "Gardener"......the scene where Fiennes/Justin finds out about the death of his wife and the camera stays on his face for almost 5 minutes , I thought was one of the most brilliant acting moments I have ever witnessed.....no dialogue ....the grief was all in his face and eyes.....masterful.Wow.
Posted by: nancy | December 22, 2005 at 11:57 PM
So much attention has gone to Heath Ledger and his performance is great. But Jake G played a different character and he played his just as well. His was the more outgoing personality and he had more dialogue which somehow made his part easier. Ledger has to communicate more with gestures and body language. But neither character was BETTER than the other. As for lead vs. supporting, the producers are being very wise. Jake G has a better shot in supporting because this year Best Actor is the toughest race to call. I hope he wins. I hope they both win actually, as ample rewards for taking on potentially career breaking roles and bringing them so vividly to life.
Posted by: Ricky0101 | December 21, 2005 at 09:51 AM
Hey, you folks don't know how lucky you are. Us here pokes out in the sticks ain't gonna git to see the movie till next month, dang it. BUT, I hope one of the two gets an Oscar, and
when he walks up to accept, he drawls: Well gol dang.........Wait till George Bush Hears About This!
Posted by: In A Trailer, and Frustrated | December 15, 2005 at 07:45 PM
Go Jake, Go!
Watch his performance in BBM a second time, you'll see that he definitely deserves a nomination, leading or supporting. He really gives an aching performance, just as worthy as Heath's.
Posted by: Downtown Guy | December 15, 2005 at 01:48 PM
I am disappointed that Jake G was not included among the best. I don't care where they put him, just put him somewhere where his good performance will be recognized. I love him dearly. I have been a fan of him for a long time and I am glad that at least he gets good films and get recognized for doing good with his films. Very sensitive actor indeed.
Again, please, can someone do something or maybe for the next awards, Oscar, etc...
Posted by: melinda hewitt | December 15, 2005 at 01:38 PM
EDouglas ... Memoirs better than White Countess? What planet are you living on? Neither was a great movie but the romance in White Countess at least was developed. Geisha's romance was so subtle that it was almost not there.
Posted by: Sid H | December 15, 2005 at 09:23 AM
I don't think that many people like White Countess. I thought it was okay, but for that type of movie (wartime romantic drama) Memoirs of a Geisha was better.
Posted by: EDouglas | December 15, 2005 at 04:25 AM
For the same reason why Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg get nominations for directing movies that weren't good enough to get nominated as pictures....it's the Hollywood Foreign Press.
Posted by: EDouglas | December 15, 2005 at 04:24 AM
I agree that Feinnes must have split some votes with himself. Not a lot, since White Countess got no love anywhere else, but I bet just enough to keep him out of the competitive actor field. Probably Natasha Richardson was close to the final five in the actress lineup as well... but White Countess just hasn't gotten the traction needed for nominations. Why is that? It looks good. I wish it'd gotten more play this year.
Posted by: Adam Keller | December 14, 2005 at 08:01 PM
I am interested to know why Fiennes wasn't one of the best actor nominees. Your article mentions the crowded best actor field...but clearly with "The Constant Gardener" receiving
nominations for Best Drama. Director and Supporting Actor.....the film was very much loved, yet the actor who carried the film is not nominated. Was there indeed vote splitting with his White Countess performance? Thats the only thing I can think of that would let Crowe in and leave Fiennes out...since "Cinderella Man" didn't really receive much love in other major categories. Does anybody have insider information about this? It would be interesting to know
what percentage of votes were for Fiennes.....for both his films.
Posted by: nancy | December 14, 2005 at 04:48 PM