Affleck upsets at Venice fest — Oscar next?
Ben Affleck emerged as a true superman from the Venice Film Festival where he was the surprising winner of the best actor award for his portrayal of TV's Superman in "Hollywoodland."
As expected, Helen Mirren was crowned best actress for "The Queen," but another upset occurred in the race for best picture. Although "Bobby," "The Queen" and French film "Private Fears" were considered the frontrunners, the prize went to "Still Life" — the tale of a Chinese village destroyed by the building of the Three Gorges dam — by director Jia Zhang-Ke, a darling of the international festival circuit. In the past he won various prizes at Venice and Berlin for "Zhantai" and "Xiao Wu" and has been nommed at Cannes ("Ren xiao yao").
"We were told there would be a surprise film at the end of this festival, and we didn't have a lot of discussion," announced jury chief Catherine Deneuve.
Usually, the top trophy goes to lesser-known. foreign-language films, but western stars often fare well in the acting categories. Affleck's victory is a real shockeroo considering how his rep's declined in recent years due to a series of film bombs ("Surviving Christmas," "Gigli"), a life lived in tabloid headlines and because his role in "Hollywoodland" is considered to be supporting Adrien Brody. Affleck won an Oscar in 1997 for co-writing "Good Will Hunting," but has never received an acting bid.
Only a few times has a lead acting award at Venice translated into an Oscar and they were all more than 50 years ago: Vivien Leigh ("Streetcar Named Desire"), Paul Muni ("The Story of Louis Pasteur"), Fredric March ("Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde")
Many other Venice champs have subsequently been nommed by the academy, including last year's victor David Strathairn ("Good Night, and Good Luck"), Javier Bardem ("Before Night Falls") and Albert Finney ("Tom Jones"), but only rarely so.
Photo: Affleck's role in "Hollywoodland" signals a major comeback in his recently flagging career.
(Focus Features)
That movie would have done a lot better withOUT Adrien Brody. He was just plain annoying, and every time he was onscreen, I couldn't take my eyes off that enormous, gigantic nose. I've always felt Ben was a much better actor than people have given him credit for...he just had the misfortune to pick some really crappy movie roles. Whose idea was it to sign off on "Gigli"?
Posted by: MizLiz | September 15, 2006 at 09:57 PM
Ben Affleck is going to make it in for Best Supporting Actor. It's almost certain, especially considering what a WEAK category that field is this year. Diane Lane is quite possible too as Best Supporting Actress, but possibly just at the Golden Globes. After all, this year shows promise of being the year that actresses strike back.
At least the amazing Diane will be a part of it =].
Posted by: James | September 14, 2006 at 01:03 PM
Ben Affleck deserved his glory at Venice.Obviously, there is still a lot of jaundiced view of Ben 's acting talent out there in the cybernet. Let's see if general public agreed with this assessment as well.
Posted by: Tagaru | September 12, 2006 at 04:17 PM
Affleck was outstanding in this movie and richly deserves the honor. Great acting doesn't always translate to great box office though and the film's subject matter may limit its financial potential.
Posted by: raven on a rock | September 11, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Ben Affleck was only okay in this movie. He's well cast as a not-very-good actor but there are only a half dozen others who could have added some zip to the role. The movie is a bore.
Posted by: I,Claudius | September 11, 2006 at 11:41 AM
DIANE LANE was superb in "HOLLYWOODLAND" and she will be nominated for an Oscar.
Posted by: m.j. | September 11, 2006 at 03:46 AM
Ben Affleck was good but so is Adrien Brody -- proving that his oscar was no fluke. Great movie and great performances.
Posted by: Jake | September 10, 2006 at 07:08 PM
Hollywoodland only made $6 million in its opening weekend.
So much for a major comeback.
Posted by: cc | September 10, 2006 at 03:06 PM
"Usually, the top trophy goes to obscure foreign-language films," Ouch, just, listen to yourself. Hear that prejudice.
Consider perhaps that foreign films are not obscure because they are foreign, but because they don't get distributed in America.
Posted by: Claude Ronson | September 10, 2006 at 07:46 AM