2008 Diva Cup Awards: Best Supporting Actor

Josh Brolin
Milk

With a character that could have gone wrong in so many ways in the hands of the wrong actor, Josh Brolin gets nearly everything right (I shudder to think of what Tom Cruise, one of Van Sant's original choices, would have done here). The role has a multitude of different dimensions to it--the fun-loving frat guy, the political "good ole boy," the seemingly secure guy who's not completely comfortable in his skin and, finally, the cold, chilly psychopath--and Brolin seamlessly synthesizes all of these components into one complex character. Brolin's winning performance here is proof that he has the capacity to be one of the most versitile actors working today.

Robert Downey, Jr.
Tropic Thunder

A dude playing a dude disguised as another dude. This description of Robert Downey, Jr.'s performance in Tropic Thunder was, besides Heath Ledger winning, the most consistent thing we saw at this year's awards circuit. It's obvious that the writers of these shows were at a loss for words on how to describe such an out-there nomination as this one and were forced to recycle this same line over and over again. This might have been a problem if this weren't the most perfect way to describe Robert Downey, Jr.'s creation here. The performance is so layered with different types of comedic and acting styles that only an actor with RDJ's varied filmography could have pulled it off nearly as well as this.

Emile Hirsch
Milk

When Emile Hirsch's name rolled around on the opening credits of Milk, I involuntarily sighed in exasperation. For some reason, after Into the Wild, the young actor's almost desperate desire to be taken seriously as an actor had gotten on my nerves. And from what I had heard about the role- a gay rights activist fighting for his basic human rights- it looked like it was going to be more of the same crap. Then, something unexpected happened: Emile opened up and showed us a side of him we've never seen before (or at least I haven't). He was funny, engaging, bitchy, touching, endearing and a whole mess of emotions I've never associated with him before. In fact, any preconceived notion I had of Hirsch was promptly forgotten after this thoughtfully handled performance and now I am actually looking forward to see what he is offering up next.

Bill Irwin
Rachel Getting Married

Bill Irwin's big-hearted father doesn't get as many big, look-at-me moments as his daughters do over the course of Rachel Getting Married, so he is forced to do most of his acting quietly and from the sidelines. This suits Irwin because it allows him to do some of the most vivid supporting work of the year without distracting from the "main attractions." Who can forget the eternally optimistic spin he can put on any moment, his absolutely unbridled joy at Rachel's announcement after the rehearsal dinner or his scrunched up face during his crying jag after Kym's return from the hair salon? He's the adoring father with abundant unconditional love to give out that every body would love to have.

Brad Pitt
Burn After Reading

Brad Pitt, for me anyways, is an actor who's always a pleasing screen presence, but I'd be hard-pressed (Fight Club aside) to think of a performance of his that's truly proved he has much acting talent. At first glance, Burn After Reading appeared to be yet another role that relied more on Pitt's natural movie star charisma than any real talent. Then, he appeared in his first scene and he made me laugh. Second scene, same result. Third time, here we go again. By the time we get to the moment where Pitt's Chad Feldheimer is sitting in the car, just staring at John Malkovich's character with a full minute of idiotic/hilarious facial expressions, I knew this was Brad's shining moment as an actor.

If Only There Were Six: Michael Shannon, Revolutionary Road

Rest of the Top 10: Aaron Eckhart, The Dark Knight...Gael Garcia Bernal, Blindness...Richard Dreyfuss, W....Ben Foster, Birds of America

And the Diva Cup Goes to: Robert Downey, Jr., Tropic Thunder

Celebrity Photography

During the past week, both Vanity Fair and the New York Times unveiled their celebrity portfolios for the Oscar season and, for some reason, they have inspired polar opposite feelings in me. The Vanity Fair portfolio, released first, used the films of Hitchcock as an inspiration and couldn't be more beautiful. The New York Times portfolio, on the other hand, are pretty in an avant garde sort of way, but as celebrity photographs, they are horrible.

This revelation got me thinking about what the difference between "good" and "bad" celebrity photography is. I don't consider myself an expert or anything in the field, but I believe that photographing celebrity, at the very least, involves using everything you can to make the celebrity as good looking possible. The picture should revolve around them and their persona. For example, you wouldn't see Greta Garbo or Bette Davis back in the day fighting with any object or the background to be the focus of the picture; on the contrary, the photographer often concentrated just on close ups of their face or profile.

To show what I mean, here are my thoughts on various pictures from both portfolios.

Beautiful. Yummy. Tantalizing. As soon as I saw both James McAvoy and Emile Hirsch clean shaven and all gussied up in 50's fashion, I totally wished that this remake of Strangers on a Train would actually happen. I also love McAvoy's leer...so sexy.

And this is the epitome of bad celebrity photographing. What the hell was the photographer thinking with this shot. Paul Dano looks like one of those damn aliens from Signs, he is so fucking creepy. I just wish my eyes had never seen this horrific photo and that it can be erased from my mind Eternal Sunshine style.

This photo could have been all sorts of amazing, but instead of highlighting McAvoy's lovely face the bonehead photographer covers it with a shadow.

Jennifer Jason Leigh looks like such a monster here it's frightening and Keira Knightley is justifiably scared. Great homage to Rebecca.

And this is supposed to be a photograph of whom? You're guess is as good as mine. (Okay, apparently it's Jennifer Jason Leigh but there's no way you can tell through that thicket of woods).

Damn, Marion Cotillard is fine. And she is the perfect Marion Crane in Psycho. That last shot of her dead is absolutely chilling- her eyes are absolutely vacant.

In this one, Marion looks either A) constipated and trying to go or B) like she's just lost her breath from the harsh wind and she has to do an embarrassingly loud gasp to catch her breath.

Who is this distinguished older lady? I would seriously have no idea with all that hair covering her face if they hadn't put a caption underneath reading "Julie Christie."

Oh, excuse me, I didn't realize Seth Rogen had a small role in Rambo.

What a beautiful ensemble photo. Josh Brolin, Casey Affleck and Ben Foster are looking good, Tang Wei is to die for and the ever classy Julie Christie and Eva Marie Saint are as glamorous as always.

This is probably the best of the New York Times photos, but that's really not saying much. Look what they have to work with.

Wow, they somehow managed to make the 80-something year old Hal Holbrook look 20 years older with this photograph. How on earth do you do that?

Again, who the fuck is this? (Sienna Miller, apparently, but I probably wouldn't have been able to tell anyways).

Jodie Foster is one classy broad and I love this take on The Birds. Who knew behind that rough exterior she looked so damn hot (even while being terrorized by random birds).