Pitt is Supporting

email this story
read comments (8)
post a comment

Brad Pitt gives his best performance ever in Babel, but it's nothing close to a lead -- Babel is an ensemble piece -- and so talk of a Best Actor nomination, no offense, is without foundation. (Tom O'Neil is saying Pitt has "declared himself in the supporting race" -- has he said this in so many words?) It's a Best Supporting Actor situation or nothing. The crying-on-the-phone- with-his-son sells the performance, but the one that seeps in even more is the peeing scene with Cate Blanchett, who plays Pitt's wife.

Van Galder's cat hat<< previous | next >>Bend Film Festival winners

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 17, 2006 at 4:17 PM

comment #1

Josh Massey says ...

Saying it is Brad Pitt's best performance is saying a lot. He is perhaps the most underrated actor working today.

Posted by Josh Massey at October 17, 2006 8:32 PM

comment #2

cleopatrajones says ...

Pitt has made some poor film choices in the past (who hasn't really) but I too think he's underrated. One of his problems is he doesn't receive credit when credit is due because of his looks. I read somewhere that "Brad Pitt is a character actor trapped in a leading man's body." After watching his performances in Twelve Monkeys, Snatch, Fight Club and even True Romance I'd have to agree with that opinion.

I have not seen Babel yet, so I can't comment on his performance but its nice to hear he's getting some good buzz.

Posted by cleopatrajones at October 17, 2006 9:00 PM

comment #3

YND says ...

CJ, don't forget about SEVEN. I think Pitt's work is remarkable in that one.

I've seen BABEL and frankly, I don't think it's an award performance. I loved the film and the work of the entire cast -- and Pitt is as solid as ever -- but I think it's to everyone's credit that no one performance steps out and says "Oscar!" It's a real ensemble, balanced all the way across the board. MAYBE the housekeeper, who gets to do some roaming across a wide emotional spectrum, for Best Supp. Actress... But otherwise, this is the kind of film that really begs for a Best Ensemble Oscar. (Also, THE DEPARTED would be a great nom for that category -- I don't know that I've ever seen such a huge cast where absolutely EVERYONE got dynamite material and knocked it out of the park.)

Posted by YND at October 18, 2006 1:58 AM

comment #4

houmas says ...

Pitt isn't underrated. He's rated exactly fine. A good actor with a limited talent, that's given some very good performances, but a bunch of mediocre ones. The guy is in the same catergory as Tom Cruise (though Pitt takes far more chances than Cruise).

The only "great" (as opposed to good) performance I've seen from Pitt is Fight Club. That must have taken a lot out of him. His "I'm crazy, ma!" histrionic overacting in 12 monkeys was embarrassing, imho. But AMPAS likes that kind of obvious nonsense. Pitt in Snatch leaves me cold (as does everything Guy Ritchie does)

But Pitt has screwed up so many gilt edged chances and "slam dunk" roles, that I find it impossible to consider him a great actor. Imagine the kind of performance a really great screen actor like Russell Crowe could have given in movies like Troy, Seven Years In Tibet, Meet Joe Black and The Devil's Own. All those films had big flaws to be sure, but flaws that could have been partially disguised had Pitt's central performances been up to snuff. But Pitt gave weak performances, and was a big part of those films flaws.

Pitt is a decent, if inconsistent actor. Of course he's going to give some strong performances, when you consider the sheer volume of great roles available to him and that he accepts. But you could say the same about many a competent, white pretty boy in the industry (from Tony Curtis right on down to Tom Cruise and Colin Farrell). These guys have the keys to the kingdom. They screw up a lot of great roles, but sometimes hit a couple out of the park. It's the law of averages. But that don't make them "great" actors.

Posted by houmas at October 18, 2006 3:03 AM

comment #5

Rich S. says ...

I've always thought Pitt was better in supporting roles. When he's the center of the film, he's expected to use looks and glamour to sell the part, and I'm not sure he buys into that. He certainly looked the part in Troy, but lacked the total narcissism and arrogance to truly sell Achilles.

Along those lines, I've really enjoyed his performances in the Ocean's movies. Funny stuff.

Posted by Rich S. at October 18, 2006 6:51 AM

comment #6

Joseph says ...

I haven't seen Babel yet, but if it's anything like Inarritu's Amores Perros, and Pitt has a role that is at the same level as Gael Garcia Bernal's in the latter film, then, yes, it's a lead role.

Posted by Joseph at October 18, 2006 8:04 AM

comment #7

Dan Revill says ...

I have to agree that Pitt is best in ensemble pieces. Give him a lead and he's somewhat lost in it (see Meet Joe Black - then again that whole movie was a bit messy, and the aforementioned Troy).
My favourite of his performances are in the Fincher films and 12 Monkeys...He's got the chops and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing Babel!

Posted by Dan Revill at October 18, 2006 5:22 PM

comment #8