Saturday, March 04, 2006

Quote of the day:

Dana Stevens in Slate:
Finally, one open question to both of you: Why is Heath Ledger's performance in Brokeback Mountain considered a leading role, while Jake Gyllenhaal's is relegated to the status of 'supporting'? They share roughly equivalent portions of screen time, and Gyllenhaal certainly has more lines, if only because his character is far chattier than the taciturn Ennis Del Mar. It's hard to imagine one of the two leads being similarly dissed in a love story between a man and a woman. Is this just because the academy wanted to avoid pitting the two men against one another in the best actor category? Or is Gyllenhaal smiting his forehead right now for agreeing to be cast as the bottom to Ledger's top?

Hee hee.


Yasser Rahman said...

I have no clue who you are talking about..but im trying to figure out :$

Shreeharsh said...

Oh, it's nothing really -- she's talking about the Academy Awards tomorrow and the whole top-bottom line just amused me a lot.

Saif Ali said...

I attended a talk on "Film Awards" in New Delhi ... where the speaker gave well thought out reasons for why such and such award was better given to such and such in such and such year. He of course, was talking about the Indian National Film Awards ... there is *always* a way to say the opposite of what the academy says. Im always a little perturbed when film critics and theorists even go on about awards.