Sunday, December 09, 2007

Random Idiocy

Janet Gaynor and Emil Jannings, the first-ever winners of the Best Actress and Best Actor Academy Awards in 1927, won their Oscars not for one role, but for a cumulative accounting of three roles. Gaynor was nominated for her role in three different films, and Jannings for two --- not three and two separate nominations in the category, respectively, but just one nomination that listed all of their cited films. They both won in essence not for one particular part, but because since they had given strong performances in several films, they were the actors of the year. This was the only year such a nominating procedure resulted in a win, and the rules were soon changed so that each nominee could only be nominated for one specific role. This didn't stop unofficial 'actor of the year' Oscars from being awarded, i.e. Jessica Lange winning best supporting actress for Tootsie in 1982 when pretty much everyone considered it to be an overall award given she also starred in (and was nominated for as Best Actress) the film Frances.
In this crazy-deep movie year, the Academy might want to think about re-adopting this tactic. There are lots of stars with multiple notable performances that may end up getting the overall shaft if Academy members split their votes. To name just a few...

Amy Adams (Charlie Wilson's War, Enchanted)
Casey Affleck (Gone Baby Gone, Jesse James)
Christian Bale (Rescue Dawn, I'm Not There)
Javier Bardem (Love in the Time of Cholera, No Country For Old Men)
Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth: The Golden Age, I'm Not There)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Before the Devil Knows You're Dead, Charlie Wilson's War, The Savages)
Tommy Lee Jones (In the Valley of Elah, No Country For Old Men)
Denzel Washington (American Gangster, The Debaters)

That's not even counting people like George Clooney or Johnny Depp, who had both an Oscar-ish role (Michael Clayton, Sweeney Todd) and a hit popcorn movie (Ocean's Thirteen, Pirates III). I dunno, doesn't the old way kind of make more sense? I guess there would be a gray area since a person could have multiple roles that spread over categories, like how Hoffman is the lead in Before..., and Savages but is supporting in Charlie Wilson. But isn't that more impressive in a way since he is able to both carry a movie by himself and play a supporting role?


What's your preferred sports-related, made-up term?

("Todd Helton's home run traveled a guess-timated 385 feet.")


("Ohhhh! Vince Carter just posterized Fredric Weis!")



RT Murphy said...

Hands-down favorite sports neologism? Chin music. Sweetness optional.

Chad Nevett said...

My only issue with nominating an actor just once no matter how many films is the placement of said nomination if they did excellent leading and supporting work. Which category do they get nominated in?

sarah nicole said...

blanchett deserves to be nominated twice, as she stands head and shoulders above the rest of those oscar-favoured beauties (berry, theron, roberts, even kidman--lightweights all, comparatively). and she will most certainly win best supporting for i'm not there.