Movies

‘They were due’ — an Oscar narrative that deserves to die?

BBG News

As an ardent movie enthusiast, I’ve often wondered: does the absolute best performance always claim the Oscar? While it’s essential to avoid cynicism, the truth is that making it to the stage calls for more than just exceptional acting. It demands a compelling narrative, a tale hidden beneath the story we see on screen. The actor worked tirelessly; they underwent a complete metamorphosis. This was a life that urgently needed to be shared.

Later on, one of the oldest tales: They’ve Been Overdue. With numerous nominations and exceptional performances under their belt, why haven’t they taken home the award yet? But is this reasoning valid? Columnist Glenn Whipp and film editor Joshua Rothkopf delved into the concept of “overdue-ness.” Is it effective? Is it fair? And what does it look like in this year’s competition?

I found the idea of “deserving” to resonate with me back in the mid-to-late ’80s and early ’90s, a period when actors like Paul Newman, Geraldine Page, and Al Pacino were respected performers who hadn’t fully achieved their potential. However, despite his remarkable performances in films like the “Godfather” series, “Serpico,” and “Dog Day Afternoon,” it seemed unfair that Al Pacino was not recognized with awards. I believe the other actors he was nominated against, such as Denzel Washington for “Malcolm X,” Stephen Rea for “The Crying Game,” Robert Downey Jr. for “Chaplin,” and Clint Eastwood in “Unforgiven,” were more deserving in my opinion.

fundamentally, I believe it’s not fair when an actor receives an award merely because they are considered ‘overdue.’ This transformation of the recognition into more of a career acknowledgment takes away from the deserving work of exceptionally gifted young nominees who find themselves waiting for their chance. It seems unfair that they should have to wait, especially considering the questionable concept of justice in such situations (as one might ask Glenn Close). Moreover, it suggests that an Oscar is a title that an actor of a certain standing is supposed to acquire, which I think is misleading. Glenn, is there any historical instance where you can justify an actor being ‘overdue’ for an award, or is this simply part of the nature of the industry?

Glenn Whipp: Essentially, Josh, it’s the Oscars, and ideally, actors should win for their iconic roles. For instance, Al Pacino for Michael Corleone, Jeff Bridges for The Dude (or el Duderino), or Elizabeth Taylor for Maggie in “Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.” However, Oscar voters often lack foresight and miss what’s obvious, or they get sidetracked by other performances from actors who are overdue or have a compelling backstory. For example, Art Carney won for the heartwarming “Harry and Tonto,” despite strong competition from Al Pacino (“The Godfather Part II”) and Jack Nicholson (“Chinatown”).

Sometimes, the stars align just right, and an actor who is overdue for recognition delivers a standout performance that contends for the best of the year – or comes very close. For instance, while there are several Leonardo DiCaprio movies I’d rather watch than “The Revenant,” his intense, absorbing portrayal as a frontiersman in that film deserved the Oscar, despite the focus on his eating raw bison liver and nearly freezing to death. Admittedly, Denzel Washington should have won for “Malcolm X,” but his first lead actor Oscar for “Training Day” is still an impressive achievement – I cast my vote for him.

Josh, I’m curious about your thoughts. If Al Pacino hadn’t won an Oscar for “Scent of a Woman,” would you still be satisfied if he received some other form of recognition from the Academy instead? Would it make things right if another actor was given the award in his place? Or do you think it’s important that he receives the actual Oscar, even if it means an untelevised career achievement event?

Rothkopf: Ah, it seems you’re a follower of “Never oppose family interests,” whereas I lean towards “Business is business, not personal.” We should always focus on the film at hand. However, there’s a strange incongruity that arises whenever we discuss “Scent of a Woman” and feel a groan. The irony lies in the fact that Pacino delivered several more notable performances post his Oscar win, such as “The Insider,” “Donnie Brasco,” and even “Glengarry Glen Ross” from 1992, which showcases the quintessential Ricky Roma. It’s interesting to note that these performances surpassed his work in “Scent of a Woman.

Am I concerned that Saoirse Ronan hasn’t won an Oscar yet? Absolutely. However, it’s important to note that I’m not her talent agent. I have faith that she’ll always secure roles. Her performances in “Brooklyn,” “Lady Bird,” and “Little Women” were nothing short of epochal and deserved the recognition. My concern lies more in the possibility of her winning for a less outstanding role. Nevertheless, Saoirse continues to deliver exceptional work, as evidenced by her performance this year in “The Outrun.” It’s hard to believe she’s only 30 years old.

I have another point to make about the “due” argument, which seems to be ageist but in a reversed way. When Pacino won for “Scent of a Woman,” he was slightly over 50 years old, and people might argue that this is too early to celebrate his success. But as we saw last weekend at the SAGs with Timothée Chalamet’s victory, age shouldn’t be a factor when it comes to recognition. Unfortunately, Chalamet has been criticized for being too young for the big roles he’s taken on. However, he has proven himself by carrying two “Dune” films and delivering an exceptional performance in a messiah role that could have easily fallen flat. Add his performances in “Call Me by Your Name” and “Beautiful Boy,” and I believe Chalamet deserves recognition, even if it’s in a peculiar way. His speech at the SAGs, where he acknowledged the “greats” and aspired to join their ranks, was electric and showcased his talent perfectly. In my opinion, that’s what the Oscars should strive for: an electrifying atmosphere that celebrates exceptional performances, regardless of age. What are your thoughts on this issue?

Whipp is comparing an electric atmosphere at the Oscars, such as the one that erupted when Al Pacino won his Oscar and received a standing ovation, to something that’s not electrical in nature. He jokes about breaking a streak, and then expresses gratitude in a touching manner. Despite his professional demeanor during awards voting, where he follows a “strictly business” approach as you suggest, Josh, the Oscars have a long-standing tradition (nearly 100 years) of recognizing individuals who may not always be deserving based on their connections rather than their acting skills. For instance, Mary Pickford won an Oscar early in its history for her connections, not for her over-the-top performance in “Coquette.” More recently, Brendan Fraser won for the controversial and exploitative film “The Whale.”

In essence, he’s saying that even though he maintains a professional stance during awards voting, the Oscars have a history of recognizing individuals who might not be deserving based on their connections or the quality of their work.

I’m a big fan of Timothée Chalamet, but I find it hard to fully support him winning the Oscar due to my bias towards music biopics after watching “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story.” I believe he deserved the award for his performance in “Call Me by Your Name,” but unfortunately, Gary Oldman won that year, having the advantage of portraying Churchill and being overdue. Chalamet might win this year or the Oscar could go to Adrien Brody who won before for “The Pianist” and is not considered due this time around for “The Brutalist.” It’s interesting that Ralph Fiennes, who gives a fantastic performance in “Conclave,” didn’t gain much traction. He masterfully portrays spiritual struggle as well as the film’s campy elements. This is only his third nomination, which makes me question why he isn’t more recognized.

Fiennes required a space to present his argument, which Moore provided when she received the Golden Globe for “The Substance.” In her acceptance speech, Moore shared an experience with a producer labeling her as a “popcorn actress” and how she internalized this notion, limiting her self-perception. She then got “The Substance,” and as she said, “the universe signaled to me that ‘you’re not finished.’ ” Though it’s not being asserted that Moore deserves the award — except for one voter who thought she should have won for “Ghost” — her story of determination has struck a chord with many in this industry. Her powerful, emotional performance may even earn her an Oscar.

Rothkopf: One day, Fiennes will release another stunning masterpiece similar to “The Grand Budapest Hotel” and “A Bigger Splash,” and I hope the Academy Awards, despite its occasional uncertainty, will recognize him for his brilliance in the style of Preston Sturges – a wit and humor that is truly unmatched. Moreover, all the praise Moore is receiving this season for “The Substance” is well-deserved – her performance is exceptional, something she hasn’t had the opportunity to showcase until now. When she wins, the applause should be for her resilience, but primarily, I hope it’s for creating a character that embodies Hollywood self-destruction, standing alongside classics like “Sunset Boulevard” and Gloria Swanson (who never won an Oscar).

It’s interesting to point out that Elizabeth Sparkle from Moore’s film was meant to have won an Oscar, but it’s never explicitly stated what movie she won for (perhaps intentionally so). This ambiguity highlights the fact that one can triumph for a brilliant or dreadful production, yet in the end, as shown in “Barry Lyndon,” all accolades eventually fade into obscurity. The exceptional talent displayed in performances like Faye Dunaway’s in “Network” and Daniel Day-Lewis in “There Will Be Blood” is so remarkable that their Oscars almost become secondary to the brilliance of their work itself. It’s simply a given.

Whipp: Hey, Josh, this is the Oscars we’re talking about here. The title “Oscar winner” sticks with you for life, from every story penned about you, even up to your obituary and beyond. It’s the allure that drives many actors to spend countless hours mingling with voters at events, answering the same questions over and over again (“What drew you to the role?”), and tolerating undercooked chicken at award ceremonies. They strive to become an actor known as “Oscar-winning.

Despite the repetitive nature of the “due” narrative, it’s clear that some viewers find it compelling. Here’s a sneak peek for those individuals: Glenn Close takes on an interesting role in the upcoming “Knives Out” film. She’s already expressed that it was “truly one of the best experiences of my life.” With such a powerful performance, there’s a strong possibility she might win her first Oscar next year. It seems like she’s already gearing up for the competition.

Read More

2025-02-27 14:31

Previous post Monster Hunter Wilds Optional Quests Guide – All the Optional Quests Included, How To Unlock Quests, and More
Next post Kyle Gass Reveals Stunning Weight Loss and New Tour After Controversial Trump Joke!