2013 Oscar Best Supporting Actor

__________________
#31 on SC's Top 100 Mofos list!!

Bingo! Waltz was awesome in Django don't get me wrong, but DiCaprio and Jackson had unforgettable performances. Maybe they shouldn't win, but damn to not even be nominated, not even in the Critics Choice Awards is insanely stupid.

__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)

It's Christopher Waltz's fault. I am just letting you know.

Waltz's Landa was passive aggressive, cold, calculating and reasonable.. in his own way. I don't know what you were watching.. then again your opinion is based almost entirely on no merit and has really no value, as always.

__________________
Let's talk some jive.

I really hope I never see a movie with this Christopher Waltz guy if he's as bad as Sexy says...though I must say on a related note Christoph Waltz is ******* awesome. It's good those two aren't getting confused.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman

Sexy Celebrity, we get that you don't like Inglourious Basterds but there's your bitterness towards it and Tarantino really is getting quite annoying.

He was amazing in Inglourious Basterds and was also amazing in Django Unchained, although I think the nomination could have gone to either three of him, DiCaprio or Jackson. The three of them nailed their unique characters perfectly, Waltz as a fairy tale like character who was very enjoyable, DiCaprio as a really hated but great villain and Jackson as a senile old man who was most surprising to me, didn't expect him to have the impact he did. Not surprised that Waltz got the nod though, the Academy have gone extremely conservative in their choices, which is a shame - not because Waltz got the nod, but in general.

__________________

What?

The character of Stephen was by no means senile. He was calculating and manipulative. He played the part of a funny old man to keep Calvin's guard down with him, but his mind was sharp. Peter Travers of Rolling Stone called him an "Uncle Tom with an agenda." I'd say that's a pretty accurate assessment. But most definitely not senile.

__________________

Agreed on all fronts.

I think Hoffman or Jones takes this. I'm not sure what I'm rooting for, though.

Maybe senile is kind of the wrong word, but at times he acts like he is a struggling old man who is obsessed with his owner but like you said that appears to be part of his calculating and manipulative character, either way he's great, probably the funniest character as well in my opinion.

I really didn't want to delete those last few posts, because there's an actual discussion underneath there, but yeah, the insult-to-substance ratio had gotten really out of whack. You guys can discuss Waltz if you want but try to keep it about the performance and not each other.

I'm really not bitter at all towards the movie and especially Quentin Tarantino. That would mean I'm more resentful towards something and I'm not. I just think Christoph Waltz is an irritating character actor, I guess you could say. Talents he may have aside, I don't really enjoy him. It's a physical thing -- how he physically makes me feel. Don't you ever just get feelings where you don't like somebody and there's really no rational reason for it? I do. And often, I find out that the feeling was valid somehow.

You know, so what if I don't like this guy who played a nasty Nazi leader? Why should I be shamed for that? If a bunch of Jews who were killed by Nazis in World War II could come back to life and they all watched Inglorious Basterds and were deeply disturbed by it and hated Christoph Waltz, are you gonna smack them all in the face and say, "How dare you! Can't you recognize talent?!" NO! So, excuse me for having a different feeling.

Fair enough I guess, but for me part of what made him so great in Inglourious Basterds was the fact that his character was so disturbing. He was polite, well presented, manipulative and extremely intelligent, yet he was clearly a monster - I despised his character, but thought his acting was great and one of the best things about the film, his presence in scenes such as the opening and restaurant scene was so uncomfortable but I just admired his acting. I guess if you really dislike him then it's probably difficult to enjoy the film. And yeh I get what you're saying about if you just don't like someone, but perhaps it's not as often for me

And I'm not sure what you'll make of him in Django Unchained, perhaps you'll like him, because I think his acting style is more suited to his deus ex machina style fairy tale character who is a good guy wanting to help somebody and has a clear hatred for racism, although you might just be unwilling to even accept that because of the dislike you have for him in your mind now, my step-dad is just like that, he has a load of actors he dislikes but doesn't even know why and struggles to watch/enjoy films they are in

Well, okay, I'll give you this -- Christoph Waltz playing a nice guy MIGHT be okay with me. I don't know, yet. But I do feel that it could be possible. I am not a person who will just completely banish someone out of my mind. And with him, there is a possibility that I could like him if he's a good character. But his Hans Landa character does irk me. I didn't really watch Inglorious Basterds feeling such disgust for him, but looking back at him and seeing how much love and praise he got for the character... something bothers me. He irks me there.

But I mean... couldn't it be okay if a person plays a character and makes him or her so horrible that it makes you hate everything about that character, including the actor portraying him? Couldn't that be a sign of something being done well? Note that I have never actually really criticized Waltz's abilities -- I've just said that I don't like the performance and that, yes, I prefer something else. But I'm not really saying he's bad.

What if really hating something was a sign of a good job done? Why does it always have to be about love and jolliness? "Oh, that Christoph Waltz! HAHAHAHAHA! He so funny. He's so bad and I LOVE IT!"

Why love it?

Maybe I am the only one who can truly realize Christoph Waltz's role since I didn't like it. Everyone else is scared of him -- that's why you laugh and love him. You are being submissive to his great harshness and darkness. You're like dogs that just roll over and say, "Okay. I cannot defeat you. Kill me if you must, but I submit to you. You win."

You guys are nothing but Christoph Waltz's bitches.

Or we just think he's a really good actor.

Drink this and then I'll give you a treat.

So I saw Silver Linings Playbook. Robert De Niro was your typical old man Robert De Niro. Robert De Niro is still a hell of a lot better than Christoph Waltz, though.

Guilt? There's no need for guilt. Martin Landau gave a better and more difficult performance in Ed Wood, than Jackson in Pulp Fiction.

I think Leonardo DiCaprio was snubbed (big time) by the way. The oscar will probably go to Hoffman now.

Jackson should have been nominated for and won Best Actor for Pulp Fiction while Landau certainly deserved Best Supporting for Ed Wood.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page