Oscar's Best Actor (2009)

Here are the Academy Award nominees for Best Actor: Richard Jenkins (The Visitor), Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon), Sean Penn (MILK), Brad Pitt (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler). Who do you think will win? Who do you want to win? Who was snubbed this year? Vote and discuss.

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

Mickey Rourke of course!

__________________
"A candy colored clown!"
Member since Fall 2002
Top 100 Films, clicky below

http://www.movieforums.com/community...ad.php?t=26201

This is one of the only categories they got right this year and, really, it would've been tough to screw this one up. Two very good performances in Jenkins and Pitt and then three amazing performances from Rourke, Langella and Penn. I'm just hoping one of those latter three win it but I guess I'm kinda sorta rooting for Langella. Right now, I'd guess he'd take it.

No real snubs for me, but others who could've made the cut in my mind were Leo in Rev Road, Brolin in W, RDJ in Iron Man, Colin Farrell in In Bruges, James Franco in Pineapple Express and Michael Sheen in Frost/Nixon

James Franco in Pineapple Express... high-larious. I'm thinking I may have to take back some of those nice things I was saying about you Mr. Swede.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

Lame as they are, at least the Golden Globes reward comedic performances. Most actors seem to think comedy is tougher to pull off than stuffy melodrama anyway and James Franco really was high-larious in that movie. I'd gladly knock off Pitt or Jenkins here if I was guaranteed Daniel Desario would take their place. Probably not gonna happen, though.

Mickey Rourke's my favorite to win this, I've said this for a while now. But as far as who got snubbed. Leo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road. I've said the same about Michael Shannon in the same flix. But, look at that final scene between him and Shannon. First his face, you can just see it boiling up, then finally he just explodes into rage. Then go from a huge fight with Kate Winslett to a eerily quiet breakfast like nothing ever happened. The more I think about it, the more I think, the more I say f*ck you Oscars. (ignore the funny-looking-ness of this. He's angry!)

__________________
I used to be addicted to crystal meth, now I'm just addicted to Breaking Bad.

Dude, maybe it was just me, but to me Franco in Pineapple Express was the best performance by a leading actor all year. It's just how amazing he did, no matter what anyone says.

DiCaprio was probably my second favorite performance of the year, I haven't seen Milk or The Wrestler yet, and Penn and Rouke seem to be the main ones people are raving about.

Anyways, out of those, I guess I would probably say Pitt for Benjamin Button, even though I think he deserves to be nominated more for Burn After Reading.

Snubbed?

I would love to see Rourke win, but I'm thinking it will be Penn.

Or it could be a surprise and Langella could take it home. My vote still goes to Penn.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

I want Mickey Rourke to win.

__________________
something witty goes here......

I see this as a heart vs head choice and, in those situations, I usually go with my head. This time's no different. I think that Penn will get it. Milk seems to be a 'Hollywood gay' film, like Philadelphia, and I think that, plus the fact that I feel Hollywood still don't trust Rourke yet, will win out over the comeback story.

I think this is a two-horse race, though the second horse may not be the fan favorite.

Brad Pitt is a famous movie star, but as I detailed in THIS thread I think he's a pretty darn good actor, too. The title role in Benjamin Button is not an easy one since because of his unique condition he is mostly a passive observer and constant outsider on his remarkable journey, not giving a lot of emotion to play throughout. But as a star turn I think it's a good one. This is only his second Oscar nomination, the other coming in support of Gilliam's 12 Monkeys a dozen years ago. Since I think he is too often underrated I'm glad he got the nomination at least, but he has no real chance at winning.

I loved The Visitor and thought Richard Jenkins was fantastic at the center of it. I always love to see good character actors get a chance at the lead and his subtle performance and less-than-Brad Pitt looks had me. But while this is great for his career and should lead to other interesting parts of size in indie pics, if he wins the Oscar it will be a huge upset and surprise. He may have a chance at getting past Rourke and Penn at the Independent Spirit Awards, but not the Oscars. But hopefully the attention is causing people who missed The Visitor last year to rent it, which is the real award for the smaller movies when they get big nominations.



Frank Langella has been at this acting thing for quite a while now. Most of his acclaim has come on the stage, not screen, including the original New York and London productions of Frost/Nixon. He had a chance at his first Oscar nomination last year for Starting Out in the Evening though ultimately didn't make the cut. But this year, having just turned seventy-one, he makes his Academy Award debut (at seventy-one he's actually seven years older than Richard M. Nixon was at the time of the interviews with David Frost). The thirty-seventh President of the United States has been portrayed a bunch of times in film over the years and Langella's take on the man is one of the best (though for my money I still think Philip Baker Hall in Altman's Secret Honor is tops). Like the actual interviews themselves, Langella's performance humanizes Tricky Dick a bit without absolving him of his political sins. He wouldn't be the oldest actor to win (Jessica Tandy was eighty when she won for Driving Miss Daisy), but the old fella may just pull it off.



Did you hear Mickey Rourke's performance in The Wrestler is his comeback? It must be true because I've seen about six dozen articles saying as much. As I've detailed in THIS, I have always been a big fan of Mickey's. I think it's criminal (in the awards injustice sense, 'natch!) that he didn't get nominated for Barfly over twenty years ago...back before he self-destructed his own career. Hell, I was pulling for him to get a nod for SIN CITY (his "real" comeback, as far as I'm concerned). The melding of Rourke's own real-life troubles with the character of has-been grappled Randy "The Ram" Robinson and that his body and especially his face show all the abuse both the man and character have endured is what makes The Wrestler what it is. Yes, it's a gritty character piece well made by Aronofsky, but without Rourke in there but instead a Sly Stallone or even Mr. T as the lead, I don't think it has the same kind of power or sadness. Because of Rourke's backstory and the perceived redemption of the critical and awards attention generated by the movie, he has to be seen as one of the favorites, certainly the best story among the acting nominees. But I think he's going to finish third. I think the nomination is all the respect he's going to get from the Academy this time around.

Sean Penn is one of the best actors of his generation. But MILK is only his fifth nomination and four of them came in the past ten years. He didn't finally win one until Mystic River five years ago. His work portraying the slain Harvey Milk is absolutely among his best performances and inhabits the man without a lot of histrionics or stereotypical tricks. It is a moving embodiment of the soul underneath the public persona, the legacy so perfectly detailed in the Oscar-winning documentary The Times of Harvey Milk almost twenty-five years ago and thirty years since Harvey's assassination. It was the right filmmaker in Gus Van Sant at the right time with the right actor. And I think it's all going to add up to Oscar gold again for Sean.

Langella may squeak in if Rourke siphons off enough of the potential Penn votes, but I think it's going to be Sean Penn as Best Actor once again.

As for some of the other performance I thought were terrific this year, Alejandro Polanco in Chop Shop, Philip Seymour Hoffman in Synecdoche, New York, Benicio Del Toro as Che, Jean Dujardin in OSS 177: Cairo, Nest of Spies (saw this on the festival circuit a couple years back but it just got a U.S. release this year), Michael Sheen as the other half of Frost/Nixon, Clint going out as an icon in Gran Torino and Colin Farrell being creeped out by midgets In Bruges.

Rourke is not going to come in third, but your reasoning is sound Holds. I can see it going either way for sure. Is Jenkins your second pick? Or Langella? And I agree, The Visitor is a very solid film that continues to deal with this effed up world we've made for ourselves post 9/11. A must see.

Is there somewhere at the Oscar site or somewhere else that lets everyone see how the voting shook out after the ceremony? That would be an interesting read.

I think it'll go Penn, Langella, Rourke, Jenkins, Pitt.

No, absolutely not. Never has been. Probably never will be.

I think The Academy and Price Waterhouse should open up the numbers after a period of twenty-five years or something. By then the people who finished a close second or a distant fifth won't really be emotionally invested in such labels, and for Oscarfreaks like me it would be endlessly fascinating to see the actual tabulations.

But it'll probably never happen. Not until I'm President of The Academy, anyway.

VOTE HOLDEN

Damn, I didn't think so, but man; would that be fun to pour over for hours and hours! Especially if they detailed who voted for who.

That's one thing I've always appreciated about the Baseball HOF voting. Even though there is at least one writer who's name escapes me at the moment who refuses to vote anyone in on the first ballot on some kind of strange principle, you still know who all the other voters choices were. Always an interesting thing to read. For me anyway.

Anyway, let me know when you make the ballot for prez... I'll vote for ya.

I'm voting Holden here. Despite the fact that we're looking at a possible "job well done" Oscar for Langella, like Alan Arkin two years ago, I don't think the Academy can overlook Penn's Harvey Milk and get away with it. It's just too complete and vibrant by a genuine actor of the heart. I like seeing Mickey Rourke being recognized here, and although I think he's got a marginal chance to steal, it feels too much like a ceremonial nod than a contending nomination.

I've still only seen Langella's performance, so far, but I'd love him to get it if only because he's the best/only reason to see Frost/Nixon.

It helps when they're in good stories. For some reason the Nixon story and Watergate scandal holds no interest for me. Political jerk offs in both parties and it's all really a silly game anyways. I didn't even like All the President's Men. I guess I don't sympathize with the story or the people involved.

Anyway besides that bit of opinion...

I watched The Wrestler on Saturday. I'll post my review tomorrow. Wonderful film though it did have issues.

Rourke of course was delightful in it and I'm hoping he'll get the Oscar. I can't really see Pitt getting it. Penn is good in everything he is in. I haven't seen Milk, but I want to see it.

I do think Rourke is enjoying the renewed attention, and The Wrestler being called his comeback role. At least common sense would say he's enjoying the attention since he's been doing quite a few interviews of late, whether on Letterman or the Today show.

Of course like Holden said his "real" comeback would have been with Sin City several years ago as Marv.

Still he hasn't exactly been gone. He's been in dozens of movies since his hay-day in the 80's, but he just hasn't been getting star billing. Although that doesn't translate to bad roles necessarily. His five minute scene in The Pledge is among the best work of his cinematic career.

I hope he wins it. It'd be nice to see.

And speaking of Rourke, what are some thoughts on his WWE ring appearance come April in Wrestlemania. I've read some articles saying that it might jeopardize his Oscar chances. I know my thoughts on the matter.

I haven't seen any of these movies, but that really doesn't matter in second-guessing the academy's picks because it's more about politics and popularity than talent. Which is why I think Rourke couldn't win even if he were the only nominee--I think he still has a bad rep in Hollywood and made too many enemies who would give the Oscar to Pluto rather than see him get it. Moreover, I think Roarke's looks, the character he plays, and the subject of professional wrestling is just not what Hollywood wants to reward.

Benjamin Button appears to be a popular movie but that sometimes doesn't pay off either. I'm not sure if Hollywood takes Pitt seriously, but again maybe this will be the year they "make it up" with him.

Richard Jenkins is an unknown to me, but there doesn't seem to be any buzz out there about him nor much about the movie. I don't think he'll catch the Academy's interest.

Judging from the TV ads, Langella does a great imitation of Nixon. But back then a lot of folks didn't watch David Frost's interview (a lot did but most didn't) because Frost really was a lightweight as an interviewer with no real news background, and a lot of people were just plain tired of Nixon and Watergate. Folks may still be tired of rehashing Nixon, no matter how well Langella plays him. Plus I think Langella won an award on the New York stage this year, and only one person has ever won both that and an Oscar in the same year, so the odds are against him.

Which leaves Sean Penn, who does have Hollywood's respect, who has won an Oscar before, and who has gotten better and better in recent years at recreating some well-known characters, like the fictional governor modeled on Huey Long in All the King's Men. Broderick Crawford won an Oscar for that role in the original film, but Penn was damn good in the remake. And again, judging from the TV ads, he appears to really get into the character of Milk. So here you have a very good and popular actor with a meaty role as a gay politician involved in a well-known, well-remembered murder. And he's already snagged the SAG award for that role, so Hollywood definitely has its eye on Penn. I think he'll get the Oscar, too.

Of course, I may have it all screwed up--maybe Hollywood will decide to award the older Langella for a lifetime of work. Or maybe it could decide that Pitt has been waiting long enough--and they've read about Clooney razzing him for no Oscar win. Maybe the weirdness of Roarke's looks and the character he plays may intimidate voters. But at this point I think the politics--and talent--will come through for Penn.