Spotlight on... Best Actor (1/7/2008)

Moving on with our detailed rankings, today a look at the race for Best Actor. I posted quite a bit for each picture yesterday, so today's writeups will probably be a bit shorter. Anyway, to the rankings:

1. Sean Penn, Milk
In a normal year Sean Penn would be running away with this. He's beloved by the Academy, plays a biographical role, and goes outside of his "comfort zone" in it--a sure shoe-in. However, despite this year's accepted lack of film greatness, fantastic acting hasn't been in short supply. So, while I think Penn's probably running slightly ahead at this point, it's really anybody's race. True, Penn is has won the most precursors so far (ten, including LAFCA and NYFCC), but he just won a few years ago for Mystic River. Is the Academy going to reward him so soon after, when they know he's capable of similar performances in the future? Perhaps not, and that seems to be the major stumbling block for Penn's chances. Well, that and the fact that Penn has taken to "pallin' around" with such notable luminaries as the Castro brothers and Hugo Chavez--something to which the Academy probably doesn't take kindly.

Anyway, while Rourke (and, to a lesser degree, Langella) probably won't repeat their acting successes anytime soon, Penn certainly will. There will be plenty of chances to reward him in the future--why take this honor away from Rourke? Still, that's mostly a superficial criticism, and it's not clear if the Academy would actually act on that instinct. If Penn's performance is the best of the year, as many say it is, doesn't he deserve the statue? Probably, but who's to say? The Golden Globes should set a definite frontrunner, as most of the probably Oscar nominees are all nominated for Best Actor (Drama) at the Globes and, perhaps even more importantly, the SAG Awards. They have a good predicative history--so perhaps this race can't really be handicapped until they each weigh in.

2. Mickey Rourke, The Wrestler
Having not yet seen this film, I can't comment on whether Rourke deserves all the praise that's been heaped upon him, but the critics seem to think so. In many ways, the "resurrection" theme of The Wrestler runs parallel to Rourke's own acting career--something that will both help and hurt him. In terms of the pros, everybody loves an underdog story. And if Rourke returning to the world of film and winning an Oscar isn't an "underdog story," then what is? After his breakthrough role in 1982's Diner, all his acting promise seemed unfulfilled... until now. However, his relative lack of action in the meanwhile could end up hurting him. The Academy is usually a merit-based society, so you really have to earn your Oscar worthiness. Rourke's performance may well be the best of the year, but after so many years of disrespect towards the field 0f acting, can he just waltz back on the scene and take an Oscar? Many of the stodgier voters will probably say no--but then again, they will probably be voting for Frank Langella anyway. Like with Penn, the upcoming Globes and SAG Awards should shed some much-needed light on the race as it stands, but all that's known right now is that Rourke's #2 could just as easily be #1.

3. Frank Langella, Frost/Nixon
My editorializing about the film aside, there seems to be no role more overhyped this year than Frank Langella's Richard Nixon. He hasn't won many precursors, the film hasn't been a box office success, and besides--he just played this same role on Broadway two years ago. Yet he won a Tony for his performance then, so wouldn't the next logical step be an Oscar? The problem is that Langella doesn't offer much of a unique spin on his role. It seems the only way he wins is if the younger voters split between Penn and Rourke, leaving a plurality of the older voters to vote for Langella. They won't identify with films about Harvey Milk or a wayward wrestler, but Richard Nixon? That's their bread and butter. Langella has remained in the top three for pretty much all of Oscar season, and there's no real danger of him losing that precious spot. But he can't really rely on the vote-splitting strategy; it's too risky, and doesn't it even do his role a disservice? Universal's campaign on his behalf has been strong, but he needs to start showing some precursor clout. Without that, he'll probably be stuck in the #3 rut right through February 22nd.

4. Richard Jenkins, The Visitor
For a largely unknown actor in a film that came out last April, Richard Jenkins' rise to an assumed nomination has been nothing short of miraculous. He's even gotten some precursor love, and is nominated right along with the Penn-Rourke-Langella troika for Best Actor at the SAG Awards, though not at the Golden Globes. But, even if he does end up getting nominated--which is pretty likely--there's no real chance he walks away with the statue. The strength of this year's field is so top-heavy, that anybody outside the big three won't really have a chance to get in. There are some years in which the assumed greatness is kind of spread out over five or six performances (of which only five can obviously get nominated), however this isn't one of those years. Jenkins would probably have an oustide shot if that were the case; but unless there's some major vote-splitting, with Jenkins as a de facto consensus nominee, he'll probably be lucky just to be nominated--however not even that is a foregone conclusion.

5. Brad Pitt, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
What does Brad Pitt have to do to get an Oscar nomination? You would think that one of the acting world's biggest stars would be rife with Academy glory by now, but he only has one Supporting Actor nomination to his name--and that's it. This film, however, could change that. By taking on a more serious role than his norm, Pitt has proven he's maturing, something the Academy will surely like. Being the leading actor in a film which is a sure Best Picture nominee also doesn't hurt, but that too is a new field for Pitt. Many feel that he was unfairly snubbed for The Assassination of Jesse James last year, so this nomination could be a way of making up for that. However, Pitt spends much of Button CGI'ed up--so while he himself is on screen for most of the film, his natural self doesn't appear for the first hour. It's still Pitt acting, but the more traditional voters probably won't quite see it as obviously as that. He probably deserves this spot, but the lack of competition in the top three nominations make a free-for-all in the final two a reality that probably doesn't suit Pitt well. Still, his film has done better than DiCaprio or Eastwood's, and he has gotten nominated for both the SAGs and the Globes, so he does stand as as strong of a 5th place contender as one can be.

#6-10:

6. Leonardo DiCaprio, Revolutionary Road
As I opined yesterday, this is the film that should be sweeping all the categories--however, with this one as an exception. It certainly doesn't help Leo's chances that this film is the big disappointment of the season, but that doesn't change the fact that he's one of the most promising young actors around. He was nominated in 2004 for The Aviator and in 2006 for Blood Diamond, and his meaty role this time around should be carrying him to a nomination and a win, but the field is much too strong for that. It wouldn't be surprising at all to see him nominated again, but that's all that would happen--a win just doesn't seem to be in the cards.

7. Clint Eastwood, Gran Torino
After a win at the National Board of Review, Clint's stock surged. However, since then, he has fallen off a bit--mostly thanks to (again) the strength of the top three, combined with the lackluster response to his film. He's freakin' Clint Eastwood, so a nomination isn't out of the question at all. And while he may be a Best Picture/Director Oscar god, he's never won an acting award, and that would certainly be a nice way to help cap off his career. But in any case, it would have been nice to see him collect some precursors after the NBR--which was a whole month ago.

8. Dustin Hoffman, Last Chance Harvey
He's been nominated seven times--winning twice--however hasn't been treated to a nomination since 1995, for Wag the Dog. While his performance this time around has been well received, the film itself has made little impact. However, he has the Golden Globes Best Actor (Musical or Comedy) category all to himself, so a win wouldn't mean he's better liked than any of the six above names, but it would indicate at least some approval of his role. In the end, while a nomination would be a nice story, it probably isn't going to happen. Still, it's Dustin Hoffman, and it has been a while....

9. Josh Brolin, W.
The only cast member of No Country For Old Men to go completely unnoticed by everybody and their dog, many people feel that Brolin deserves some belated recognition for that performance. However, that acknowledgement will more likely than not come in the form of a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Milk. While Brolin's role as our embattled presidnt was well received, the film was not, and its October release date ensured it would be swallowed by both the early release "indie" films and the late release big studio films. Don't count on this one happening.

10. Benicio del Toro, Che
What in God's name happened with this film? Touted to be the biopic of the year, its ever-changing release date, unwieldy length, and eventual limited release to a total of about five people doomed it. I'm sure del Toro was very good in his role, but his film's complete lack of buzz put this one in the "woulda, coulda, shoulda" category. The fact that he won't be nominated isn't a reflection of his performance, but rather a reflection of the film's enthusiasm (or lack thereof).

Tomorrow the DGAs... and Best Director (with a possibly Best Picture update if something truly shocking happens)!