Alternate Best Actor 1954: Results

5. Charles Laughton- Charles Laughton has a fairly simple role but he is consistently amusing in his performance.

4. James Stewart in Rear Window- Stewart manages to provide a realistic portrait who we can easily go along through the sometimes quite seedy world of being a voyeur.

3. James Mason 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea- Mason gives a great performance of an iconic character by always bringing to life both the wondrous qualities to his portrayal in equal measure with his more violent aspects.

2. Toshiro Mifune in Seven Samurai- Mifune gives a very big but also a very striking performance of a swordsman driven mad by his past.

1. Ray Milland in Dial M For Murder- Again another strong year with four great performances the academy foolishly ignored. Although it was fairly easily to know Brando would still be first it was again difficult to choose the number one out of these four. I give it to Milland though who gives a strong performance by both bringing to life the fierce some hidden motivation of his murderer, but as well as easily adding an appropriate degree of humor in the role as well.

Overall Rank:

1. Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront
2. Ray Milland in Dial M For Murder
3. Toshiro Mifune in Seven Samurai
4. James Mason in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
5. James Stewart in Rear Window
6. James Mason in A Star is Born
7. Bing Crosby in The Country Girl
8. Kirk Douglas in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea 
9. Dan O'Herlihy in Robinson Crusoe
10. Takashi Shimura in Seven Samurai
11. Charles Laughton in Hobson's Choice
12. Humphrey Bogart in The Caine Mutiny
13. John Mills in Hobson's Choice
14. Paul Lukas in 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea
15. Gene Kelly in Brigadoon
16. Bing Crosby in White Christmas
17. Danny Kaye in White Christmas
18. Robert Francis in The Caine Mutiny

Next Year: 1937

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1954: James Mason in 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea

James Mason did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is a pretty entertaining rendition of the Jules Verne novel about three men who end up on a submarine which has been destroying ships for some time and is at first believed to be a monster.

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is unique for a Disney live action film for the time with its several high profile actors of the time appearing in it such Paul Lukas as the inquisitive professor Arounax, a charming and enjoyable Kirk Douglas as the harpooner Ned Land, as well as a very likable Peter Lorre in a very unPeter Lorre like role as the Professor's assistant. The most important of all though is James Mason as the Captain of the underwater submarine Nautilus who seems to be clearly as brilliant as they come, but the only problem is he might also be just about as mad as they come as well.

Live action Disney films certainly can have some hokey acting just watch Maurice Chevalier's performance in In Search of the Castaways for evidence of that, this is one film though where there is none of that certainly not in the lead performance of Nemo by Mason. James Mason is easily one of my favorite actors and one of the reasons why is he almost always seems to put his all in his performance no matter what the film he showed in his more Oscar favorable fair with his nominated performance in A Star is Born, yes and I do know that this film in fact won more Oscars than that one but I mean in terms of Oscar favored acting, and he shows the same conviction in this performance.

James Mason makes a great impression of the very first scenes where Captain Nemo appears. Mason with an absolute ease conveys the mystery of the character. Mason unique extremely refined persona and voice is perfect for Nemo. Although it is rather easy to argue that Nemo is the villain of the film, Mason never does portray him for a moment as one. Mason actually delves deeper into the character always trying to bring to life the motivation of the man rather than just his actions as a lesser performance might have done. Mason always makes Nemo a man rather than a monster.

Mason makes Nemo into a fascinating anomaly of a man. In the way he speaks about his discoveries and his knowledge about technology that can only be fathomed at best by others at the time. Mason is excellent in conveying the wondrous nature of Nemo's own mind and that he is very much a man of discovery. There though at the same time is an undercurrent of menace, the sort of menace only James Mason could convey so quietly yet so effectively. Mason is able to even in his moments of speaking about his vast accomplishments, is able to bring to life so well the darker undercurrent behind the character.

The dark undercurrent is of course his own origin which involved death and brutal torture in his past. Mason especially excels here as he shows the incredible hate that is always weighing on Nemo's mind. It is really this hate for the inhumanity of man. Mason effectively portrays it as something that Nemo merely cannot shake, by creating a haunting quality within his performance that conveys that Nemo never can forget what has happened to him, and it is that drives his violent passions behind his current mission. Mason never makes this anger a simple evil, but actually a very humanizing element to Nemo.

In the most pivotal moments really of his performance Mason is able to bring to life perfectly the drive that creates the hate in Nemo. Although most of the time it is, as I said, something that is always a part of him but not something he likes to dwell on too much that is except for one scene where Nemo crashes purposefully through a ship from the country that had previously enslaved him. Mason is excellent here as he in a silent scene for Nemo shows the full extent of bitterness in Nemo. It is a striking moment for Mason because all of the proper gentlemanly aspect of Nemo goes away for a moment, and we see the true humanity in Nemo through his anger.

I should also really say that Mason also gives a very entertaining performance that goes hand in hand with his surprisingly character driven performance. Mason is always an extremely likable actor, and it really is just a joy to watch him particularly in a few of the smaller scenes of conversation. Mason here has again a great wit in the role that is extremely well utilized. He of course never hammers it in or very tries to be funny when it is not required. In fact Mason never really appears like he really is trying to be funny, Mason though is able to be humorous in just the right moments of this performance that never once compromise the heavier moments in his performance.

This is a truly great performance by James Mason that is able to bring to life every aspect of the character to the screen, and I must imagine do far more with the role than perhaps the filmmakers even expected. I have to say that I find he is even better here than even in his strong work in his Oscar nominated role from this year. Mason is simple incredible and just fascinating in every one of his scenes in this film. He is able to take an iconic character like Captain Nemo and basically create his very own form of that icon through his performance. In what easily could have been a corny performance, Mason once again shows his strength of an actor by seeming to make the most out of any role he is given.

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1954

And the Nominees Were Not:

James Mason in 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea

Charles Laughton in Hobson's Choice

Ray Milland in Dial M For Murder

James Stewart in Rear Window

Toshiro Mifune in Seven Samurai

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1966: Results

5. Mako in The Sand Pebbles- Mako gives a good realistic performance. His role is limited, and his character is frankly cut off just when he is becoming interesting.

4. James Mason in Georgy Girl- Mason although has a thankless role in many ways gives a charming, and dryly comic performance, that manages to turn his character into an actual man and not just a creep as he easily could have been.

3. Robert Shaw in A Man For All Seasons- If I was giving the award to my favorite actor Shaw would take this, with close competition from Mason. Nevertheless Shaw gives a strong performance in only two scenes realizing Henry VIII's distinct personality marvelously.

2. George Segal in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?- Segal has an extremely thankless role especially compared to the flashiness of the performances around him, but Segal stays true to his part and creates an effective realistic portrait of a man in the strange situation of the film.

1. Walter Matthau in The Fortune Cookie- Walter Matthau stands on top for this with his consistently hilarious performance. Matthau never wastes a moment as his shyster lawyer deriving comedy from every facet of his character and makes the film.

Deserving Performances:
Richard Attenborough in The Sand Pebbles
Richard Crenna in The Sand Pebbles
Lee Van Cleef in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
John Hurt in A Man for All Seasons

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1966: James Mason in Georgy Girl

James Mason received his second Oscar nomination for portraying James Leamington in Georgy Girl.

Georgy Girl is about a young woman Georgy (Lynn Redgrave) who tries to avoid the romantic intentions of her father's employer as well as be part of the swinging life of her selfish roommate (Charlotte Rampling).

James Mason is one actor I have yet to see a performance by him that I did not like. Mason perhaps since he took almost any role he was offered genuinely loved acting, and maybe it is that joy of performance that comes through in his performances aids in this. Mason just has a unique charming presence, and something wonderful I find about him is that despite the fact he is well spoken especially classy this could easily come off as just acting superior, but Mason always has a certain likability which works perfectly for his performance as James Leamington in Georgy Girl.

James Leamington is a rich man who constantly is trying to convince his employee's daughter, who he has supported and believes she owes him, to become his mistress. Leamington certainly as written is very much a creep especially sense he considers Georgy almost as a daughter before he wishes to have a relationship with her. Mason though with his unique style some how manages avoid this and some how manages to make Leamington likable. Mason manages to show that, even in his scenes where he is upset with Georgy, that his character really has an honest enthusiasm love for her, and even more importantly he never forgets to find the humor in his character.

Mason never lets a moment slip to bring in a little dry humor into his portrayal. There is something almost endearing about Leamington simply because of the way Mason always pokes fun at his character. Mason though is perfect at this because he never winks toward the audience in any way he is invested in his character at all times, yet he finds just the right way to make fun of him at the same time. He is always very serious in all his scene, yet he stays so serious throughout everything it is actually quite funny. This is especially true when he offers his affair agreement to Georgy. He takes such a business like approach to the whole affair that i could be taken as excessively cold, but Mason brings humor to the scene because he never once shows that Leamington has the slightest sense of what he is doing and how he is doing it.

Mason's part though mostly are these short scenes of repetition with Leamington always looking for Georgy even though she is trying her best to avoid him. Later in the film though he does have a dramatic moment. The moment actually comes a little out of nowhere, but it does force Leamington to face the effects of his strange decisions. The scene is rather quick, but Mason nails it. His reaction could not be a better reaction of complete shock, as well as some grief. Yet magically Mason still even has a bit of humor in this scene as his surprised look still suggests his character naivety, as Mason's face seems to suggest that Leamington only just realized that anyone even really existed in his world beside him.

Mason only real problem is the fact that the film does not really care much for his character in the least. He is only a side character at first, and that he almost seems dispensable later on in the film when the film becomes far far more interested in Georgy's dealing with her roommate and her boyfriend. If it weren't for the ending one would wonder why it continued to cut to Leamington during the latter half of the film. Mason is always good, his best scene comes from this cutaway, but the way the film is set up it makes his character almost seem superfluous. The reason for Leamington comes in the end though in a quick scene where fulfills his role in the story. Mason is good in the very short final scene as he shows a changed man, sort of. Mason does convey enough that Leamington seems to have finally seen a way not to be completely selfish, it is quick change but naturally handled by Mason.

This is actually technically speaking a very good performance by Mason it could have been an utter failure in so many ways, but Mason does find the right way to portray the part to make the character of Leamington work, as well as actually make the ending sort of work. If Leamington had been portrayed completely without humor he would have been an awful character, and would have hurt the film and certainly would have ruined the ending. Luckily Mason does not fail with the part, and even though it is far from his greatest performance it is a challenged fulfilled.

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1966

And the Nominees Were:

Robert Shaw in A Man For All Seasons

James Mason in Georgy Girl

Walter Matthau in The Fortune Cookie

George Segal in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Mako in The Sand Pebbles

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1982: Results

5. Charles Durning in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas- Durning although may be the best part of the film, still does not make a particularly substantial impact with his small amount of screentime, that is mostly made up of a very unspectacular musical number.

4. Robert Preston in Victor Victoria- Preston gives a standard Preston performance which most certainly is charming but also not particularly special. It is not even the best case of Preston doing Preston.

3. Lou Gossett, Jr. in An Officer and A Gentleman- Gossett is convincing and capable as an intense drill Sergeant, he also is very good in inserting subtle indications of the more humane characterizations of the man.

2. John Lithgow in The World According to Garp- John Lithgow never overacts in his role as a transsexual and instead gives a nicely heartfelt performance.

1.James Mason in The Verdict- This win easily goes to James Mason who thoroughly proves his strength as an actor in the role of the ace attorney in this film. He gives an excellent quietly dominating performance that creating the perfect sort of adversary in the film.

Deserving Performances:
Rutger Hauer in Blade Runner
Charles Durning in Tootsie

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1982: James Mason in The Verdict

James Mason received his third and final Oscar nomination for portraying Ed Concannon in The Verdict.

In the supporting actor category Mason was not the first actor to be nominated for portraying an the adversary attorney in a court room drama as George C. Scott was also nominated for a similar role in 1959 for Anatomy of a Murder a performance that earned my win for that particular year. What I like is to see these two talented actors taken such different approaches to what are very similar character in that they are both there just to win their case, there really is not a personal life mentioned or anything else, yet they still managed to be Oscar nominated.

Well it is most certainly true that one can be nominated for an entirely unimpressive and unsubstantial performance, Mason though as with  Scott managed to show how a great actor can make the most out of just about any sort of role if they actually bother to try. It is just interesting to look at the differences and similarities between Scott and Mason in the ways they both managed to succeed in their roles, and make a substantial impact in their film despite the technical limitations of their part.

Where Scott was more demanding, and intense as his prosecutor, Mason portrays his slick attorney as a relatively quite man but one who like Scott's character is absolutely always in control of his situation. Mason though always presents Ed Concannon as an always prepared man who examines every situation so he doesn't need to get loud or angry, he is in charge because he has determined that he is in charge. Mason always shows with cold efficiency that there is a calculated procedure Concannon takes to everything involved with a case.

Mason has such a great ease in his performance that it makes him a more than just a rival to Paul Newman's Frank Galvin, but in fact makes him seem like his legal superior. Mason for most of the film has complete control in his scenes, and so calmly lays down plan and actions in every scene with just the right degree of  smug superiority. Mason never shows Concannon to be an idiot when it comes to his superior manner and tone, but rather something he has earned his right to use from his long standing history as a lawyer.

Mason is particularly excellent in his scenes of cross examination, since he really does not have a harsh intense attitude, but rather is always polite, even though Mason shows almost a fiendish quality in this calm approach that through his slowly but eloquently put questions he is always carefully tearing into them. I particularly like when Concannon basically harasses a witness, and accuses her of lying, yet he does it with such calm reserve he actually seems even more piercing because of this.

Mason is terrific in every moment he needs to show just how smart, and effective Ed Concannon is creating an almost overwhelming obstacle for Galvin to fight, but my favorite moment in his performance is when he is at a loss for words in a single scene. Mason's reaction is absolutely perfect when Concannon finally is truly surprised by something he hadn't planned for, and Mason shows a vulnerability in this single scene where it Concannon can barely understand that there something has occurred that he has not planned for, simply a terrific moment that perfectly shows a sign of weakness in Concannon.

This is a great performance by Mason who takes what he has an makes the absolute most of it. It would have been very easy to actually have had Concannon be an nonentity in the film, but instead just like George C. Scott in Anatomy of Murder he turns Concannon into a formidable court room villain. His performance here puts to shame other performances that just settle in their roles and never attempt bring more life to the part. This is a brilliant realization of what an actor can do with a character even when the character is limited.

Read More

Best Supporting Actor 1982

And the Nominees Were:

James Mason in The Verdict

Robert Preston in Victor Victoria

Lou Gossett Jr. in An Officer and A Gentleman

Charles Durning in The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas

John Lithgow in The World According to Garp

Read More