Alternate Best Actor 1960: Albert Finney in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning

Albert Finney did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Arthur Seaton in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning.

Saturday Night and Sunday Morning is an interesting character piece about a rebellious working class man who is having an affair with an married woman (Rachel Roberts), and at the same is beginning one with a younger woman (Shirley Anne Field).

The British kitchen sink dramas as they were known commonly feature a very particularly blunt black and white cinematography, and a man with rather unsavory qualities as a protagonist. To go along with the protagonist is usually quite a strong central performance by an actor such as Richard Harris's strong work in This Sporting Life, or Laurence Olivier's outstanding performance in The Entertainer. Albert Finney's performance is very much in the same vein in terms of style, as Arthur Seaton with many unsavory qualities, and is portrayed by Finney very effectively. 

Finney's Seaton is an angry young factory worker. Finney does not of course portray this as some sort of direct venom filled anger toward anyone in particular. There is a particular distaste for so many things around him particularly his boss, and his father that is well played by Finney. Finney makes it as basically as not something that Arthur is constantly going on about by any means. Finney though is very striking in though in the moments that Arthur brings about the hate in his eyes over the people he has no respect for like his father who he believes to be dead from the neck up.

Albert Finney has a powerful raw quality to his performance as this young man who in a certain way seems aimless. Yes he does indeed have prospects of a future it seems, but Finney makes it clear that there is no desire to really go on them. When he is working Finney portrays it as merely what must be done for Seaton to do what he wants. He shows no desire, or fervor in Arthur when he is working, only a distinct lack of respect for his boss. Finney is abashed in that Arthur has no cares for his job other than just the money it provides, which he would like more of, but that is not something he would ever stop hating his boss for.

When not at work or in his parent's home or at work Arthur enjoys the night life, although enjoy might not be the absolutely best word. Finney is good because he is not overbearing in the least in terms of the strong discontent in Arthur, and he is effective in actually showing really that there really does not seem to be an especially obvious solution to his problem. Finney is very good in showing a frustration within this man that never come off as him being smug, or even cruel, but rather he portrays it almost as like a troublesome itch. It is something that bothers the man, but he can't get rid of it because he does not know how.

After all the time he spends enjoying himself does not seem to rid himself of the itch, as there is always that slightly bothered feeling underlying Finney's performance. Also in his scenes with Rachel Roberts where Arthur takes part in an affair with an older married woman, but you'd still be hard pressed to find a moment where he is enjoying himself all that much. Finney has Seaton be a man who goes with this woman and has an affair with her seemingly just because why not. It is not that Finney portrays it like Arthur is this empty man, but in fact he quite effectively shows him to be a lively man seeking for joys from what he can, it just happens not to be all that much of joy in it.

Finney is excellent here becuase it is not as if Arthur is some sort of separate man from what he does and has no attachment, he does have attachment, but Finney brilliantly is able to bring a certain life to the character that always suggests a selfish youth in him. When she becomes pregnant, Finney is terrific in portraying Arthur's reaction to it. He most certainly is effective as he pulls right into the conversation constantly pushing the credits to end the pregnancy, very concerned only for his own problems that would come from it. Finney portrays his reaction as completely selfish although he really is fantastic because he makes Arthur not seem nearly as despicable as he really is.

One thing very important to the whole of Finney's  performance that makes it work as well as it does is his charisma he has in the role no matter what the situation. He makes Arthur into a fun loving man, that even with all his frustrations still remains a charming person in his own way. He is actually completely believable in his abilities to keep on good terms with both of the women he knows romantically, as well as so many of the other people around him. Finney brings us in right through Arthur's journey effectively never boring us for a moment.

Finney rejects the notion that a character change must be obviously portrayed by any means. Arthur's affair leads him to being severely beaten, but his relationship with the non married younger woman seems a bit more promising to him. Finney is good here becuase he does leave the results of Arthur's experience appropriately ambiguous, and rightly stresses the fact that Arthur's lack of experience as a man leaves him somewhat befuddled. The anger seems gone to a degree but not so much the frustrations. It is perhaps a lesson partially learned, and Finney makes far more meaningful by  keeping the change in Arthur subtle. This is a strong performance by Albert Finney, and a very notable early indicator of his talent as an actor.

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1960: Max von Sydow in The Virgin Spring

Max von Sydow did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Tore in The Virgin Spring.

The Virgin Spring tells the story of a prosperous man who avenges his daughter after her murder and rape at the hands of a group of herdsman.

Max von Sydow portrays the prosperous man who actually has a very simple role for about two thirds of the film. In the scenes before his daughter is murdered von Sydow is only briefly in the film. He is properly stoic as the patriarch of the household. In his manner at the table he shows a certain low key power as the head of the table. He also has one brief but important scene with his daughter. Sydow is effective in this in just portraying a warm but genuine relations between Tore and his daughter that properly establishes his love for his daughter that brings about his actions later on.

Sydow appears very little during the middle portion of the film. When he is on screen he keeps up the same strong presence, and he is entirely appropriate in his performance. He stays that way until he learns of the fate of his daughter which leads him to seek revenge. Sydow's first reaction of Tore's finding out about exactly what happened to his daughter is very effectively portrayed. It is rather fast, and Sydow handles it well by showing the emotions of despair quickly reigning on him, but portrays it along with a drive in Tore for vengeance.

Sydow portrays Tore's vengeance as something quite efficient. Sydow makes it a passionate moment for Tore even though it is rather quietly handled passion actually. The hatred, and anger toward the three people who were involved with act is embedded into Sydow's face, but he keeps it very much focused as Tore's goal never becomes forgotten for a moment. When Tore does murder all three of the them Sydow's gives it a certain efficiency. There is not a hint of hesitation in Sydow during the attack, he goes about one by one never giving a second thought for a moment. Sydow becuase of the lack of hesitation makes it a particularly brutal scene.

After the killing though Sydow finally shows Tore realizing his actions, as he simultaneously grieves over his daughter as well as is pained to a certain degree over his killing of the men. In his final scene where he simultaneously tries to make peace with God over having killed the men, but as well hates toward God over allowing the original act to happen, Sydow is quite powerful. He is able to still fairly quietly convey the complex internal struggle in this man, and movingly shows the deep hurt within the man over his horrendous experience.

This is not the most complex performance ever given by Max von Sydow, and his screen time is fairly limited as he only comes into the lead role for the final third of the film, but it certainly is a strong early work from him. He fully realizes his character the warm patriarch and father, and it is because of this that he is able to really give the appropriate impact to the scenes of vengeance. It is a very specific performance that effectively does the most with his role.

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1960

And the Nominees Were Not:

Robert Mitchum in The Sundowners

Albert Finney in Saturday Night and Sunday Morning 

Anthony Perkins in Psycho

Marcello Mastroianni in La Dolce Vita

Max von Sydow in The Virgin Spring

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1984: Results

5. Eddie Murphy in Beverly Hills Cop- Murphy is funny in his funny scene but quite lacking in his dramatic scenes.

4. Steve Martin in All of Me- Martin gives an enjoyable performance as at first a straight man, than later very  entertainingly as a man with another person sharing his body.

3. Philip Baker Hall in Secret Honor- Hall shows how one should portray Nixon in his effective performance that makes for an outstanding one man show.

2. Robert De Niro in Once Upon a Time in America- De Niro carries this epic by powerfully portraying both the violent youth, and the haunted age of a career criminal.

1. Harry Dean Stanton in Paris, Texas- Harry Dean Stanton gives a great subtle performance as a man trying to rebuild himself. It is a quiet but deeply moving performance that shows his abilities as an actor goes far beyond the usual small parts he is given.

Overall Rank:

1. F. Murray Abraham in Amadeus
2. Haing S. Ngor in The Killing Fields
3. Harry Dean Stanton in Paris, Texas
4. Robert De Niro in Once Upon a Time in America
5. Philip Baker Hall in Secret Honor
6. Tom Hulce in Amadeus
7. Steve Martin in All of Me
8. Bill Murray in Ghostbusters
9. John Hurt in 1984
10. Albert Finney in Under the Volcano 
11. Sam Waterson in The Killing Fields
12. Christopher Guest in This is Spinal Tap 
13. Victor Banerjee in A Passage to India
14. Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom 
15. Anthony Hopkins in The Bounty
16. Michael McKean in This is Spinal Tap 
17. Ralph Macchio in The Karate Kid
18. Michael Biehn in The Terminator 
19. Matt Dillon in The Flamingo Kid
20. Mel Gibson in The Bounty
21. Eddie Murphy in Beverly Hills Cop
22. Howard E. Rollins in A Soldier's Story 
23. Lance Guest in The Last Starfigher 
24. William Shatner in Star Trek III 
25. Arnold Schwarzenegger in The Terminator 
26. Christopher Lambert in Greystoke 
27. Zach Galligan in Gremlins
28. Jeff Bridges in Star Man

Next Year: 1960

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1984: Robert De Niro in Once Upon a Time in America

Robert De Niro did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying David "Noodles" Aaronson Once Upon a Time in America.

Once Upon a Time in America is a great film about a the journey of a group of friends who go from young thugs, to bootlegging kingpins, and eventually meet their ends.

Robert De Niro portrays the lead of the small group of kids and later men who slowly rise the ranks in a bootlegging operation during Prohibition in New York City. De Niro was not nominated here even though he certainly is a very popular actor with the academy having won twice and being nominated many times before and after this performance. This film though was unable to get a single nomination. This is probably due to the fact that it was a box office flop, as well there was a bit of a controversy over the short version which apparently was very poorly edited into a mess of the film.

De Niro is no stranger to gangster roles, and as he did in The Godfather Part II and later in Goodfellas he shows prowess in this role as Noodles. De Niro in the scenes that take place after Noodles is released from prison and he joins his friends to rise not only in the organization but as well in the power structure of the city portrays the part of Noodles very much to the point most of the time. De Niro makes it clear that Noodles is very very ready to be a gangster to the fullest extent and does not have any qualms about pushing right forward with his friends to the top no matter what it takes.

De Niro as usual has a certain suaveness in the role. He does not overplay though as there are certain scenes which would contradict the rest of his characterization. De Niro though effectively shows that Noodles is a competent capable man right for his time and place. In these earlier scenes there is always a certainty within De Niro though expresses well the passion behind Noodles that pushes himself and his friends forward in the underworld without much hesitation. He presents Noodles as a skillful and capable gangster as he pushes through the film.

There is something that De Niro does not avoid in this performance though, which is muck of being the criminal. De Niro is very blunt in his performance in this regard. There is not any hesitation shown in Noodles whether he is killing a man, committing any sort of horrible violent, and to some degree even raping women. De Niro makes it clear that Noodles is very much into his amorality. It frankly would have been easy to try to gain more sympathy, but De Niro does this instead giving what is probably a far realistic portrait of a gangster. This does not mean that he portrays Noodles one dimensionally though.

There is some sort of conscious that De Niro puts in just the right glint that he brings into his performance. This never stops him from committing any of his acts of violence though, instead De Niro is able suggest only that Noodles does think about his actions at times, after the fact not before, particularly in the scene where he rapes his old sweetheart. De Niro is good becuase he does not go and just show Noodles to be guilt stricken, Noodles is still very much into his behavior as a career mobster, but he effectively does portray just the smallest speck of regret in his acts, only the smallest though, although this works well with another part of his performance.

This hint of his morality comes in a far deeper fashion in the scenes that take place after Noodles returns to town after having informer to the police on his friends, seeming like he needs to settle some of score although he is quite unaware of what that is. De Niro is very strong in these scenes showing a very changed man in Noodles. He is a different man, and De Niro effectively shows that that small bit of morality has grown on him turning him into a far more somber man than before. De Niro crates a moving portrait of this aged gangster who violent history is far behind him, and he is only left to reflect on the mistakes that he had once made.

These scenes later in Noodles life De Niro is very very quiet in them and reflect well the haunted feeling he has over his past actions. De Niro very best scene is when he confronts an old friend, and it is a particularly powerful moment. There would have been many ways to portray the scene as it could have been far more anger filled, or anguish filled. Instead De Niro leaves a much stronger impact by showing that any feelings like that are far past Noodles. It is a heartbreaking scene because De Niro only shows Noodles as really understanding what has happened more than anything else. He truly presents a grown and properly sorrowful poignant portrayal of this man.

I suppose I should mention that this film does not portray the three time section of Noodles's life in chronological order. It jumps around between the segments therefore De Niro is shown to be instantly in the two roles of the differently aged Noodles. There is not any sort of disconnect between the two. It is the same man in both places. De Niro though makes this memorable through the fact that he shows that this is the same Noodles, but even though it is not directly portrayed he vividly brings to life just how changed Noodles has been over his experiences. De Niro effectively carries this powerful epic with his great performance.

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1984: Eddie Murphy in Beverly Hills Cop

Eddie Murphy did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Axel Foley in Beverly Hills Cop.

Beverly Hills Cop is a some what amusing but certainly not great comedy about a Detroit Cop who goes to Beverly Hills to investigate the death of his friend.

Eddie Murphy now is considered to bit of a wash up as he rarely has a successful comedy. Back in the 80's when this film came out though he was considered to be on top. This does not mean though Murphy was necessarily the greatest actor at this point though. In Beverly Hills Cop he portrays the Detroit cop who makes his way to Beverly Hills to avenge his friends, and there are really two sides of this character the serious side and the Eddie Murphy side.

Originally the film was going to star Sylvester Stallone, and it is pretty easy to see how the film would have been with Stallone in the lead, it is also easy to see the ways Murphy presence changed the film, but as well to a degree was forced to stay in line with the original idea for the film. There are basically two types of scenes for Murphy in this film which really do not overlap in the way they probably should which are the serious and the humorous ones, and yes there are far more serious scenes than one would expect from a Eddie Murphy comedy.

I might as well mention Bill Murray as a great example of an actor who is able to traverse through the serious and the comedic without a problem as he did in this year in Ghostbusters, as well as later on in fantastically in Groundhog's day. Murphy though pretty much separates them, trying maybe a little to put some comedy in the more dramatic moments, but mostly that just involves him doing his somewhat odd dry heave laugh which he always does in the more serious scenes of the film.

Murphy I can't say is all the convincing in any of the dramatic moments such as when Foley is hanging out with his friend or later reacting to his death. There is not any conviction in his performance, nor is there anything in his performance to make their relationship mean anything. Murphy though very well could have taken the route of always going for laughs, but he does not instead he actually tries to be convincing as the character and he is a bit awkward in these moments.

What made the film popular though I'm sure are all of the comedic scenes which apparently Murphy improvised for the most part. This actually seems quite obvious since Murphy is on a much better level during these moments. He has a high energy, and he really does try to make the most of riff he can come up with. To Murphy's credit as well he does make these seem as Foley's method rather than simply Murphy being Eddie Murphy.

It is hard to say that every one of the scenes that Murphy humorously goes through are downright hilarious, but most of them are quite amusing, and some of them are hilarious. It is probably rather safe to say that without Murphy this would have had very few if any redeeming features, since his full fledged comedy scenes are by far the best scenes in the film. Still I cannot forget that the serious scenes are certainly very lacking, something Murphy as well did better in films before and after this one.This is not a bad performance by Murphy becuase when he is funny he is funny, but that is really the best that can be said about this performance, which may be enough I suppose.

Read More

Alternate Best Actor 1984: Philip Baker Hall in Secret Honor

Philip Baker Hall did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying President Richard M. Nixon in Secret Honor.

Secret Honor is an effective film that basically is just Nixon in a room rambling about the various troubles of his life while apparently contemplating suicide.

Philip Baker Hall did not get an Oscar nomination for his portrayal of Nixon even though Anthony Hopkins and Frank Langella both eventually received nominations for portraying the former American President. I was not particularly impressed by either of their turns which both relied far too much on mannerisms that were neither accurate to the man nor were they effective in creating a portrait of Nixon. As well their performances were both bizarre in making Nixon seem a little too strange with Hopkins seeming to be some odd constantly sweating creature. Hall takes a far better approach in his portrayal of Nixon.

Hall firstly is not all made up, his hair is like Nixon's and it stops there. On first look it does not seem Hall is trying to obviously portray Nixon as there are not obvious mannerisms like those who followed him. In truth though Hall does have the mannerisms, but he has them in the way the real Nixon had them. Hall is able to portray them so naturally, and really quietly that it never for a moment seems like acting. Hall even finds his way to bringing to life some of Nixon way of moving , and even pointing. it is truly astonishing, because Hall infuses them so well with his performance that they only add to his characterization never distract or over take it.

Philip Baker Hall is in a one man show here there are no other characters but Nixon. He stays in the same room for the entire film that is furnished with portraits of former Presidents as well as Henry Kissinger. There is a camera a microphone as well as monitors watching him throughout. Hall begins talking and does not stop. He slowly sets up the whole rambling on about his life and his troubles that he has faced through his political career while defending himself as well as attacking others. Hall is great as he starts very dignified setting up the whole thing as a statesman would, but quickly showing a lesser side as he snaps curse words in suddenly without warning.

Hall shows a violent personality in his portrayal of Nixon as he quickly but effectively escalates the monologue that he delivers. It is well handled by Hall showing well that everything that Nixon is speaking about he is deeply pained by his life. He can't help but become immediately emotional over thinking of his life. Hall though does not show Nixon to go all out instantly and he effectively is able to further his distress throughout the film. As Nixon brings up more and more of his life the worst and the worst Hall is able to powerfully bring about the degree these thoughts bear down on Nixon.

Nixon never does leave the room but I think Philip Baker Hall tells us more about Nixon's life than the films that show these moments. Hall brings us into the mind of this man brilliantly during every story that he tells. Hall is spectacular in that he never makes the story anything but a natural stream of consciousness. Hall is able to jump from moment to moment in Nixon's mind brilliantly. There is never a single delay in his performance he is absolutely convincing in that he always makes the way the subjects come in his mind, the way they drift from one moment to another they are absolutely natural.

Hall is amazing in this strongly emotional performance. Nixon is always a little upset here telling his life story but Hall is spectacular. Although he is always forceful and frankly loud Hall is never one note during his performance. He has with his moments of hatred, and pain he feels over what he perceives as portrayal. Hall though weaves these well with scenes of bringing about his intelligence of a man when he shows Nixon to be defending himself. Hall is quick and sharp in basically the comebacks Nixon has with his imagined enemies. Hall is able to portray the strengths Nixon would have to had to make his achievements he had, while showing all of the weakness in his character.

Hall delivers with a passion all of his stories he never loses a beat, he is simply incredible throughout. He fleshes out the whole of Nixon in his characterization. He never once takes a simple approach for the man. Even his pain is never one way. Hall shows a great deal of this Nixon simply through the pain. It is pain caused by his hatred of his enemies. Hall though movingly as much shows a pain from a shattered pride that comes from his background. It is a stunning portrayal by Hall here he brings us into through every one of these stories as his degradation to the final moment is truly powerful. He never portrays Nixon in a one note fashion as he so easily could have been. He gives a great performance that gives Nixon the complexity he deserves.

Read More